|
Post by soonernvolved on Aug 30, 2018 6:36:54 GMT -6
www.nationalreview.com/2018/08/trump-russia-probe-robert-mueller-time-for-truth/amp/The Truth Will Set Us All Free By VICTOR DAVIS HANSON August 30, 2018 6:30 AM ......... It’s time to stop the stonewalling, redacting, suppression, leaking to the press, and media hysteria surrounding investigations into the 2016 election. Special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation was star-crossed from the start. His friend and successor as FBI director, James Comey, by his own admission prompted the investigation — with the deliberate leaking of classified memos about his conversations with President Donald Trump to the press. Mueller then unnecessarily stocked his team with what the press called his “dream team” of mostly Democratic partisans. One had defended a Hillary Clinton employee. Another had defended the Clinton Foundation. Mueller did not at first announce to the press why he had dismissed Trump-hating FBI operatives Lisa Page and Peter Strzok from his investigative team. Instead, he staggered their departures to leave the impression they were routine reassignments. But Mueller’s greatest problem was his original mandate to discover whether Trump colluded with the Russians in 2016 to tilt the election in his favor. After 15 months, Mueller has indicted a number of Trump associates, but on charges having nothing to do with Russian collusion. They faced inordinately long prison sentences unless they “flipped” and testified against Trump. We are left with the impression that Mueller cannot find much to do with his original mandate of unearthing Russian collusion, but he still thinks Trump is guilty of something. In other words, Mueller has reversed the proper order of jurisprudence. Instead of presuming Trump innocent unless he finds evidence of Russian collusion, Mueller started with the assumption that the reckless raconteur Trump surely must be guilty of some lawbreaking. Thus, it is Mueller’s job to hunt for past crimes to prove it. While Mueller so far has not found Trump involved in collusion with foreign citizens to warp a campaign, there is evidence that others most surely were colluding — but are not of interest to Mueller.It is likely that during the 2016 campaign, officials at the Department of Justice, FBI, CIA, and National Security Agency broke laws to ensure that the outsider Trump lost to Hillary Clinton. FBI and DOJ officials misled the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court in order to obtain warrants to surveil Trump associates. National-security officials unmasked the names of those being monitored and likely leaked them to the press with the intent to spread unverified rumors detrimental to the Trump campaign. A spy on the federal payroll was implanted into the Trump campaign. Hillary Clinton’s campaign team paid for research done by a former British intelligence officer working with Russian sources to compile a dossier on Trump. Clinton hid her investment in Christopher Steele’s dossier by using intermediaries such as the Perkins Coie law firm and Fusion GPS to wipe away her fingerprints. As a result of wrongful conduct, more than a dozen officials at the FBI and DOJ have resigned or retired, or were fired or reassigned. Yet so far none of these miscreants has been indicted or has faced the same legal scrutiny that Mueller applies to Trump associates.
Hillary Clinton is not facing legal trouble for destroying subpoenaed emails, for using an unlawful email server, or for the expenditure of campaign money on the Steele dossier.No president has ever faced impeachment for supposed wrongdoing alleged to have taken place before he took office — not Andrew Johnson, not Richard Nixon, and not even Bill Clinton, who lied about his liaisons with Monica Lewinsky in the Oval Office. With the effort to go back years, if not decades, into Trump’s business and personal life, we are now in unchartered territory. The argument is not that Trump committed crimes while president — indeed, his record at home and abroad is winning praise. The allegations are instead about what he may have done as a private citizen, and whether it could have reversed the 2016 election. The only way to clear up this messy saga is for Trump to immediately declassify all documents — without redactions — relating to the Mueller investigation, the FISA court warrants, the Clinton email investigation, and CIA and FBI involvement with the dossier and the use of informants. Second, there needs to be another special counsel to investigate wrongdoing on the part of senior officials in these now nearly discredited agencies. The mandate should be to discover whether there was serial conflict of interest, chronic lying to federal officials, obstruction of justice, improper unmasking and leaking, misleading of federal courts, and violation of campaign-finance laws. It is past time to stop the stonewalling, the redacting, the suppression, the leaking to the press, and the media hysteria. The government must turn over all relevant documents to two special counsels and free each to discover who did what in 2016. Americans need the whole truth to ensure equality under the law and to thereby set us free from this nearly two-year nightmare.
|
|
|
Post by trumped on Aug 30, 2018 8:57:37 GMT -6
Donald J. Trump @realdonaldtrump · 2h Wow, Nellie Ohr, Bruce Ohr’s wife, is a Russia expert who is fluent in Russian. She worked for Fusion GPS where she was paid a lot. Collusion! Bruce was a boss at the Department of Justice and is, unbelievably, still there!
|
|
|
Post by oilsooner on Aug 30, 2018 8:57:54 GMT -6
www.nationalreview.com/2018/08/trump-russia-probe-robert-mueller-time-for-truth/amp/The Truth Will Set Us All Free By VICTOR DAVIS HANSON August 30, 2018 6:30 AM ......... It’s time to stop the stonewalling, redacting, suppression, leaking to the press, and media hysteria surrounding investigations into the 2016 election. Special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation was star-crossed from the start. His friend and successor as FBI director, James Comey, by his own admission prompted the investigation — with the deliberate leaking of classified memos about his conversations with President Donald Trump to the press. Mueller then unnecessarily stocked his team with what the press called his “dream team” of mostly Democratic partisans. One had defended a Hillary Clinton employee. Another had defended the Clinton Foundation. Mueller did not at first announce to the press why he had dismissed Trump-hating FBI operatives Lisa Page and Peter Strzok from his investigative team. Instead, he staggered their departures to leave the impression they were routine reassignments. But Mueller’s greatest problem was his original mandate to discover whether Trump colluded with the Russians in 2016 to tilt the election in his favor. After 15 months, Mueller has indicted a number of Trump associates, but on charges having nothing to do with Russian collusion. They faced inordinately long prison sentences unless they “flipped” and testified against Trump. We are left with the impression that Mueller cannot find much to do with his original mandate of unearthing Russian collusion, but he still thinks Trump is guilty of something. In other words, Mueller has reversed the proper order of jurisprudence. Instead of presuming Trump innocent unless he finds evidence of Russian collusion, Mueller started with the assumption that the reckless raconteur Trump surely must be guilty of some lawbreaking. Thus, it is Mueller’s job to hunt for past crimes to prove it. While Mueller so far has not found Trump involved in collusion with foreign citizens to warp a campaign, there is evidence that others most surely were colluding — but are not of interest to Mueller.It is likely that during the 2016 campaign, officials at the Department of Justice, FBI, CIA, and National Security Agency broke laws to ensure that the outsider Trump lost to Hillary Clinton. FBI and DOJ officials misled the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court in order to obtain warrants to surveil Trump associates. National-security officials unmasked the names of those being monitored and likely leaked them to the press with the intent to spread unverified rumors detrimental to the Trump campaign. A spy on the federal payroll was implanted into the Trump campaign. Hillary Clinton’s campaign team paid for research done by a former British intelligence officer working with Russian sources to compile a dossier on Trump. Clinton hid her investment in Christopher Steele’s dossier by using intermediaries such as the Perkins Coie law firm and Fusion GPS to wipe away her fingerprints. As a result of wrongful conduct, more than a dozen officials at the FBI and DOJ have resigned or retired, or were fired or reassigned. Yet so far none of these miscreants has been indicted or has faced the same legal scrutiny that Mueller applies to Trump associates.
Hillary Clinton is not facing legal trouble for destroying subpoenaed emails, for using an unlawful email server, or for the expenditure of campaign money on the Steele dossier.No president has ever faced impeachment for supposed wrongdoing alleged to have taken place before he took office — not Andrew Johnson, not Richard Nixon, and not even Bill Clinton, who lied about his liaisons with Monica Lewinsky in the Oval Office. With the effort to go back years, if not decades, into Trump’s business and personal life, we are now in unchartered territory. The argument is not that Trump committed crimes while president — indeed, his record at home and abroad is winning praise. The allegations are instead about what he may have done as a private citizen, and whether it could have reversed the 2016 election. The only way to clear up this messy saga is for Trump to immediately declassify all documents — without redactions — relating to the Mueller investigation, the FISA court warrants, the Clinton email investigation, and CIA and FBI involvement with the dossier and the use of informants. Second, there needs to be another special counsel to investigate wrongdoing on the part of senior officials in these now nearly discredited agencies. The mandate should be to discover whether there was serial conflict of interest, chronic lying to federal officials, obstruction of justice, improper unmasking and leaking, misleading of federal courts, and violation of campaign-finance laws. It is past time to stop the stonewalling, the redacting, the suppression, the leaking to the press, and the media hysteria. The government must turn over all relevant documents to two special counsels and free each to discover who did what in 2016. Americans need the whole truth to ensure equality under the law and to thereby set us free from this nearly two-year nightmare. Good article. The main passage that caught me: I was on board with the Mueller investigation at first...under the rationale that we would have an unbiased investigation limited to the mandate (I'd say I was cautiously optimistic.....and ultimately proven wrong). Now, its clear that Mueller has hit a point where he has to pervert justice to justify the rationale for his role. Worse, his continued investigation is supported by those who have an agenda against Trump, though no facts have surfaced showing him to be guilty of any wrongdoing related to the investigation. Essentially mob rule with the backing of law enforcement. Any unbiased person would concede that you cant just keep investigating someone because you dont like them. And the National Review points out here how we can infer that there is no evidence that Trump committed any crimes related to Russia based on the tactics Mueller is using to conduct his investigation. And it should be noted that the National Review is not typically supportive of Trump. In fact, they have been downright hostile for the most part.
|
|
|
Post by sooner98 on Aug 30, 2018 9:37:52 GMT -6
The Case for Sessions' Resignation GrowsWhen Justice Department official Bruce Ohr testified before the House Judiciary and Oversight committees on Tuesday, no actual Democrat congressmen or women showed up. They likely would claim it wasn't necessary. This was all old hat and there was no there there. The opposite is true. There's plenty there -- to wit, the potential weaponization of the FBI, and by extension the Department of Justice, to prevent the presidency of Donald Trump and later to undermine it. Whether you like Trump or not, if true, that's nothing short of sabotage of American democracy as we know it, the Sovietization of the prosecutorial wings of our legal system. But never mind. When party politics is involved, best to ignore it. What Ohr knows about who, what, where, why, when and how the nefarious Steele dossier was conceived and then promulgated -- to the FBI, media and even to the supposedly sacrosanct FISA court -- is, at least to those congressional Democrats, of no consequence. But not to those of us who actually care about this country, not just holding onto power and/or upending the dreaded Donald by any means necessary, ends justifying means. When we heard AG Jeff Sessions had appointed an FBI agent in relatively far away and therefore free of influence Utah, John Huber, to deal with this, we heaved the proverbial sigh of relief. Something was finally being done to investigate the possible misuse of our premier law enforcement agency that could result in actual prosecutions. Rumors were even circulating in certain conservative circles that Trump and Sessions were actually secretly in cahoots, that Trump's angry tweets at his former ally were a masquerade for the coming settling of accounts. All were finally to be treated equally under the law. But that was way back in March and now we learn, via members of the committees, that Huber has not even bothered to interview the very Bruce Ohr -- the covert point man to Christopher Steele after the FBI officially severed its links to the British former spook for leaking to the press. Say what? As of now, there has not been a peep out of Huber, no criminal charges thus far even for Andrew McCabe, whose indictment was recommended by the inspector general, not to mention a whole host of other FBI officials who appear to have lied to Congress and elsewhere, including James Comey, Peter Strzok and others less well known. Jeff Sessions, where are you? What is going on? Do you want the FBI to remain an organization disdained and distrusted by literally half the country? What kind of prescription is that for our national health? The first inspector general's report, despite some stinging revelations, was in the end basically a high-toned cover-up. It looks all the more so with the new report that Hillary Clinton's emails were being read in real time by the Chinese, a not very shocking development considering the multiple ways PRC intelligence services have permeated our society. The FBI denies this, but is there reason to believe them? The Clinton server would have been easy for a bright high school student to hack. The Chinese have accomplished far more difficult cyber feats. Interestingly, these are the same emails that we also have now learned were never really looked into by the FBI (see the revelations about the Weiner laptop). Perhaps they should ask Chairman Xi, not Putin, for details. Will Inspector General Horowitz revise his first report based on these new findings? Or will he continue to subtly prevaricate on his second one intended to investigate the yet more significant question of possible FBI spying on the Trump campaign, even that the organization instigated some form of set-up? That would be unprecedented. Like almost all bureaucracies, the Department of Justice and the FBI seem most concerned with self-preservation. I was one of those hoping (see the "cahoots" reference above) that Jeff Sessions was to some extent at least playing possum. He was doing some good things, especially concerning illegal immigration and ruthless drug gangs. But these initiatives, laudable as they might be, now seem almost a purposeful distraction, conservative virtue signaling designed to placate his critics while the real malfeasance occurred and occurs in the heart of the agency he directs. Sessions recused himself early on from the Russia investigation. With twenty-twenty hindsight, he should have resigned completely at that point because an attorney general unable to oversee that politically fraught investigation is not an attorney general at all. Hands tied, he is a bystander to the most significant and controversial issue in his department. Not only has this turned Ron Rosenstein into a quasi-AG, a job to which he was not appointed, it has added to the already pervasive suspicion of the investigation and therefore of the Justicee Department in general. Beyond a house-cleaning of virtually all upper executive personnel, it's hard to see how this would ever be corrected. Jeff Sessions should be the first to go. It would be good if he set an example and did this voluntarily.
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Aug 30, 2018 10:07:52 GMT -6
The Case for Sessions' Resignation GrowsWhen Justice Department official Bruce Ohr testified before the House Judiciary and Oversight committees on Tuesday, no actual Democrat congressmen or women showed up. They likely would claim it wasn't necessary. This was all old hat and there was no there there. The opposite is true. There's plenty there -- to wit, the potential weaponization of the FBI, and by extension the Department of Justice, to prevent the presidency of Donald Trump and later to undermine it. Whether you like Trump or not, if true, that's nothing short of sabotage of American democracy as we know it, the Sovietization of the prosecutorial wings of our legal system. But never mind. When party politics is involved, best to ignore it. What Ohr knows about who, what, where, why, when and how the nefarious Steele dossier was conceived and then promulgated -- to the FBI, media and even to the supposedly sacrosanct FISA court -- is, at least to those congressional Democrats, of no consequence. But not to those of us who actually care about this country, not just holding onto power and/or upending the dreaded Donald by any means necessary, ends justifying means. When we heard AG Jeff Sessions had appointed an FBI agent in relatively far away and therefore free of influence Utah, John Huber, to deal with this, we heaved the proverbial sigh of relief. Something was finally being done to investigate the possible misuse of our premier law enforcement agency that could result in actual prosecutions. Rumors were even circulating in certain conservative circles that Trump and Sessions were actually secretly in cahoots, that Trump's angry tweets at his former ally were a masquerade for the coming settling of accounts. All were finally to be treated equally under the law. But that was way back in March and now we learn, via members of the committees, that Huber has not even bothered to interview the very Bruce Ohr -- the covert point man to Christopher Steele after the FBI officially severed its links to the British former spook for leaking to the press. Say what? As of now, there has not been a peep out of Huber, no criminal charges thus far even for Andrew McCabe, whose indictment was recommended by the inspector general, not to mention a whole host of other FBI officials who appear to have lied to Congress and elsewhere, including James Comey, Peter Strzok and others less well known. Jeff Sessions, where are you? What is going on? Do you want the FBI to remain an organization disdained and distrusted by literally half the country? What kind of prescription is that for our national health? The first inspector general's report, despite some stinging revelations, was in the end basically a high-toned cover-up. It looks all the more so with the new report that Hillary Clinton's emails were being read in real time by the Chinese, a not very shocking development considering the multiple ways PRC intelligence services have permeated our society. The FBI denies this, but is there reason to believe them? The Clinton server would have been easy for a bright high school student to hack. The Chinese have accomplished far more difficult cyber feats. Interestingly, these are the same emails that we also have now learned were never really looked into by the FBI (see the revelations about the Weiner laptop). Perhaps they should ask Chairman Xi, not Putin, for details. Will Inspector General Horowitz revise his first report based on these new findings? Or will he continue to subtly prevaricate on his second one intended to investigate the yet more significant question of possible FBI spying on the Trump campaign, even that the organization instigated some form of set-up? That would be unprecedented. Like almost all bureaucracies, the Department of Justice and the FBI seem most concerned with self-preservation. I was one of those hoping (see the "cahoots" reference above) that Jeff Sessions was to some extent at least playing possum. He was doing some good things, especially concerning illegal immigration and ruthless drug gangs. But these initiatives, laudable as they might be, now seem almost a purposeful distraction, conservative virtue signaling designed to placate his critics while the real malfeasance occurred and occurs in the heart of the agency he directs. Sessions recused himself early on from the Russia investigation. With twenty-twenty hindsight, he should have resigned completely at that point because an attorney general unable to oversee that politically fraught investigation is not an attorney general at all. Hands tied, he is a bystander to the most significant and controversial issue in his department. Not only has this turned Ron Rosenstein into a quasi-AG, a job to which he was not appointed, it has added to the already pervasive suspicion of the investigation and therefore of the Justicee Department in general. Beyond a house-cleaning of virtually all upper executive personnel, it's hard to see how this would ever be corrected. Jeff Sessions should be the first to go. It would be good if he set an example and did this voluntarily. Agree completely. After the midterms fire Sessions, Rosenstein, Ohr, etc. I’d replace Sessions with one of Andrew C. McCarthy, Trey Gowdy, etc. Same with the others mentioned, there needs to be a major housecleaning at both the DOJ/FBI.
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Aug 30, 2018 10:31:17 GMT -6
Former Labor Secretary for Bill Clinton: www.newsweek.com/robert-reich-if-trump-guilty-his-presidency-must-be-annulled-opinion-1092345?amp=1ROBERT REICH: IF TRUMP IS GUILTY, HIS PRESIDENCY MUST BE ANNULLED | OPINION By Robert Reich On Tuesday, August 28, 2018 - 07:36 The only way I see the end of Trump is if there’s overwhelming evidence he rigged the 2016 election. In which case impeachment isn’t an adequate remedy. His presidency should be annulled. Let me explain. Many people are convinced we’re already witnessing the beginning of the end of Trump. In their view, bombshell admissions from Trump insiders with immunity from prosecution, combined with whatever evidence special counsel Robert Mueller might uncover about Trump’s obstruction of justice and his aides' collusion with the Russians, will all tip the scales. Democrats would take back the House and begin impeachment, and the evidence of impeachable offenses would put enough pressure on Republican senators to send Trump packing. I don’t believe this for a moment. First, the Senate has never in history convicted a president of impeachment. Second, even if Democrats flip the House in November, Republicans will almost certainly remain in control of the Senate—and so far they’ve displayed the integrity of lizards. Third, Fox News and the rest of the right-wing sleaze media will continue to distort and cover up whatever the evidence shows—convincing 35 to 40 percent of Americans, along with most Republicans, that Trump is the innocent victim of a plot to remove him. Finally, Trump himself will never voluntarily resign, as did Nixon. He’ll lie and claim a conspiracy to unseat him. He’s proved himself a superb conman, an entertainer-demagogue capable of sowing so much confusion and instigating so much hate and paranoia that he has already survived outrages that would have broken any garden-variety loathsome president—Helsinki, Charlottesville, children locked in cages at the border, firings and cover-ups, racist slurs, clear corruption. ......... Suppose, just suppose, Robert Mueller finds overwhelming and indisputable evidence that Trump conspired with Russian President Vladimir Putin to rig the 2016 election, and the rigging determined the election’s outcome. In other words, Trump’s presidency is not authorized under the United States Constitution. Suppose these findings are so compelling that even Trump loyalists desert him, the Republican Party decides it has had enough, and Fox News calls for his impeachment. What then? Impeachment isn’t enough. Impeachment would remedy Trump’s “high crimes and misdemeanors.” But impeachment would not remedy Trump’s unconstitutional presidency because it would leave in place his vice president, White House staff and Cabinet, as well as all the executive orders he issued and all the legislation he signed, and the official record of his presidency. The only response to an unconstitutional presidency is to annul it. Annulment would repeal all of an unconstitutional president’s appointments and executive actions, and would eliminate the official record of the presidency. Annulment would recognize that all such appointments, actions and records were made without constitutional authority. The Constitution does not specifically provide for annulment of an unconstitutional presidency. But read as a whole, the Constitution leads to the logical conclusion that annulment is the appropriate remedy for one. After all, the Supreme Court declares legislation that doesn’t comport with the Constitution null and void, as if it had never been passed. It would logically follow that the Court could declare all legislation and executive actions of a presidency unauthorized by the Constitution to be null and void, as if Trump had never been elected.
|
|
|
Post by oilsooner on Aug 30, 2018 10:38:48 GMT -6
Former Labor Secretary for Bill Clinton: www.newsweek.com/robert-reich-if-trump-guilty-his-presidency-must-be-annulled-opinion-1092345?amp=1ROBERT REICH: IF TRUMP IS GUILTY, HIS PRESIDENCY MUST BE ANNULLED | OPINION By Robert Reich On Tuesday, August 28, 2018 - 07:36 The only way I see the end of Trump is if there’s overwhelming evidence he rigged the 2016 election. In which case impeachment isn’t an adequate remedy. His presidency should be annulled. Let me explain. Many people are convinced we’re already witnessing the beginning of the end of Trump. In their view, bombshell admissions from Trump insiders with immunity from prosecution, combined with whatever evidence special counsel Robert Mueller might uncover about Trump’s obstruction of justice and his aides' collusion with the Russians, will all tip the scales. Democrats would take back the House and begin impeachment, and the evidence of impeachable offenses would put enough pressure on Republican senators to send Trump packing. I don’t believe this for a moment. First, the Senate has never in history convicted a president of impeachment. Second, even if Democrats flip the House in November, Republicans will almost certainly remain in control of the Senate—and so far they’ve displayed the integrity of lizards. Third, Fox News and the rest of the right-wing sleaze media will continue to distort and cover up whatever the evidence shows—convincing 35 to 40 percent of Americans, along with most Republicans, that Trump is the innocent victim of a plot to remove him. Finally, Trump himself will never voluntarily resign, as did Nixon. He’ll lie and claim a conspiracy to unseat him. He’s proved himself a superb conman, an entertainer-demagogue capable of sowing so much confusion and instigating so much hate and paranoia that he has already survived outrages that would have broken any garden-variety loathsome president—Helsinki, Charlottesville, children locked in cages at the border, firings and cover-ups, racist slurs, clear corruption. ......... Suppose, just suppose, Robert Mueller finds overwhelming and indisputable evidence that Trump conspired with Russian President Vladimir Putin to rig the 2016 election, and the rigging determined the election’s outcome. In other words, Trump’s presidency is not authorized under the United States Constitution. Suppose these findings are so compelling that even Trump loyalists desert him, the Republican Party decides it has had enough, and Fox News calls for his impeachment. What then? Impeachment isn’t enough. Impeachment would remedy Trump’s “high crimes and misdemeanors.” But impeachment would not remedy Trump’s unconstitutional presidency because it would leave in place his vice president, White House staff and Cabinet, as well as all the executive orders he issued and all the legislation he signed, and the official record of his presidency. The only response to an unconstitutional presidency is to annul it. Annulment would repeal all of an unconstitutional president’s appointments and executive actions, and would eliminate the official record of the presidency. Annulment would recognize that all such appointments, actions and records were made without constitutional authority. The Constitution does not specifically provide for annulment of an unconstitutional presidency. But read as a whole, the Constitution leads to the logical conclusion that annulment is the appropriate remedy for one. After all, the Supreme Court declares legislation that doesn’t comport with the Constitution null and void, as if it had never been passed. It would logically follow that the Court could declare all legislation and executive actions of a presidency unauthorized by the Constitution to be null and void, as if Trump had never been elected. totally agree with this liberal
|
|
|
Post by sooner98 on Aug 30, 2018 12:35:37 GMT -6
This is the only sentence that matters in Mr. Reich's article.
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Aug 30, 2018 13:42:53 GMT -6
thehill.com/homenews/house/404084-house-republicans-say-ohr-interview-escalates-surveillance-concernsHouse Republicans say the closed-door testimony of Justice Department (DOJ) official Bruce Ohr on Tuesday has heightened their concerns that federal authorities abused surveillance powers during the 2016 presidential election. GOP lawmakers, trickling in and out of the roughly eight-hour interview, claimed Ohr indicated in his testimony that FBI officials knew more information than they led on in their application to obtain a Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) warrant on former Trump campaign aide Carter Page. Ohr, whom Republicans described as cooperative in his testimony on Tuesday, has come under increasing GOP scrutiny for his contacts with intelligence firm Fusion GPS and former British spy Christopher Steele, who were behind an opposition research dossier on President Trump. “Thus far, [Ohr] has done nothing but exacerbate my concerns that the FISA process has been abused,” Rep. John Ratcliffe (R-Texas), a House Judiciary Committee member, told The Hill. House Republicans have long questioned whether federal authorities leaned too much on the dossier assembled by Steele and Fusion GPS, a controversial document containing a series of salacious allegations on the then-GOP candidate's ties to Russia. Now, House Republicans are suggesting the FBI withheld key information in their application in order to obtain a warrant. “Not only did the FBI know that the dossier was unverified, but they also knew there was real credibility issues or it would never end up in a courtroom because of the inherent way it was collected and the bias that was associated with that,” said Rep. Mark Meadows (R-N.C.), one of the fiercest DOJ critics, noting that lawmakers have to verify such claims. The FBI used Steele as a source in their application to obtain a surveillance warrant on Page, according to the heavily redacted FISA application released by the Department of Justice last month. While the bureau noted in their application that Steele was a credible source who was likely “looking for information that could be used to discredit” Trump’s campaign, they still deemed him as a “reliable.” The FBI continued to view Steele as reliable even after the bureau ended its relationship with him as a source over his unauthorized contacts with the press. The Republican lawmakers declined to elaborate on the details the FBI may have omitted from the application, citing an ongoing interview that is being jointly conducted by the House Judiciary and Oversight and Government Reform committees. A Justice Department spokeswoman declined to comment on the Republican assertions.
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Aug 30, 2018 13:44:11 GMT -6
www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/bruce-ohr-names-andrew-mccabe-fbi-officials-tied-to-peter-strzok-among-his-trump-dossier-contacts-reportsJustice Department official Bruce Ohr told lawmakers Tuesday that he had several contacts in the Justice Department and FBI with whom he discussed the anti-Trump dossier and had given some related research. Rep. John Ratcliffe, R-Texas, a member of the Judiciary Committee told Fox News late Tuesday that Ohr gave lawmakers "a list of half a dozen" senior FBI and DOJ officials knew about his involvement with ex-British spy Christopher Steele, the author of the dossier that contained unverified claims about Trump's ties to Russia. In a tweet Wednesday, he further explained that the "operational roles" of Ohr and his wife Nellie, who worked as a contractor for the firm that commissioned the dossier, and their "financial gain from it" were known to "at least" half a dozen senior FBI and DOJ officials prior to the first Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act application to spy on onetime Trump campaign aide Carter Page, who has suspicious ties to Russia, and that these details were "never disclosed."
|
|
|
Post by oilsooner on Aug 30, 2018 13:51:56 GMT -6
thehill.com/homenews/house/404084-house-republicans-say-ohr-interview-escalates-surveillance-concernsHouse Republicans say the closed-door testimony of Justice Department (DOJ) official Bruce Ohr on Tuesday has heightened their concerns that federal authorities abused surveillance powers during the 2016 presidential election. GOP lawmakers, trickling in and out of the roughly eight-hour interview, claimed Ohr indicated in his testimony that FBI officials knew more information than they led on in their application to obtain a Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) warrant on former Trump campaign aide Carter Page. Ohr, whom Republicans described as cooperative in his testimony on Tuesday, has come under increasing GOP scrutiny for his contacts with intelligence firm Fusion GPS and former British spy Christopher Steele, who were behind an opposition research dossier on President Trump. “Thus far, [Ohr] has done nothing but exacerbate my concerns that the FISA process has been abused,” Rep. John Ratcliffe (R-Texas), a House Judiciary Committee member, told The Hill. House Republicans have long questioned whether federal authorities leaned too much on the dossier assembled by Steele and Fusion GPS, a controversial document containing a series of salacious allegations on the then-GOP candidate's ties to Russia. Now, House Republicans are suggesting the FBI withheld key information in their application in order to obtain a warrant. “Not only did the FBI know that the dossier was unverified, but they also knew there was real credibility issues or it would never end up in a courtroom because of the inherent way it was collected and the bias that was associated with that,” said Rep. Mark Meadows (R-N.C.), one of the fiercest DOJ critics, noting that lawmakers have to verify such claims. The FBI used Steele as a source in their application to obtain a surveillance warrant on Page, according to the heavily redacted FISA application released by the Department of Justice last month. While the bureau noted in their application that Steele was a credible source who was likely “looking for information that could be used to discredit” Trump’s campaign, they still deemed him as a “reliable.” The FBI continued to view Steele as reliable even after the bureau ended its relationship with him as a source over his unauthorized contacts with the press. The Republican lawmakers declined to elaborate on the details the FBI may have omitted from the application, citing an ongoing interview that is being jointly conducted by the House Judiciary and Oversight and Government Reform committees. A Justice Department spokeswoman declined to comment on the Republican assertions. I’d be curious to know what the libs say to this obviously questionable activity? Prob nothing, because Trump deserves it. Sad... Meanwhile, back in Diane Feinstien's office: Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
|
|
|
Post by okirishfan on Aug 30, 2018 14:28:57 GMT -6
Trump claiming now that NBC "fudged" his Lester Holt "Russia" interview. I guess he's talking about the part where he admits to firing Comey over the "Russia thing". This isn't really "news" as Trump tends to lie and contradict himself often, but it begs the question of why is he bringing it up now? OOJ? And in true circus like fashion, his own lawyer is on tape saying multiple times that "Trump has already answered the question of why Comey was fired....it's on tape". Never a dull moment. www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/onpolitics/2018/08/30/donald-trump-lester-holt-interview-james-comey/1142245002/In a series of tweets Thursday morning, the president railed against the media and took aim at NBC, seeming to accuse the network of "fudging" an interview he gave last year, just days after he abruptly fired FBI Director James Comey. Trump offered no proof of the claim. "What’s going on at @cnn is happening, to different degrees, at other networks - with @nbcnews being the worst," the president tweeted. "The good news is that Andy Lack(y) is about to be fired(?) for incompetence, and much worse. When Lester Holt got caught fudging my tape on Russia, they were hurt badly!"
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Aug 30, 2018 14:37:10 GMT -6
Trump claiming now that NBC "fudged" his Lester Holt "Russia" interview. I guess he's talking about the part where he admits to firing Comey over the "Russia thing". This isn't really "news" as Trump tends to lie and contradict himself often, but it begs the question of why is he bringing it up now? OOJ? And in true circus like fashion, his own lawyer is on tape saying multiple times that "Trump has already answered the question of why Comey was fired....it's on tape". Never a dull moment. www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/onpolitics/2018/08/30/donald-trump-lester-holt-interview-james-comey/1142245002/In a series of tweets Thursday morning, the president railed against the media and took aim at NBC, seeming to accuse the network of "fudging" an interview he gave last year, just days after he abruptly fired FBI Director James Comey. Trump offered no proof of the claim. "What’s going on at @cnn is happening, to different degrees, at other networks - with @nbcnews being the worst," the president tweeted. "The good news is that Andy Lack(y) is about to be fired(?) for incompetence, and much worse. When Lester Holt got caught fudging my tape on Russia, they were hurt badly!" In Trump’s defense, NBC has been caught “fudging” things before, so it’s not like it’s out of the question. Now, as for a circus, it’s like the Mueller investigation where lying/misleading the FBI is bad and you get into trouble for it, unless one happens to be Cheryl Mills, James Comey, Huma Abedin, etc & then it’s no problem.
|
|
|
Post by okirishfan on Aug 30, 2018 14:54:07 GMT -6
Trump claiming now that NBC "fudged" his Lester Holt "Russia" interview. I guess he's talking about the part where he admits to firing Comey over the "Russia thing". This isn't really "news" as Trump tends to lie and contradict himself often, but it begs the question of why is he bringing it up now? OOJ? And in true circus like fashion, his own lawyer is on tape saying multiple times that "Trump has already answered the question of why Comey was fired....it's on tape". Never a dull moment. www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/onpolitics/2018/08/30/donald-trump-lester-holt-interview-james-comey/1142245002/In a series of tweets Thursday morning, the president railed against the media and took aim at NBC, seeming to accuse the network of "fudging" an interview he gave last year, just days after he abruptly fired FBI Director James Comey. Trump offered no proof of the claim. "What’s going on at @cnn is happening, to different degrees, at other networks - with @nbcnews being the worst," the president tweeted. "The good news is that Andy Lack(y) is about to be fired(?) for incompetence, and much worse. When Lester Holt got caught fudging my tape on Russia, they were hurt badly!" In Trump’s defense, NBC has been caught “fudging” things before, so it’s not like it’s out of the question. Now, as for a circus, it’s like the Mueller investigation where lying/misleading the FBI is bad and you get into trouble for it, unless one happens to be Cheryl Mills, James Comey, Huma Abedin, etc & then it’s no problem. In NBC's defense, Trump makes up lies all of the time and continually contradicts himself, seemingly unaware that he is doing so and that there is record of it (and in this case his own attorney testifies to his reason for firing Comey on the NBC interview).
Would be difficult to "fudge" an interview where Trump says, he fired Comey and gave the reason for doing so as well as contradicting himself saying he was going off the recommendation given to him but then saying in the interview he was going to fire Comey, regardless. Forgive me if I have a hard time believing that was all just NBC splicing and editing words coming out of his mouth.
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Aug 30, 2018 16:05:34 GMT -6
www.breitbart.com/big-government/2018/08/30/email-correspondence-between-clinton-associate-fusion-russians-trump-tower-meeting/amp/NEW YORK — Attorney Edward Lieberman, whose late wife Evelyn served as Hillary Clinton’s chief of staff, exchanged numerous emails with the co-founder of the controversial Fusion GPS firm and Russian participants in the infamous June 9, 2016, Trump Tower meeting, documentation provided to the Senate Judiciary Committee shows. The correspondence, part of a series of exhibits provided to Senate investigators and reviewed by Breitbart News, took place in the weeks leading up to the Trump Tower meeting. Earlier this week, Breitbart News cited witness testimony saying Lieberman was present at one and possibly two dinner meetings between the controversial Fusion GPS firm and key participants in the infamous June 2016 Trump Tower meeting. Also, Lieberman met with one Russian participant the same day of the Trump Tower meeting, according to separate testimony. Now the email logs provide a paper trail connection between Lieberman, Fusion GPS, and two of the Russian participants in the Trump Tower confab. Besides working for Hillary Clinton while she was First Lady, Lieberman’s late wife, Evelyn, also served as Bill Clinton’s deputy chief of staff, and famously transferred Monica Lewinsky out of the White House to the Defense Department. Edward Lieberman himself has been described as working within the orbit of the Clintons. He previously served as legal counsel and advisor to the Albright Group LLC, which was founded by Madeleine K. Albright, who served as Bill Clinton’s Secretary of State and who would later serve as a surrogate for Hillary Clinton during the 2016 presidential campaign. Lieberman’s expertise, listed on his former Albright Group bio, includes “multi-billion dollar privatizations of oil and gas assets in Eastern Europe, Central Asia and Russia.” ..... As part of his interview with the Senate Judiciary Committee last August, Fusion GPS co-founder Glenn Simpson produced documentation requested by Senate investigators, including “privilege logs” of the emails in question. The logs contained the names of the recipients of the emails as well as the dates and the subjects. The actual email texts were not provided by Simpson citing confidentiality due to “attorney work product.” The testimony and exhibits were released in January, but most of the exhibits remain largely unreported by the news media. The documentation was given new scrutiny in light of this reporter’s recent articles on Lieberman’s ties to Trump Tower meeting participants. intelligence.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=850Most of the email logs provided to the committee were sent between May 13, 2016, and May 20, 2016, ending just twenty days before the Trump Tower get-together. The email logs resume again in October 2016, with no logs provided for the key days before or after the Trump Tower meeting. The logs show the emails in question were sent between Lieberman, Simpson, and Russian-born Washington lobbyist Rinat Akhmetshin, who was present at the Trump Tower presentation. Other emails were sent from Mark Cymrot, a lawyer at the U.S. law firm BakerHostetler, with Simpson, Lieberman, and Akhmetshin listed as the recipients. Simpson and Fusion GPS were hired by BakerHostetler, which represented the Russian firm Prevezon, to do opposition work targeting British financier Bill Browder. It was Browder who did extensive investment work in Russia and who successfully lobbied Congress to pass the Magnitsky Act, the very topic of the Trump Tower meeting. Russian-linked Prevezon Holdings Ltd. had settled a case in the U.S. involving the purchase of real estate with allegedly laundered money, accusations that centered around the Magnitsky Act. Russian lawyer Natalia Veselnitskaya, who countered the Magnitsky Act, was an attorney for Prevezon and led the Trump Tower meeting along with Akhmetshin.
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Aug 30, 2018 16:08:03 GMT -6
In Trump’s defense, NBC has been caught “fudging” things before, so it’s not like it’s out of the question. Now, as for a circus, it’s like the Mueller investigation where lying/misleading the FBI is bad and you get into trouble for it, unless one happens to be Cheryl Mills, James Comey, Huma Abedin, etc & then it’s no problem. In NBC's defense, Trump makes up lies all of the time and continually contradicts himself, seemingly unaware that he is doing so and that there is record of it (and in this case his own attorney testifies to his reason for firing Comey on the NBC interview).
Would be difficult to "fudge" an interview where Trump says, he fired Comey and gave the reason for doing so as well as contradicting himself saying he was going off the recommendation given to him but then saying in the interview he was going to fire Comey, regardless. Forgive me if I have a hard time believing that was all just NBC splicing and editing words coming out of his mouth.
Because NBC would never edit something to make it look like something it wasn’t. Oh, wait...... www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/erik-wemple/post/nbc-issues-apology-on-zimmerman-tape-screw-up/2012/04/03/gIQA8m5jtS_blog.html?utm_term=.e7f81a739d00
|
|
|
Post by sooner8th on Aug 30, 2018 16:17:59 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Aug 30, 2018 16:39:47 GMT -6
Show me where I said Fox was without mistakes, I’ll wait patiently for that post. As for the rest, NBC & it’s reporters mirror CNN in that they have been caught playing “fast & loose “ with the truth,(one such report led to CNN firing three employees), but you & those like you will gladly overlook it as it doesn’t fit your narrative of “get Trump “.
|
|
|
Post by sooner8th on Aug 30, 2018 17:51:08 GMT -6
Show me where I said Fox was without mistakes, I’ll wait patiently for that post. As for the rest, NBC & it’s reporters mirror CNN in that they have been caught playing “fast & loose “ with the truth,(one such report led to CNN firing three employees), but you & those like you will gladly overlook it as it doesn’t fit your narrative of “get Trump “. You are too busy beating up on msn like a lemming. This is the hypocrisy of rightwingnuts, beat up MSM for a mistake, which they apologize for and fire people - but faux lies all the time without ever an apology and fire no one. So, of course, who are you upset with? MSM. Fast and loose, don't make me laugh, faux "news" lies all the fucking time. Even with the most horrific sexual abuse and harassment anyone has ever hear of wasn't enough to fire the POS's at faux, much less lying on air. But you & those like you will gladly overlook it as it long as it fits your narrative of “protect Trump“.
|
|
|
Post by kcrufnek on Aug 30, 2018 17:54:48 GMT -6
So, the Russians AND the Chinese hacked Hillary’s (illegal) home brew server?? And we know this for a fact? And we are still focused on an 18 month long investigation against her opponent that hasn’t yielded any proof of the initial charge? Sounds political.... Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk I forced myself to watch Chuck U Todd today and he and his guest were repeatedly saying how Trump lied about the Chinese. After the hack of the OPM hack how can people still not understand what China is doing?
|
|
|
Post by kcrufnek on Aug 30, 2018 17:58:06 GMT -6
You are too busy beating up on msn like a lemming. Fast and loose, don't make me laugh, faux "news" lies all the fucking time. Even with the most horrific sexual abuse and harassment anyone has ever hear of wasn't enough to fire the POS's at faux, much less lying on air. But you & those like you will gladly overlook it as it long as it fits your narrative of “protect Trump“. Matt Lauer worked at NBC. *has ever heard of
|
|
|
Post by sooner8th on Aug 30, 2018 17:59:11 GMT -6
So, the Russians AND the Chinese hacked Hillary’s (illegal) home brew server?? And we know this for a fact? And we are still focused on an 18 month long investigation against her opponent that hasn’t yielded any proof of the initial charge? Sounds political.... Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk I forced myself to watch Chuck U Todd today and he and his guest were repeatedly saying how Trump lied about the Chinese. After the hack of the OPM hack how can people still not understand what China is doing? He did lie about the Chinese. ZERO evidence to back it up. That is the difference between rightwingnut media and REAL media - EVIDENCE, which trump has ZIP.
|
|
|
Post by oilsooner on Aug 30, 2018 18:00:21 GMT -6
So, the Russians AND the Chinese hacked Hillary’s (illegal) home brew server?? And we know this for a fact? And we are still focused on an 18 month long investigation against her opponent that hasn’t yielded any proof of the initial charge? Sounds political.... Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk I forced myself to watch Chuck U Todd today and he and his guest were repeatedly saying how Trump lied about the Chinese. After the hack of the OPM hack how can people still not understand what China is doing? First, don’t know how you watch that shit. Secondly, as I have a few beers, I get more hardcore in my beliefs and trend toward the less hopeful view, and think they don’t care about truth. Peterson vs Harris debating truth. If you haven’t heard it, I recommend listening to it. The fucking intellectual dishonesty these days, be it due to ignorance or intention, just blows my fucking mind. God help us.... Tribalism is at its height. We are fucking tethered to morons and ideologues. And we are all sinking quickly. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
|
|
|
Post by kcrufnek on Aug 30, 2018 18:11:30 GMT -6
First, don’t know how you watch that shit. Secondly, as I have a few beers, I get more hardcore in my beliefs and trend toward the less hopeful view, and think they don’t care about truth. Peterson vs Harris debating truth. If you haven’t heard it, I recommend listening to it. The fucking intellectual dishonesty these days, be it due to ignorance or intention, just blows my fucking mind. God help us.... Tribalism is at its height. We are fucking tethered to morons and ideologues. And we are all sinking quickly. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk I will flip over from time to time just to see if they are all on the same page. Usually they are. And, after my foot procedure mand a few hydros I'm pretty numb to it all. Cheers!!
|
|
|
Post by kcrufnek on Aug 30, 2018 18:13:48 GMT -6
Bwahahaha. Robert Reich. He is in the top three biggest shit heads of all time.
|
|
|
Post by oilsooner on Aug 30, 2018 18:26:31 GMT -6
No matter how pub or dem or pro or anti trump, surely we can all agree on this:
We have to come to know that the “MSM” is out for clicks, advertisements, and revenue. Not truth.
If we can’t agree on that, we’re in trouble...
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
|
|
|
Post by oilsooner on Aug 30, 2018 18:27:50 GMT -6
First, don’t know how you watch that shit. Secondly, as I have a few beers, I get more hardcore in my beliefs and trend toward the less hopeful view, and think they don’t care about truth. Peterson vs Harris debating truth. If you haven’t heard it, I recommend listening to it. The fucking intellectual dishonesty these days, be it due to ignorance or intention, just blows my fucking mind. God help us.... Tribalism is at its height. We are fucking tethered to morons and ideologues. And we are all sinking quickly. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk I will flip over from time to time just to see if they are all on the same page. Usually they are. And, after my foot procedure mand a few hydros I'm pretty numb to it all. 😴 Cheers!! Cheers to you brother. Hope your foot, and med situation finds improvement. Pulling for ya man. As for me... One bourbon. One shot. And one beer. (One drink of Jack ain’t enough, better make it three...) Oh, and on Chuck Todd: Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
|
|
|
Post by sooner8th on Aug 30, 2018 18:55:04 GMT -6
You are too busy beating up on msn like a lemming. Fast and loose, don't make me laugh, faux "news" lies all the fucking time. Even with the most horrific sexual abuse and harassment anyone has ever hear of wasn't enough to fire the POS's at faux, much less lying on air. But you & those like you will gladly overlook it as it long as it fits your narrative of “protect Trump“. Matt Lauer worked at NBC. *has ever heard of You really think lauer = ailes? You are showing your ignorance and stupidity. What a fucking joke. Read up on roger before you post something stupid dumbass.
|
|
|
Post by 1tc on Aug 30, 2018 18:59:26 GMT -6
Matt Lauer worked at NBC. *has ever heard of You really think lauer = ailes? You are showing your ignorance and stupidity. What a fucking joke. Read up on roger before you post something stupid dumbass. You are simply terrible at your whataboutisms. Turrible.
|
|
|
Post by oilsooner on Aug 30, 2018 19:01:03 GMT -6
Matt Lauer worked at NBC. *has ever heard of You really think lauer = ailes? You are showing your ignorance and stupidity. What a fucking joke. Read up on roger before you post something stupid dumbass. Yeah, Lauer only had a button under his desk to lock the door so he could assault women. Are you a ditch digger?? That’s what my mom said I’d be if I refused to listen up in class... Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
|
|