|
Post by kcrufnek on Nov 15, 2018 18:44:19 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by oilsooner on Nov 15, 2018 19:54:01 GMT -6
Shows how far this shit has come and how hard these “sources” were trying to cover up activities we all now know were occurring. CNN believed the lies and down the rabbit hole they went. A good find.
|
|
|
Post by kcrufnek on Nov 16, 2018 3:44:24 GMT -6
He's been all over it from the start. To me it's confusing as hell but he lays it all out. He has a book out that pretty good - Spygate.
|
|
|
Post by oilsooner on Nov 16, 2018 18:49:20 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Nov 16, 2018 20:25:59 GMT -6
Sounds good. Is he going to have one of those FBI lawyers that won't let him answer any questions?
|
|
|
Post by kcrufnek on Nov 16, 2018 21:03:34 GMT -6
Sounds good. Is he going to have one of those FBI lawyers that won't let him answer any questions? He needs to be under oath.
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Nov 19, 2018 15:50:32 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Nov 19, 2018 15:55:57 GMT -6
dailycaller.com/2018/11/19/republicans-trump-declassify-fbi-dossier/Republicans for months have pressed the Justice Department to turn over classified emails that show that the FBI “withheld evidence” from the federal court that authorized surveillance warrants against former Trump campaign adviser Carter Page, the chairman of the House Intelligence Committee said Sunday. California Rep. Devin Nunes, the Republican chairman of the Intelligence panel, said in an interview on Fox News that Republicans have recently added the documents to a list of records that they hope President Donald Trump will declassify. “For months, we have been reviewing emails between FBI and DOJ and others that clearly show that they knew of information that should have been presented to the [Foreign Intelligence Surveillance] Court. It is real evidence that people within the FBI withheld evidence from the FISA court,” Nunes said on Fox News’ “Sunday Morning Futures” with Maria Bartiromo.
|
|
|
Post by kcrufnek on Nov 19, 2018 19:12:37 GMT -6
I'm afraid we're seeing the future. If such things as the Constitution as well as the rule of law get in the way go find a friendly judge. Much like how 2018 was most likely a dress rehearsal for ruining the 2020 elections.
|
|
|
Post by okie52 on Nov 19, 2018 20:28:43 GMT -6
So we’ve been about 2 years on comeys investigations?
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Nov 20, 2018 11:09:48 GMT -6
Revenge for Hillary much? Also, cute coming from Hillary’s spox: thehill.com/homenews/house/417603-house-oversight-dems-to-investigate-ivanka-trumps-personal-email-useDemocrats on the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee are planning to look into Ivanka Trump’s use of a personal email account to determine whether she violated federal law. A Democratic aide told The Hill on Tuesday that the committee is planning “to continue our investigation of the presidential records act and federal records act, and we want to know if Ivanka complied with the law.” The Democratic aide also noted on Tuesday that the committee had started a bipartisan investigation last year on whether White House officials were in compliance with the Presidential Records Act under then-committee Chairman Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah), who has since retired from Congress. That probe has since been dropped. ........
|
|
|
Post by xingtherubicon on Nov 20, 2018 17:30:06 GMT -6
Sounds 'careless'
|
|
|
Post by 1tc on Nov 20, 2018 22:06:51 GMT -6
In related news, a Judge has given Hillary 30 days to respond to email and email server questions
|
|
|
Post by reddeadredemption on Nov 21, 2018 7:55:47 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by NN on Nov 21, 2018 13:00:46 GMT -6
If you wonder what a pocket AG cost, its 1.2 million.
|
|
|
Post by oilsooner on Nov 21, 2018 13:36:33 GMT -6
If you wonder what a pocket AG cost, its 1.2 million. “I’m President Obama’s wingman”
|
|
|
Post by NN on Nov 21, 2018 14:23:58 GMT -6
If you wonder what a pocket AG cost, its 1.2 million. “I’m President Obama’s wingman” Hitting the snooze button, wake me when you have something better than a "but Obama".
|
|
|
Post by oilsooner on Nov 21, 2018 15:12:26 GMT -6
“I’m President Obama’s wingman” Hitting the snooze button, wake me when you have something better than a "but Obama". Does the two party system produce any better??
|
|
|
Post by kcrufnek on Nov 21, 2018 15:36:17 GMT -6
"We were talking about grandchildren".
|
|
|
Post by xingtherubicon on Nov 21, 2018 16:28:48 GMT -6
“I’m President Obama’s wingman” Hitting the snooze button, wake me when you have something better than a "but Obama". We used to have an AG that wouldn't prosecute black panthers intimidating voters AT THE POLLS in Philly...gave guns to cartels, and was held in contempt of congress AND contempt of court for being a lying piece of shit. If you don't like what's happening with the AG's office now, all of the sudden...well, kindly go fuck yourself.
|
|
|
Post by NN on Nov 21, 2018 16:42:15 GMT -6
Hitting the snooze button, wake me when you have something better than a "but Obama". We used to have an AG that wouldn't prosecute black panthers intimidating voters AT THE POLLS in Philly...gave guns to cartels, and was held in contempt of congress AND contempt of court for being a lying piece of shit. If you don't like what's happening with the AG's office now, all of the sudden...well, kindly go fuck yourself. That's the spirit, Happy Thanksgiving to you and yours.
|
|
|
Post by xingtherubicon on Nov 21, 2018 17:36:55 GMT -6
We used to have an AG that wouldn't prosecute black panthers intimidating voters AT THE POLLS in Philly...gave guns to cartels, and was held in contempt of congress AND contempt of court for being a lying piece of shit. If you don't like what's happening with the AG's office now, all of the sudden...well, kindly go fuck yourself. That's the spirit, Happy Thanksgiving to you and yours. and to you...I'm doing the noodles this year!
|
|
|
Post by kcrufnek on Nov 29, 2018 1:20:19 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by oilsooner on Nov 29, 2018 13:08:35 GMT -6
Guardian backpeddling Manafort/Assange meeting claim? link![](https://i.imgur.com/Hazowl4.png) ![](https://i.imgur.com/EuqkxGl.png)
|
|
|
Post by sooner98 on Nov 29, 2018 13:30:53 GMT -6
"We've got Drumpf now! The noose is tightening! The walls are closing in! It's the beginning of the end!"
Issue a blanket pardon for everyone except Cohen, and fire the sad Basset hound and his partisan posse into an early retirement, STAT.
|
|
|
Post by oilsooner on Nov 29, 2018 14:04:55 GMT -6
thehill.com/opinion/white-house/418098-more-questions-than-answers-in-too-many-trump-storiesMore questions than answers in too many Trump stories More questions than answers in too many Trump stories BY SHARYL ATTKISSON, OPINION CONTRIBUTOR 1,164 The views expressed by contributors are their own and not the view of The Hill TWEET SHARE MORE Something strange has happened to the news. We’ve largely suspended our normal ethical practices and standards when it comes to covering President Trump. Maybe it doesn’t seem strange to the usual crowd: the Washington and New York-centric media, political figures, insiders and pundits. They act like it’s not happening. Or maybe they don’t even notice. But to a lot of fair-minded, ordinary Americans, it’s just odd. A good example is the recent rash of stories about President Trump reportedly wanting the Justice Department to investigate two of his political nemeses: former presidential candidate Hillary Clinton and former FBI Director James Comey. I’m not as smart as a lot of people, but my initial reaction was a big “So what?” First, it’s unsurprising that Trump would have wanted his Justice Department to investigate two officials widely accused of wrongdoing. Second, even Trump’s critics acknowledge his right to ask for such investigations. Third, the investigations were never ordered. Yet the story, reported by The New York Times — and therefore guaranteed to be copied by news outlets internationally — portrayed the big “news” as if it were proof of politically motivated interference of the worst kind. I’m not arguing that the allegations, if deemed credible, aren’t worthy of examination. And Trump’s critics have every right to have their views heard on the national news. But the fairness that once was routinely expected in news stories is notably absent. Here are four ways the story falls short of upholding routine journalistic standards. The story relies on anonymous sources. Risky to begin with, creating international headlines on the basis of nameless, faceless people becomes even more perilous considering how many leaked stories by anonymous sources have proven factually incorrect. The story lacks appropriate context. When the only way to tell a story is through anonymous sources, their self-interests and identities must be described with as much specificity as possible so viewers can weight the allegations. Do the sources oppose Trump? Do they work in the White House? Were they fired? Disgruntled? Could they be trying to cover up their own wrongdoing? How are they in position to know what they claim to know? None of this information was provided. Likewise, the story failed to include the context that the main subject, former White House counsel Donald McGahn, had repeatedly clashed with Trump and was ultimately forced out of his job. There are numerous instances of missing attribution. If a reporter didn’t personally witness an event, he generally should not present allegations or facts as if true and verified; they should be attributed to their source. Here’s one paragraph full of examples of missing attribution: “The lawyer, Donald F. McGahn II, rebuffed the president, saying that he had no authority to order a prosecution. Mr. McGahn said that while he could request an investigation, that too could prompt accusations of abuse of power. To underscore his point, Mr. McGahn had White House lawyers write a memo for Mr. Trump warning that if he asked law enforcement to investigate his rivals, he could face a range of consequences, including possible impeachment.” In a news piece, the reporters’ opinions shouldn’t be reported as facts. But in this story, after accepting one-sided, leaked information as true, the writers add their own opinions. Here’s one example: “The encounter was one of the most blatant examples yet of how Mr. Trump views the typically independent Justice Department as a tool to be wielded against his political enemies.” Unasked and unanswered questions It seems to me, smart and fair reporting wouldn’t only report the allegations against Trump, but also would examine competing questions. Are all the figures who have warded off Trump from being involved in his own Justice Department really trying to keep him away so that he doesn’t uncover facts related to allegedly politically motivated acts, surveillance and wrongdoing by some officials over the years? Is the strategy to accuse Trump of “obstruction” every time he interacts with his Justice Department part of the “insurance policy” discussed by multiple Trump opponents — including two FBI officials and a Comey associate? Does the press risk being used as a propaganda tool by reporting a series of what appear to be orchestrated, anonymous leaks of unverified, derogatory information against Trump? In the end, journalistic standards aren’t designed for us to follow only when we write stories about people we like. They’re to hold us to a level of professionalism when we’re reporting on political figures we don’t like — even ones we may hate or who attack us personally. If we can’t maintain our standards under the most challenging circumstances, then we shouldn’t pretend to have them to begin with. Sharyl Attkisson (@sharylattkisson) is an Emmy Award-winning investigative journalist, author of The New York Times best-sellers “The Smear” and “Stonewalled,” and host of Sinclair’s Sunday TV program, “Full Measure.”
|
|
|
Post by oilsooner on Nov 29, 2018 14:45:04 GMT -6
"We've got Drumpf now! The noose is tightening! The walls are closing in! It's the beginning of the end!" Issue a blanket pardon for everyone except Cohen, and fire the sad bloodhound and his partisan posse into an early retirement, STAT. Yeah, I am becoming pretty pessimistic about it all, myself. Trump is in a bad spot, and I am pretty sure the country is lost. At least, if you believe in individualism and small government, as I do. Trump is a republican, so he was going to have a rough go of things anyway, but he also threatened the Deep State. They have since circled the wagons and feed the Orangebadman crowd, who have no issue with tactics, provided they are aimed at their arch nemesis. The progressives are no more than willing pawns, but they clamor to give power to a government they also see as tyrannical. The Deep State enjoys the symbiotic relationship, because they are in power, and the arrangement secures it. Without solid proof that Trump colluded with Russia (which I dont think Mueller has, because he is so heavily relying on perjury charges), the Mueller investigation is nothing more than a politically motivated witch hunt, fueled by false allegations that were bought, fed to the government, then passed around to the media by the opposing political party. That is the most third world, backwards ass, non American shit I can think of, and the fact that the country supports it because they either agree with the ideology of the guilty political party or they have become lost in the wilderness of mirrors is nearly too much to bare. The alternative is that they have irrefutable proof that Trump colluded with Russia, and all is lost, because now the left is going to have a field day. It'd be a very sad day for America. I dont know where things are going, but I am pretty sure it's not good. Mueller says no collusion, but OOJ, and all this other unrelated bullshit that was drummed up on false charges, and I dont know how thats any better than where we are today. I dont think he should fire Mueller, because he might as well let shit play out at this point, but I wouldnt really give a shit if he did. Whatever Mueller has (proof of anything) he already has, so its not like Trump can erase of all of that. But, its gonna run off any moderates that might change their mind with no proof of collusion if he fires him before he reports. There are no good answers here.
|
|
|
Post by reddeadredemption on Nov 29, 2018 15:46:25 GMT -6
"We've got Drumpf now! The noose is tightening! The walls are closing in! It's the beginning of the end!" Issue a blanket pardon for everyone except Cohen, and fire the sad bloodhound and his partisan posse into an early retirement, STAT. Yeah, I am becoming pretty pessimistic about it all, myself. Trump is in a bad spot, and I am pretty sure the country is lost. At least, if you believe in individualism and small government, as I do. Trump is a republican, so he was going to have a rough go of things anyway, but he also threatened the Deep State. They have since circled the wagons and feed the Orangebadman crowd, who have no issue with tactics, provided they are aimed at their arch nemesis. The progressives are no more than willing pawns, but they clamor to give power to a government they also see as tyrannical. The Deep State enjoys the symbiotic relationship, because they are in power, and the arrangement secures it. Without solid proof that Trump colluded with Russia (which I dont think Mueller has, because he is so heavily relying on perjury charges), the Mueller investigation is nothing more than a politically motivated witch hunt, fueled by false allegations that were bought, fed to the government, then passed around to the media by the opposing political party. That is the most third world, backwards ass, non American shit I can think of, and the fact that the country supports it because they either agree with the ideology of the guilty political party or they have become lost in the wilderness of mirrors is nearly too much to bare. The alternative is that they have irrefutable proof that Trump colluded with Russia, and all is lost, because now the left is going to have a field day. It'd be a very sad day for America. I dont know where things are going, but I am pretty sure it's not good. Mueller says no collusion, but OOJ, and all this other unrelated bullshit that was drummed up on false charges, and I dont know how thats any better than where we are today. I dont think he should fire Mueller, because he might as well let shit play out at this point, but I wouldnt really give a shit if he did. Whatever Mueller has (proof of anything) he already has, so its not like Trump can erase of all of that. But, its gonna run off any moderates that might change their mind with no proof of collusion if he fires him before he reports. There are no good answers here. It would be a sad day for America because the left would have a 'field day' or because a sitting President colluded with a foreign government?
|
|
|
Post by oilsooner on Nov 29, 2018 15:56:50 GMT -6
Yeah, I am becoming pretty pessimistic about it all, myself. Trump is in a bad spot, and I am pretty sure the country is lost. At least, if you believe in individualism and small government, as I do. Trump is a republican, so he was going to have a rough go of things anyway, but he also threatened the Deep State. They have since circled the wagons and feed the Orangebadman crowd, who have no issue with tactics, provided they are aimed at their arch nemesis. The progressives are no more than willing pawns, but they clamor to give power to a government they also see as tyrannical. The Deep State enjoys the symbiotic relationship, because they are in power, and the arrangement secures it. Without solid proof that Trump colluded with Russia (which I dont think Mueller has, because he is so heavily relying on perjury charges), the Mueller investigation is nothing more than a politically motivated witch hunt, fueled by false allegations that were bought, fed to the government, then passed around to the media by the opposing political party. That is the most third world, backwards ass, non American shit I can think of, and the fact that the country supports it because they either agree with the ideology of the guilty political party or they have become lost in the wilderness of mirrors is nearly too much to bare. The alternative is that they have irrefutable proof that Trump colluded with Russia, and all is lost, because now the left is going to have a field day. It'd be a very sad day for America. I dont know where things are going, but I am pretty sure it's not good. Mueller says no collusion, but OOJ, and all this other unrelated bullshit that was drummed up on false charges, and I dont know how thats any better than where we are today. I dont think he should fire Mueller, because he might as well let shit play out at this point, but I wouldnt really give a shit if he did. Whatever Mueller has (proof of anything) he already has, so its not like Trump can erase of all of that. But, its gonna run off any moderates that might change their mind with no proof of collusion if he fires him before he reports. There are no good answers here. It would be a sad day for America because the left would have a 'field day' or because a sitting President colluded with a foreign government? Both, obviously.
|
|
|
Post by sooner98 on Nov 29, 2018 16:15:15 GMT -6
I am 100 percent confident he did not collude with a foreign government. Mueller is coming up with all of these indictments for "lying" about unimportant details, and two dozen mysterious, faceless Russians to pad his stats, so that the leftist dolts can all say "See, look, this isn't a witch hunt! Mueller has now indicted 50 people! Trump has to be guilty too! IMPEACH!!!"
Meanwhile, zero evidence of collusion. Two years later, and the collusion train hasn't even left the station.
|
|