|
|
Post by soonernvolved on May 17, 2018 11:00:49 GMT -6
dailycaller.com/2018/05/17/cnn-pundits-party-avenatti-photo/The wife of a CNN commentator accidentally exposed the network’s bias in a now-deleted tweet that showed anchors and pundits partying with Stormy Daniel’s lawyer Michael Avenatti. Juanita Scarlett, who is married to CNN political commentator Errol Louis, posted a photo of Avenatti with Louis, CNN anchor Don Lemon, and CNN commentator Margaret Hoover. The caption read, “Thrilled to have met @michaelavenatti at the Sag Harbor soiree of my second favorite favorite on-air journalist @donlemon @errollous @margarethoover.”… …The soiree was most likely at Lemon’s home since he purchased a place in Sag Harbor a couple of years ago. ....... But fortunately,(rather unfortunately for CNN), some saved the tweets: He asks a very good question in the second tweet. Only answer could be that it shows the network’s bias for their favorite guest?
|
|
|
|
Post by trumped on May 17, 2018 11:58:20 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by trumped on May 17, 2018 12:01:27 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by trumped on May 17, 2018 12:04:16 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on May 17, 2018 12:18:17 GMT -6
Get your popcorn buckets ready folks:
|
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on May 17, 2018 12:29:30 GMT -6
thefederalist.com/2018/05/17/10-key-takeaways-from-new-york-times-error-ridden-defense-of-fbi-spying-on-trump-campaign/10 Key Takeaways From The New York Times’ Error-Ridden Defense Of FBI Spying On Trump Campaign It's reasonable to assume that much of the new information in the New York Times report relates to leakers' fears about information that will be coming out in the inspector general report. ..... Here are a few quick takeaways. 1. FBI Officials Admit They Spied On Trump Campaign .... 2. Terrified About Looming Inspector General Report People leak for a variety of reasons, including to inoculate themselves as much as they can. For example, only when the secret funders of Fusion GPS’s Russia-Trump-collusion dossier were about to be revealed was their identity leaked to friendly reporters in the Washington Post. In October of 2017 was it finally reported that the Clinton campaign and Democratic National Committee secretly paid for the Russia dossier, hiding the arrangement by funneling the money through a law firm. .... 3. Still No Evidence of Collusion With Russia In paragraph 69 of the lengthy story, The New York Times takes itself to task for burying the lede in its October 31, 2016, story about the FBI not finding any proof of involvement with Russian election meddling. The key fact of the article — that the F.B.I. had opened a broad investigation into possible links between the Russian government and the Trump campaign — was published in the 10th paragraph. ...... 4. Four Trump Affiliates Spied On Thanks to the work of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence and the Senate Judiciary Committee, Americans already learned that the FBI had secured a wiretap on Carter Page, a former Trump campaign official. That wiretap, which was renewed three times, was already controversial because it was secured in part through using the secretly funded opposition research document created by the Hillary Clinton campaign and Democratic National Committee. The secret court that grants the wiretap was not told about Hillary Clinton or the DNC when the government applied for the wiretap or its renewals. ..... 5. Wiretaps, National Security Letters, and At Least One Spy ..... 6. More Leaks About a Top-Secret Government Informant The House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence recently subpoenaed information from the FBI and Department of Justice. They did not publicly reveal what information they sought, but the Department of Justice responded by claiming that they were being extorted by congressional oversight. Then they leaked that they couldn’t share the information because it would jeopardize the life of a government informant. They also waged a public relations battle against HPSCI Chairman Nunes and committee staff. ..... 7. Ignorance of Basic Facts One thing that is surprising about the story is how many errors it contains. The problems begin in the second sentence, which claims Peter Strzok and another FBI agent were sent to London. The New York Times reports that “[t]heir assignment, which has not been previously reported, was to meet the Australian ambassador, who had evidence that one of Donald J. Trump’s advisers knew in advance about Russian election meddling.” ..... 8. Insurance: How Does It Work? The story reminds readers that Strzok once texted Page “I want to believe the path you threw out for consideration in Andy’s office — that there’s no way he gets elected, but I’m afraid we can’t take that risk. It’s like an insurance policy in the unlikely event you die before you’re 40.” The article says Trump thought this “insurance policy” referred to a plan to respond to the unlikely event of a Trump victory. It goes on: ...... 9. Eavesdropping, Not Spying, And Other Friendly Claims The story could not be friendlier to the FBI sources who are admitting what they did against the Trump campaign. A few examples: ..... 10. Affirms Fears of Politicized Intelligence This New York Times story may have been designed to inoculate the FBI against revelations coming out of the inspector general report, but the net result was to affirm the fears of many Americans who are worried that the U.S. government’s law enforcement and intelligence agencies abused their powers to surveil and target Americans simply for their political views and affiliations. The gathered information has been leaked to media for years, leading to damaged reputations, and the launch of limitless probes, but not any reason to believe that Trump colluded with Russia to steal an election.
|
|
|
|
Post by trumped on May 17, 2018 12:40:53 GMT -6
Get your popcorn buckets ready folks: Yup all the chickens are coming home to roost |
|
|
|
Post by trumped on May 17, 2018 12:45:55 GMT -6
DP
|
|
|
|
Post by oilsooner on May 17, 2018 12:59:27 GMT -6
Get your popcorn buckets ready folks: Yup all the chickens are coming home to roost Maybe Comey had good reason to skip yesterday’s sitdown?? I know I got mah popped corn ready....  |
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on May 17, 2018 13:41:54 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on May 17, 2018 13:45:28 GMT -6
amp.dailycaller.com/2018/05/17/michael-avenatti-company-discriminated-against-pregnant-woman-court-docs-show/Michael Avenatti’s coffee chain fired a top-performing store manager in July 2016 because she became pregnant, a court found according to documents obtained by The Daily Caller News Foundation. A Washington state court on Oct. 13, 2017, ordered the parent companies for Tully’s Coffee chain to repay the woman $80,000 in lost wages and $40,000 in damages for the “pain and suffering” after her unlawful termination, court documents show. Both parent companies, Global Baristas, LLC and Global Baristas US, LLC, are either directly or indirectly controlled by Avenatti, according to government records reviewed by TheDCNF. The woman, Elizabeth Eno, worked for the chain from 2012 until she was fired in July 2016, shortly after she informed her supervisor that she became pregnant, according to court documents. Eno informed her supervisor around “the beginning of July 2016” that she was pregnant, court documents show. On July 5, the expectant mother “was evaluated by a secret shopper” and scored an 89 percent, court documents show. But two days later, the woman’s supervisor told her that she had, in fact, fared poorly in the evaluation and informed her that she had been fired, the court found. This was roughly a week after she had revealed her pregnancy to her supervisor. The defendants “failed to provide a justification for Ms. Eno’s termination based on poor job performance or to further a legitimate business necessity,” the court found. Before she was fired, Eno had recently been ranked the second-highest performing store manager in the district and tenth-highest in the entire company, according to the court’s statement of facts. The court stated as fact that the coffee chain “unlawfully discriminated against Ms. Eno when she was terminated due to her pregnancy.” She was awarded $80,000 to recover “lost wages due to being unable to secure equal employment.” “Additionally, as a result of Defendants’ actions, Ms. Eno experienced pain and suffering due to being pregnant and having a child while unemployed and unable to take leave under the Family Medical Leave Act,” the court found, awarding the woman $40,000 in damages.
|
|
|
|
Post by trumped on May 17, 2018 14:51:09 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on May 17, 2018 15:41:24 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by trumped on May 17, 2018 15:53:19 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by trumped on May 17, 2018 15:54:55 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on May 17, 2018 17:33:51 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by okie52 on May 17, 2018 18:40:36 GMT -6
Comey is still a POS
And a pussy.
|
|
|
|
Post by trumped on May 17, 2018 19:37:21 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by okie52 on May 17, 2018 20:57:46 GMT -6
Whenever you see McCain you can automatically write down “sellout”. |
|
|
|
Post by trumped on May 17, 2018 20:59:21 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by trumped on May 17, 2018 21:15:19 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by trumped on May 17, 2018 21:33:06 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by trumped on May 17, 2018 21:54:39 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by imthedude on May 18, 2018 4:42:11 GMT -6
Thanks for posting all of this fellas. It’s so much to go through that I’ve given up on even trying to explain it to friends. It’s so far fetched that Tom Clancy couldn’t have come up with this, yet it’s all true.
|
|
|
|
Post by imthedude on May 18, 2018 4:45:59 GMT -6
Oh, and public executions need to make a comeback for these people.
|
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on May 18, 2018 4:54:29 GMT -6
Stormy Daniels lawyer related: dailycaller.com/2018/05/17/michael-avenatti-sex-harassment-lawsuit/Two companies controlled by Michael Avenatti have yet to pay the over $126,000 owed to a victim of sex discrimination case despite orders from a Washington state court, the victim’s lawyer told The Daily Caller News Foundation. Elizabeth Eno, a top-performing manager at Tully’s Coffee chain, was fired in July 2016 because she was pregnant, the court ruled last year, awarding her $120,000 from Tully’s two parent companies at the time: Global Baristas LLC and Global Baristas US, LLC. But Eno has yet to see a single cent from the award, her attorney told TheDCNF on Thursday. State records show that Global Baristas US, LLC is controlled by the similarly named Global Baristas LLC, which in turn is controlled by Avenatti, the lawyer for porn star Stormy Daniels. Avenatti claimed to know nothing about the money his companies apparently owe Eno. “I have no idea. I had nothing to do with the case,” Avenatti told TheDCNF on Thursday. A judge ruled a summary order against the two companies in October 2017 to pay Eno $120,585 for wage losses, expectation damages, and pain and suffering related to her wrongful termination. Avenatti’s companies didn’t even send an attorney to court. On February 8th, Eno’s attorney was granted an affidavit to garnish the settlement from the two companies’s bank accounts in KeyBank because the companies had yet pay out any of the judgement money to Eno. Because of interest and various filing fees, Eno’s judgement increased to $126,540.17. KeyBank answered the writ of garnishment a week later on February 15. The bank reported no property or effects from Avenatti’s companies, writing “N/A,” court documents show. Three months later, Elizabeth Eno is still waiting for her money. .......... And this is the Democrats/MSM’s new favorite person. |
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on May 18, 2018 5:03:55 GMT -6
thefederalist.com/2018/05/17/far-russia-investigations-keep-leading-back-investigators/One Year In, The Russia Investigations Keep Leading Back To The Investigators What was once a no-downside case for Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s office has now become one with little upside. Ben Weingarten By Ben Weingarten MAY 17, 2018 In February I wrote that the Russiagate collusion-mongers were hurting America far worse than the sole group of Russians the special counsel indicted. The rationale was that in effectively waging a mass disinformation, lawfare, and political campaign against a sitting president, collusion-mongers had already done more damage to our government and society than anything Vladimir Putin could have cooked up. This is true at a broader level as well. The political establishment that wishes to bring down the Trump presidency daily shows itself willing to eviscerate all norms, from corrupting the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act court and violating Department of Justice procedures, to perhaps even planting FBI informants inside the Trump campaign. It has exhibited a willingness to undermine national security in the form of gross intelligence and law enforcement politicization, game-playing with redactions, and endless leaks. The establishment has taken such actions under the guise of defending “norms” and protecting “national security.” In short, we are witnessing an episode of mass projection. Why? Because given that they are increasingly exposed, the Left must keep this charade going, grasping at every possible straw while hoping against hope the Trump administration makes a grave misstep under the heat of various spotlights. Otherwise, they risk their own downfall. The boomerang is real. How do these folks reconcile their belief in the president’s lawlessness and recklessness with the fact that, after a campaign waged by the entire Clinton machine, months and months of efforts to uncover a smoking gun by the most skilled and hungry of prosecutors, surrounded by swamp creatures who wish to destroy President Trump at every turn, there appears to be no “there” there? The Facebook ads Democrats on the House Intelligence Committee released really are not cutting it. The February Indictment Returns Let us return to the special counsel, arguably the leading edge of Russiagate, and its February indictment. The increasingly narrow Moscow-specific angle to the investigation has suddenly re-emerged. When the singular litigation effort to date directly implicating the Kremlin with mischief in the 2016 U.S. presidential election—and arguably the sole case remotely squaring with the special counsel’s mandate—comes into question, we best take notice. Recall that the indictment charged 13 Russians and three front companies with “committing federal crimes while seeking to interfere in the United States political system.” The first of the eight counts for which the defendants were charged hewed the closest to the idea that Russian actors “meddled” or “interfered in” the 2016 election, though absent any “coordination” or “collusion” with the Trump campaign: “Criminal conspiracy to defraud the United States…by impairing the lawful functions of the Federal Election Commission, the U.S. Department of Justice, and the U.S. Department of State in administering federal requirements for disclosure of foreign involvement in certain domestic activities.” While the media hailed it as proving a pro-Trump Russian bias, the indictment chronicles the conspirators’ creation and dissemination of social media content and a handful of rallies supporting both sides of contentious issues as well as presidential candidates across the political spectrum, describing the conspirators’ ultimate “strategic goal” as seeking to “sow discord in the U.S. political system, including the 2016 U.S. presidential election.” The evidence cited in the indictment illustrated a sort of clownishness and crudeness to these efforts, as if the Kremlin was either winking at us, or its agents were about as able as a Lada. It also revealed just how paltry in price and minimal in reach these efforts were in context of a multi-billion-dollar election in this age of 24/7 media. What a return on investment they have received. A Slam Dunk Turned Into a Slam Regardless, Special Counsel Robert Mueller surely believed his team had a slam dunk. This was arguably the most justified indictment specifically relating to Russian attempts to impact our election. Even better, those charged would likely never appear in court, let alone challenge the charges. Case closed. As Andrew McCarthy, the former federal prosecutor and clarion legal voice in the ongoing Russiagate travails, asserted at the time of the special counsel’s victory lap: When prosecutors are serious about nabbing law-breakers who are at large, they do not file an indictment publicly. That would just induce the offenders to flee to or remain in their safe havens. Instead, prosecutors file their indictment under seal, ask the court to issue arrest warrants, and quietly go about the business of locating and apprehending the defendants charged. In the Russia case, however, the indictment was filed publicly even though the defendants are at large. That is because the Justice Department and the special counsel know the Russians will stay safely in Russia. Mueller’s allegations will never be tested in court. That makes his indictment more a political statement than a charging instrument. Stunningly, the assumption that Mueller’s allegations would never be tested in court has proven false, illustrating the cunning of Russians in adapting their tactics to the conditions the collusion-mongers have provided them. Russians Call Mueller’s Bluff In April, lawyers for one of the Russian entities charged in the indictment filed an appearance in federal court. According to reports, the attorneys for Concord Management proceeded to make discovery requests demanding what the special counsel attorneys described as “sensitive intelligence gathering, national security, and foreign affairs information.” In early May, the federal judge overseeing the case struck down the special counsel’s request to delay arraignment by a month, a delay sought because the Mueller team had argued it was unclear whether Concord had formally accepted its summonses that were to be conveyed to them by way of the Office of the Prosecutor General of Russia. You don’t say. The case has now proceeded, with Concord Management filing a not-guilty plea. Its lawyers have started to hammer at the credibility of the indictment and thus the special counsel itself, alleging that one of the three entities charged, “Concord Catering,” did not even exist during the period of activity the indictment covers.
|
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on May 18, 2018 6:33:04 GMT -6
www.nationalreview.com/news/giuliani-muellers-team-agreed-to-narrow-the-scope-of-trump-interview-questions/amp/Rudy Giuliani said Friday that special counsel Robert Mueller has agreed to the Trump legal team’s demand that he narrow the scope of questions he plans to ask the president as a prerequisite to securing an in-person interview. Mueller, who has long sought a sit down with Trump, agreed Wednesday night to narrow his focus in interviewing Trump from five broad topics to just two, Giuliani told CNN’s Chris Cuomo. “Wednesday night we received a communication from them. We sent about five letters and never received a response and then they sent us a response. I can’t go in to detail, but narrowing the subjects for questioning down to about two,” he said. “You could actually have divided those into five categories or subject areas — so three are out. No secret that the whole thing with Michael Cohen is out because that’s in the Southern District of New York,” he added before explaining that Mueller has turned over all responsibilities related to the investigation into Cohen’s financial crimes to the U.S. attorney’s office in Manhattan. Pressed on what questions — besides those pertaining to Cohen — had been abandoned, Giuliani said he couldn’t provide specifics but offered that his team would like to see a tight focus on Russian involvement in the election. “The main focus that we want, I can tell you, is Russia. Was there a connection with Russia?” Mueller provided a list of 49 questions he would like to ask Trump in person to his legal team last month. The list, which was obtained by the New York Times, includes questions related to former national security advisor Michael Flynn’s contacts with Russian officials, the firing of former FBI director James Comey, attorney general Jeff Sessions’ contacts with Russians, and Trump’s knowledge of broad campaign coordination with Russia.
|
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on May 18, 2018 6:38:26 GMT -6
www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-05-18/brennan-needs-very-good-lawyer-says-digenova-hes-going-be-front-grand-jury-shortlyVeteran D.C. attorney Joe diGenova - who President Trump initially wanted to hire to represent him in the Mueller probe, only to have to step aside due to conflicts - sat down on Fox News on Thursday where he put a bow on what many believe was a high-stakes gamble by various members within the Obama Intelligence Community (IC) and others to infiltrate the Trump campaign and frame Donald Trump with Russiagate. Key among the participants in this alleged plot is former CIA director John Brennan, whose involvement is thought to have dovetailed with the FBI's recently disclosed "operation Crossfire Hurricane" - the code name given to the agency's earliest counterintelligence investigation into the Trump campaign. The FBI says the operation was launched following a drunken conversation between a Clinton-linked Australian ambassador and a low-level Trump associate, George Papadopoulos, who may have been set up from the start after being fed information by a professor named Joseph Mifsud, who is currently missing.
|
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on May 18, 2018 6:40:55 GMT -6
DiGenova said:
We know that Hillary Clinton was illegally exonerated. We knew that a year ago. We know that there was a substantial effort to frame the current President of the United States with crimes by infiltrating his campaign and then his administration with spies that the FBI had set upon them.
We have learned that the crimes were committed by the FBI, senior members of the Department of Justice, John Brennan, Mr. Clapper, Mr. Comey and others associated with the Democratic Party and Donald Trump and his associates committed no crimes….
Mr. Brennan who loves to make comments about the process get himself a good lawyer, not a good writer…
Yes, NBC News’ consultant, the former Director of the Central Intelligence Agency, the most partisan hack leader of the CIA needs a very, very good lawyer…
He’s going to be in front of a grand jury shortly.“
|
|
