Advertisement

Find answers, ask questions, and connect with our community around the world.

  • btomba_77

    Member
    January 18, 2018 at 11:57 am

    President Trump personally made the decision to curtail the testimony of former chief White House political strategist Steve Bannon before the House Intelligence Committee, [link=http://foreignpolicy.com/2018/01/18/trump-ordered-bannon-to-limit-testimony/]Foreign Policy[/link] reports.
     
    Trump acted to limit Bannons testimony based on legal advice provided by Uttam Dhillon, a deputy White House counsel, who concluded that the administration might have legitimate executive privilege claims to restrict testimony by Bannon and other current and former aides to the president.
     
    But Dhillon has also concluded that Bannon and other current and former Trump administration officials do not have legitimate claims to executive privilege when it comes to providing information or testimony to special counsel Robert Mueller.
     

    • kaldridgewv2211

      Member
      January 18, 2018 at 12:38 pm

      So is the executive privilege really just a way that the executive branch can hide their shady dealings?

      • btomba_77

        Member
        January 18, 2018 at 1:20 pm

        Quote from DICOM_Dan

        So is the executive privilege really just a way that the executive branch can hide their shady dealings?

         
        The counter argument is that the Executive needs to be able to have open and frank discussions in order to operate and make decisions.
         
        In the end it is up to the courts to decide where privilege ends and compulsory testimony begins.  

        • kayla.meyer_144

          Member
          January 18, 2018 at 1:26 pm

          [link]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_privilege[/link]
           

          The [link=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supreme_Court_of_the_United_States]Supreme Court of the United States[/link] has ruled this privilege may qualify as an element of the [link=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Separation_of_powers_under_the_United_States_Constitution]separation of powers[/link] doctrine, derived from the supremacy of the executive branch in its own area of Constitutional activity.[link=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_privilege#cite_note-2][2][/link][/sup]
          The Supreme Court confirmed the legitimacy of this doctrine in [i][link=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Nixon]United States v. Nixon[/link][/i] in the context of a subpoena emanating from the judiciary, instead of emanating from Congress.[link=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_privilege#cite_note-USvNixon-3][3][/link][/sup] The Court held that there is a qualified privilege, which can be invoked and thereby creates a presumption of privilege, and the party seeking the documents must then make a “sufficient showing” that the “Presidential material” is “essential to the justice of the case” (418 U.S. at 71314). [link=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chief_Justice_of_the_United_States]Chief Justice[/link] [link=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warren_E._Burger]Warren Burger[/link] further stated that executive privilege would most effectively apply when the oversight of the executive would impair that branch’s national security concerns.
           
          The Supreme Court addressed “executive privilege” in [i][link=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Nixon]United States v. Nixon[/link][/i], the 1974 case involving the demand by [link=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Watergate_scandal]Watergate[/link] [link=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special_prosecutor]special prosecutor[/link] [link=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archibald_Cox]Archibald Cox[/link] that President [link=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Nixon]Richard Nixon[/link] produce the audiotapes of conversations he and his colleagues had in the [link=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oval_Office]Oval Office[/link] of the [link=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_House]White House[/link] in connection with criminal charges being brought against members of the Nixon Administration. Nixon invoked the privilege and refused to produce any records.
           
          The Supreme Court did not reject the claim of privilege out of hand; it noted, in fact, “the valid need for protection of communications between high Government officials and those who advise and assist them in the performance of their manifold duties” and that “[h]uman experience teaches that those who expect public dissemination of their remarks may well temper candor with a concern for appearances and for their own interests to the detriment of the decisionmaking process.” This is very similar to the logic that the Court had used in establishing an “executive immunity” defense for high office-holders charged with violating citizens’ constitutional rights in the course of performing their duties. The Supreme Court stated: “To read the [link=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Article_Two_of_the_United_States_Constitution]Article II[/link] powers of the President as providing an absolute privilege as against a subpoena essential to enforcement of criminal statutes on no more than a generalized claim of the public interest in confidentiality of nonmilitary and nondiplomatic discussions would upset the constitutional balance of ‘a workable government’ and gravely impair the role of the courts under [link=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Article_Three_of_the_United_States_Constitution]Article III[/link].” Because Nixon had asserted only a generalized need for confidentiality, the Court held that the larger public interest in obtaining the truth in the context of a criminal prosecution took precedence.

           
           
           
           

      • ruszja

        Member
        January 18, 2018 at 1:22 pm

        Quote from DICOM_Dan

        So is the executive privilege really just a way that the executive branch can hide their shady dealings?

        Executive privilege has been asserted by every modern presidential administration.
        If your job title is ‘chief strategist’, every conversation you have with your boss is privileged. Mr Schiff can jump up and down all he wants, it won’t change the reality of it.

        Obama tried to assert EP to cover for Holders criminal activities. That didn’t hold up in court.

  • 100574

    Member
    January 18, 2018 at 2:44 pm

    Breaking news on Gorka
    The White House employed a Hungarian fugitive for seven months, according to an arrest warrant that appears to show that Sebastian Gorka, a former adviser to Donald Trump, was wanted there on weapons charges as of September 2016.[b][/b][i][/i][u][/u][strike][/strike]

  • btomba_77

    Member
    January 18, 2018 at 6:36 pm

    House releases it’s Fusion GPS Simpson interview transcript.
     
    Lots of threads coming … which I presume Mueller is already running down…. some of which are really really interesting
     
    Russian money laundering, the Mayflower hotel, suggestions that the NY FBI field office was in the bag for Trump, Nigel Farage and a thumb drive to Assange, Michael Cohen (Trump’s attoreny) the holder of all Russia related info …

    • Unknown Member

      Deleted User
      January 18, 2018 at 10:25 pm

      [link]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WUg5ud8eM-k[/link]

      • btomba_77

        Member
        January 19, 2018 at 4:29 am

        Quote from Jan the Third

        [link=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WUg5ud8eM-k]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WUg5ud8eM-k[/link]

        I’ve said to my friends a bunch of times.  If you want to see which Democratic candidate should run to win the Presidency in 2020 you should find a focus group of 100 people in Mahoning and Lorain  counties OH who voted for Obama twice but then turned around and voted for Trump.
         
        Follow who *they* want for President and give it to them.  That’s how you win again.

        • julie.young_645

          Member
          January 19, 2018 at 5:07 am

          And whom do you thing might fit that criterion?

          • btomba_77

            Member
            January 19, 2018 at 5:34 am

            Quote from DoctorDalai

            And whom do you thing might fit that criterion?

             
            Will take this to a new thread ….

  • btomba_77

    Member
    January 19, 2018 at 10:31 am

    [b]deleted — wrong thread[/b]

  • btomba_77

    Member
    January 23, 2018 at 3:01 pm

    Biden: [url=https://www.politico.com/story/2018/01/23/mitch-mcconnell-russia-obama-joe-biden-359531]McConnell refused to call out the Russians during 2016 campaign[/url]
     

    Former Vice President Joe Biden said that Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) stopped the Obama administration from speaking out about Russian interference in the 2016 campaign by refusing to sign on to a bipartisan statement of condemnation.
     
    That moment made Biden think the die had been cast this was all about the political play.
     
    Biden said he and former President Obama worried that without a united front of bipartisanship, speaking out before the election would undermine the legitimacy of the election and American institutions in a way that would play into the Russians larger ambitions.

    • yao.bw39_792

      Member
      January 23, 2018 at 8:41 pm

      Exclusive: New signs Gates may be negotiating with Mueller’s team[/h3] [link=https://www.cnn.com/2018/01/23/politics/rick-gates-new-attorney-mueller-russia-investigation/index.html]https://www.cnn.com/2018/…vestigation/index.html[/link]

      • 100574

        Member
        January 23, 2018 at 9:00 pm

        he should have done that weeks ago-especially when Bannon tried to put the blame on Manafort about the Russia meeting–clear signal Manafort is going downnnnn–that Russian wants his money Paul

        Quote from Nice Guy

        Exclusive: New signs Gates may be negotiating with Mueller’s team [link=https://www.cnn.com/2018/01/23/politics/rick-gates-new-attorney-mueller-russia-investigation/index.html]https://www.cnn.com/2018/…vestigation/index.html[/link]

        • 100574

          Member
          January 23, 2018 at 9:07 pm

          some quack arrested for threats against CNN–

  • btomba_77

    Member
    January 25, 2018 at 5:31 pm

     
    …[link=https://www.volkskrant.nl/tech/dutch-agencies-provide-crucial-intel-about-russia-s-interference-in-us-elections~a4561913/]https://www.volkskrant.nl…us-elections~a4561913/[/link]
     
    [b]Dutch intelligence agencies provide FBI direct evidence of Russia hacking the DNC[/b]
     

    It’s the summer of 2014. A hacker from the Dutch intelligence agency AIVD has penetrated the computer network of a university building next to the Red Square in Moscow, oblivious to the implications. One year later, from the AIVD headquarters in Zoetermeer, he and his colleagues witness Russian hackers launching an attack on the Democratic Party in the United States. The AIVD hackers had not infiltrated just any building; they were in the computer network of the infamous Russian hacker group Cozy Bear. And unbeknownst to the Russians, they could see everything.
     

     
    The Dutch hacker team spends weeks preparing itself. Then, in the summer of 2014, the attack takes place, most likely before the tragic crash of flight MH17. With some effort and patience, the team manages to penetrate the internal computer network. The AIVD can now trace the Russian hackers’ every step. But that’s not all. 

    The Cozy Bear hackers are in a space in a university building near the Red Square. The group’s composition varies, usually about ten people are active. The entrance is in a curved hallway. A security camera records who enters and who exits the room. The AIVD hackers manage to gain access to that camera. Not only can the intelligence service now see what the Russians are doing, they can also see who’s doing it. Pictures are taken of every visitor. In Zoetermeer, these pictures are analyzed and compared to known Russian spies. Again, they’ve acquired information that will later prove to be vital.
     

     
    There’s a long aftermath to the Russian attacks, particularly the attack on the Democratic Party. Moreover, the FBI investigation into the Russian interference adds a political dimension. After her defeat in November 2016, Clinton will say that the controversy about her leaked emails are what cost her the presidency. President elect Donald Trump categorically refuses to explicitly acknowledge the Russian interference. It would tarnish the gleam of his electoral victory. He has also frequently praised Russia, and president Putin in particular. This is one of the reasons the American intelligence services eagerly leak information: to prove that the Russians did in fact interfere with the elections. And that is why intelligence services have told American media about the amazing access of a ‘western ally’. 

    This has led to anger in Zoetermeer and The Hague. Some Dutchmen even feel betrayed. It’s absolutely not done to reveal the methods of a friendly intelligence service, especially if you’re benefiting from their intelligence. But no matter how vehemently the heads of the AIVD and MIVD express their displeasure, they don’t feel understood by the Americans. It’s made the AIVD and MIVD a lot more cautious when it comes to sharing intelligence. They’ve become increasingly suspicious since Trump was elected president.

    • julie.young_645

      Member
      January 25, 2018 at 5:43 pm

      And [i]I [/i]get taunted for believing in “conspiracy theories”.

      • kaldridgewv2211

        Member
        January 25, 2018 at 6:18 pm

        The world is not out to get you. Yes the FBI stuff is looking like Ron Johnson is the boy who cried wolf. The idea the Russians hacked the DNC is very plausible. We probably hack them too, just like every other nation.

  • julie.young_645

    Member
    January 25, 2018 at 6:53 pm

    Just because you’re paranoid doesn’t mean they [i]aren’t[/i] out to get you!
     
    But think about what you just said. Everybody hacks everybody. How did this turn into a witch hunt against Trump? 

    • kayla.meyer_144

      Member
      January 25, 2018 at 7:12 pm

      Because he welcomed the Russians with open arms. And who knows how hes attached to them money wise.

  • btomba_77

    Member
    January 25, 2018 at 7:12 pm

    NYT: [url=https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/25/us/politics/trump-mueller-special-counsel-russia.html?mtrref=www.google.com&gwh=9A6D127A17316153422B29EF65C10E9C&gwt=pay]Trump tried to fire Mueller last year but only halted when WH counsel threatened to resign.[/url]
     

    President Trump ordered the firing last June of Robert S. Mueller III, the special counsel overseeing the Russia investigation, according to four people told of the matter, but ultimately backed down after the White House counsel threatened to resign rather than carry out the directive.
     
    The West Wing confrontation marks the first time Mr. Trump is known to have tried to fire the special counsel. Mr. Mueller learned about the episode in recent months as his investigators interviewed current and former senior White House officials in his inquiry into whether the president obstructed justice.
     
    After receiving the presidents order to fire Mr. Mueller, the White House counsel, Donald F. McGahn II, refused to ask the Justice Department to dismiss the special counsel, saying he would quit instead, the people said. They spoke on the condition of anonymity because they did not want to be identified discussing a continuing investigation.

     
    Obstruction of justice.
     
     
    At least now we know why MCGahn retained his own counsel for the Russia probe last Fall.

    He’s probably already had a chat with Mr. Mueller.
     
     
     

    • 100574

      Member
      January 25, 2018 at 7:19 pm

      Guilty–illegal intent
      did WH counsel drop this leak–he knows how Dean lost his license–jailed
      Gates may have flip–the lawyer that got killed in Kabul so Gates has now hired a top Washington lawyer
      Melania has the power now to get her lawyers to update that prenup–get some extra dollars –he can’t do anything to u now 

      Quote from dergon

      NYT: [link=https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/25/us/politics/trump-mueller-special-counsel-russia.html?mtrref=www.google.com&gwh=9A6D127A17316153422B29EF65C10E9C&gwt=pay]Trump tried to fire Mueller last year but only halted when WH counsel threatened to resign.[/link]

      President Trump ordered the firing last June of Robert S. Mueller III, the special counsel overseeing the Russia investigation, according to four people told of the matter, but ultimately backed down after the White House counsel threatened to resign rather than carry out the directive.

      The West Wing confrontation marks the first time Mr. Trump is known to have tried to fire the special counsel. Mr. Mueller learned about the episode in recent months as his investigators interviewed current and former senior White House officials in his inquiry into whether the president obstructed justice.

      After receiving the presidents order to fire Mr. Mueller, the White House counsel, Donald F. McGahn II, refused to ask the Justice Department to dismiss the special counsel, saying he would quit instead, the people said. They spoke on the condition of anonymity because they did not want to be identified discussing a continuing investigation.

      Obstruction of justice.

      At least now we know why MCGahn retained his own counsel for the Russia probe last Fall.

      He’s probably already had a chat with Mr. Mueller.

      • julie.young_645

        Member
        January 26, 2018 at 5:39 am

        I’ve been to Russia some years ago, and I’m going back this year. Guess I’d best never run for office. I can’t believe the utter paranoia over [i]Russia Russia Russia [/i]when your very own idol, the Former Occupant, schooled Mitt Romney in a quite derisive way that Russia was nothing to worry about. You guys believe every other pearl of wisdom that dripped from his lips, why not that one?

        • btomba_77

          Member
          January 26, 2018 at 5:49 am

          This isnt about Romney. This isnt about Obama.

          Your efforts to push the conversation in that direction reek of misdirection.

          If you want to deflect you should try a bit more subtlety.

          • julie.young_645

            Member
            January 26, 2018 at 6:13 am

            Oh, get over yourself. You guys cannot STAND it when I point out the horrific foolishness, hypocrisy, and cognitive dissonance of your various positions. YOU are the one deflecting here, my friend. If Russia was the benign entity Obama insisted it was, there is no problem with any (fictional) Trump association. If it IS the big bad boogeyman, Obama was wrong. I can hear your intestines churning from here. 

            • yao.bw39_792

              Member
              February 6, 2018 at 3:43 pm

              Nice profile of Mr. Steele
              [link=https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/hero-or-hired-gun-how-a-british-former-spy-became-a-flash-point-in-the-russia-investigation/2018/02/06/94ea5158-0795-11e8-8777-2a059f168dd2_story.html?hpid=hp_hp-top-table-main_steele-530pm%3Ahomepage%2Fstory&utm_term=.4cb7b25791f5]https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/hero-or-hired-gun-how-a-british-former-spy-became-a-flash-point-in-the-russia-investigation/2018/02/06/94ea5158-0795-11e8-8777-2a059f168dd2_story.html?hpid=hp_hp-top-table-main_steele-530pm%3Ahomepage%2Fstory&utm_term=.4cb7b25791f5[/link]

              • 100574

                Member
                February 6, 2018 at 4:14 pm

                people going to Russia–please stay there

                • Unknown Member

                  Deleted User
                  February 6, 2018 at 7:37 pm

                  *steps in to see status of Russia conspiracy theory*
                   
                  *same old claptrap from our friends on the Left side of the aisle, with no buttressing substance*
                   
                  Good night.

                  • 100574

                    Member
                    February 6, 2018 at 8:38 pm

                    A plane trip to Moscow awaits U

                    Quote from Jan the Third

                    *steps in to see status of Russia conspiracy theory*

                    *same old claptrap from our friends on the Left side of the aisle, with no buttressing substance*

                    Good night.

  • 100574

    Member
    February 6, 2018 at 9:04 pm

    Sources close to Trump say he regrets not putting Rudy Giuliani at State and Chris Christie at Justice to help shoot down the Russia probe[b][/b][i][/i][u][/u][strike][/strike]-per Vanity Fair
    like does he really think they would have been approved

    • Unknown Member

      Deleted User
      February 6, 2018 at 9:25 pm

      [u][b]CLICK IMAGE FOR JOY[/b][/u]
       
      [link=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jbZ6a2gUbnc][image]https://russianlife.com/default/cache/file/FDC091A3-BF65-411F-AA185121BBB36C10.jpg[/image]
      [/link]
       

      • 100574

        Member
        February 6, 2018 at 9:38 pm

        the midget known as Putin has a gynecomastia problem

        Quote from Jan the Third

        [u][b]CLICK IMAGE FOR JOY[/b][/u]

        [link=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jbZ6a2gUbnc][image]https://russianlife.com/default/cache/file/FDC091A3-BF65-411F-AA185121BBB36C10.jpg[/image]
        [/link]

        • Unknown Member

          Deleted User
          February 6, 2018 at 9:45 pm

          [link=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K5fXbEivWec]The midget who, per your claim, controlled the US’s election[/link]

          • 100574

            Member
            February 6, 2018 at 10:12 pm

            via Republican help–midgets have a brain and if he sees losers like the GOP–he is like easy pickings–they are deseperate

            Quote from Jan the Third

            [link=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K5fXbEivWec]The midget who, per your claim, controlled the US’s election[/link]

            • 100574

              Member
              February 6, 2018 at 10:13 pm

              the midget known as Putin still has a breast issue Jan the Man–like get a boob job man-even the animal he is riding has a better boob job going

              • Unknown Member

                Deleted User
                February 6, 2018 at 10:26 pm

                Quote from sentinel lymph node

                the midget known as Putin still has a breast issue Jan the Man–like get a boob job man-even the animal he is riding has a better boob job going

                The animal has a boob job?
                 
                [8|]
                 
                My, my, you are in rare form tonight.

                • 100574

                  Member
                  February 6, 2018 at 10:59 pm

                  it was pure sarcasm–like yhe animals chest has nothing dripping down to it’s belly button–Putin’s face is pulled sooo tight–he could go to Mexico for a cheap boob lift

                  Quote from Jan the Third

                  Quote from sentinel lymph node

                  the midget known as Putin still has a breast issue Jan the Man–like get a boob job man-even the animal he is riding has a better boob job going

                  The animal has a boob job?

                  [8|]

                  My, my, you are in rare form tonight.

                  • Unknown Member

                    Deleted User
                    February 6, 2018 at 11:02 pm

                    Do you know a [i][b]thing[/b][/i] about bears? Are you aware that they often have rolls and rolls of fat?
                     
                    Don’t quit your day job, bud.

                    • 100574

                      Member
                      February 7, 2018 at 12:49 am

                      do u see fat on that bear carry that pasty white guy with the saggy girls out there–if he is going to go bear put some spray tan on that body–even trump has the face sprayed orange

                      Quote from Jan the Third

                      Do you know a [i][b]thing[/b][/i] about bears? Are you aware that they often have rolls and rolls of fat?

                      Don’t quit your day job, bud.

  • ruszja

    Member
    February 8, 2018 at 9:26 pm

    So Mark Warner has his own collude-o-rama. Working with a lobbyist for a banned russian oligarch to get his private back-channel to Christopher Steele:
     
    [link=http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/02/08/democratic-sen-mark-warner-texted-with-russian-oligarch-lobbyist-in-effort-to-contact-dossier-author-christopher-steele.html]http://www.foxnews.com/po…hristopher-steele.html[/link]

    • 100574

      Member
      February 8, 2018 at 10:03 pm

      Rubio has already explained this with a tweet
      but Politico has
      FBI surveillance of Carter Page might have picked up Banno[b][/b][i][/i][u][/u][strike][/strike]n

      Quote from fw

      So Mark Warner has his own collude-o-rama. Working with a lobbyist for a banned russian oligarch to get his private back-channel to Christopher Steele:

      [link=http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/02/08/democratic-sen-mark-warner-texted-with-russian-oligarch-lobbyist-in-effort-to-contact-dossier-author-christopher-steele.html]http://www.foxnews.com/po…hristopher-steele.html[/link]

      • btomba_77

        Member
        February 9, 2018 at 3:50 am

        Quote from sentinel lymph node

        Rubio has already explained this with a tweet
        but Politico has
        FBI surveillance of Carter Page might have picked up Banno[b] [/b][i] [/i][u][/u][strike][/strike]n

        Quote from fw

        So Mark Warner has his own collude-o-rama. Working with a lobbyist for a banned russian oligarch to get his private back-channel to Christopher Steele:

        [link=http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/02/08/democratic-sen-mark-warner-texted-with-russian-oligarch-lobbyist-in-effort-to-contact-dossier-author-christopher-steele.html]http://www.foxnews.com/po…hristopher-steele.html[/link]

         
        “Sen.Warner fully disclosed this to the committee four months ago.  Has had zero impact on our work.”  ~ Marco Rubio
         
         
         
         
         
        btw — this is a nice little “how to” for the Trump admin.  Next time around if you had a meeting, you make a full disclosure.  And if you are asked under oath you answer truthfully.   Good advice for Trump Jr, Sessions, Flynn, Kushner, Manafort …. 

        • kaldridgewv2211

          Member
          February 9, 2018 at 6:43 am

          I watched the last 7 minutes of this Navalny video last night.  It seems Putin tried to pull some kind of weird blackmail on him.  It’s all on video but Putin sends the same hookers to everything.  He was able to track girls on their social media.  However, through doing that he seems to be able to tie Manafort right to Russian Oligarch.  This is the one that he was supposedly relaying T Rump campaign info back to Putin through.
           
           
          [link=https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2018/02/08/russian-opposition-leader-alexei-navalny-scours-instagram-to-accuse-a-top-kremlin-official-of-ties-to-a-billionaire/?utm_term=.730738ac93ab]https://www.washingtonpos…utm_term=.730738ac93ab[/link]

        • ruszja

          Member
          February 9, 2018 at 10:32 am

          Quote from dergon

          “Sen.Warner fully disclosed this to the committee four months ago.  Has had zero impact on our work.”  ~ Marco Rubio

           
          He disclosed his backroom dealings after information about it started to become public.
           
          You guys need to make up your mind. Either talking to the russians to get dirt on your opponents is the crime of the century or it is business as usual. The way Adam Schiff and Mark Warner were all to eager to engage with ‘russians’  as long as there was a prospect of getting dirt on the president, it would seem that it is in fact standard procedure in the swamp.

          • btomba_77

            Member
            February 9, 2018 at 11:06 am

             
            It’s really not similar at all.  Warner was trying to get Steele to testify. You now have in addition to the Rubi comments, a joint statement from Warner and Burr.
             
            It’s not similar.  Trump, Hannity, and Fox are invested in making it [i]appear[/i] similar…. but it’s not.
             
             

            • kayla.meyer_144

              Member
              February 9, 2018 at 11:31 am

              fw is helping to stir the pot to cause confusion, like Hannity, et al. If you can’t argue the facts create confusion.

              • kayla.meyer_144

                Member
                February 9, 2018 at 6:17 pm

                Well, Trump afraid to release the Democratic response to Nuness nothingburger; denies release.

                Next we will hear his opinion the Dem memo is treason.

                • heenadevk1119_462

                  Member
                  February 9, 2018 at 8:26 pm

                  ^ And before the Nunes memo all we heard was how that crushed confidentiality, was a blow to intelligence, and “endangered” national security, even though it clearly didn’t endanger anything.
                   
                  Now, they want to do precisely the same thing x 1000
                   
                  You are liars and you support them Schiff for Brains every step of the way.
                   
                  I bet the Strzok and Page texts are not problematic at all for you, either. Or McCabe. Or Holder as the president’s “Wingman”
                   
                  The left has an inability to be honest about any topic, at all, at this point.

                  • kayla.meyer_144

                    Member
                    February 10, 2018 at 5:54 am

                    Trump is the original nothingburger & you support him. Don’t look now but if you find any meat at all in that nothingburger, it’s badly spoiled along with the moldy bread & limp pickle.

  • kaldridgewv2211

    Member
    February 10, 2018 at 8:49 am

    If there’s so much confidence in the Nunes memo why’d he block the Democrat memo?

    • Unknown Member

      Deleted User
      February 10, 2018 at 2:19 pm

      ” Elections have consequences. And I won “.

      BHO

      • kayla.meyer_144

        Member
        February 11, 2018 at 7:48 am

        Quote from IR_CONSULT

        ” Elections have consequences. And I won “.

        BHO

        We ARE dealing with the consequences, IR. The consequence of a man-child POTUS and a Party who blindly supports him over the cliff.

    • ruszja

      Member
      February 10, 2018 at 6:23 pm

      Quote from DICOM_Dan

      If there’s so much confidence in the Nunes memo why’d he block the Democrat memo?

      Why ? Because they deliberately loaded it with classified information banking on the fact that it would have to be redacted. Gives them something else to bitch about.

      • btomba_77

        Member
        February 10, 2018 at 7:18 pm

        Just a reminder: The vote to release the Dem memo was unanimous.  Every single Republican on the House Intel committee voted to allow its release

      • kayla.meyer_144

        Member
        February 11, 2018 at 7:50 am

        Quote from fw

        Quote from DICOM_Dan

        If there’s so much confidence in the Nunes memo why’d he block the Democrat memo?

        Why ? Because they deliberately loaded it with classified information banking on the fact that it would have to be redacted. Gives them something else to **** about.

        You made that up from your lower digestive tract exit. There is nothing true about your statement except your credulousness or Trump loyalty. Take your pick.

        • Unknown Member

          Deleted User
          February 11, 2018 at 9:37 am

          Your gracious God Hussain set the tone..you lost so STFU.
          How about you take his advice……thanks.

          • kayla.meyer_144

            Member
            February 11, 2018 at 10:32 am

            Quote from IR_CONSULT

            Your gracious God Hussain set the tone..you lost so STFU.
            How about you take his advice……thanks.

            First thing, I am an theist & have no god, unlike you, the Angry Selfish God Trump. Fall down & worship! Take your own advice. I’m not crippled by uncontrollable anger and blame at the world.
             
            [link=https://www.nytimes.com/2018/02/10/opinion/sunday/trump-shows-us-the-way.html]https://www.nytimes.com/2…-shows-us-the-way.html[/link]

            Donald Trump slipped into the Oval Office through a wormhole of confusion about the American identity.
             
            We werent winning wars anymore. They just went on and on and on, with inexplicable and deceptive aims and so many lives and limbs and trillions lost.
             
            We couldnt believe in our institutions, with breaches of trust and displays of ineptitude.
             
            We were moving from a white-majority, male-dominated country and manufacturing base to a multicultural, multilateral, globalized, P.C., new energy, new technology world, without taking account of the confusion and anger of older Americans who felt like strangers in a strange land.
             
            Among many, the allure of Barack Obamas brainy nuance had given way to a longing for a more muscular certainty.
            With the Russians sowing confusion, Trump surfed those free-floating anxieties, that fear of not knowing who we are, straight to Pennsylvania Avenue.

            And now, thanks to our barmy president and his staff meltdown, we are finding out fast who we are and whom we dont want to be.
             
            We dont want to countenance abusive behavior. And we certainly dont want men like Rob Porter who have punched, kicked, choked and terrorized their wives to be in the presidents inner circle, helping decide which policies, including those that affect women, get emphasized.
             
            We dont want the White House chief of staff to be the sort of person who shields and defends abusers and then dissembles about it simply because the abuser is a rare competent staffer. Or a man who labels Dreamers too lazy to get off their asses simply because they didnt apply for legal protections in time.
             
            We want our president to be a moral beacon, not a ratings-obsessed id. We want a president who understands that sexual and physical abuse are wrong. As a more lucid Trump tweeted in 2012 about Rihanna getting back together with Chris Brown, A beater is always a beater.

            We dont want a president who bends over backward to give the benefit of the doubt to neo-Nazis, wife beaters, pedophiles and sexual predators or who is a sexual predator himself. We dont want a president who thinks #me is more important than #metoo.
             
            We dont want a president who suggests that Democrats who dont clap for him are treasonous and who seems more enthralled by authoritarian ways than democratic ones.
             
            We dont want a president who glides through the chaos he craves and conjures, while everyone around him immolates and shivers.

            Consequences yes. America deserves Trump for not paying attention & allowing the angry crazies and irresponsible to take control.
             
            We don’t need an immature man-child for president. We don’t need a president and followers who believe there is such a thing as “alternative facts.”
             
            Hopefully Trump is the kick America & the world needed to kick them – us – awake, to not take good government for granted because some nut and his followers could take over.
             
            History rhymes. We do’t need this nursery rhyme called Trump & Trumpism.
             
             

          • Unknown Member

            Deleted User
            February 11, 2018 at 10:36 am

            Sources report that Democrats loaded the Decmocratic memo with classified information, so that Trump would have to direct for a redaction to take place in order to protect said information.

            • kayla.meyer_144

              Member
              February 11, 2018 at 10:40 am

              Why every Republican voted for its release.
               
              Drink your Kool Aid, Jan.

  • Unknown Member

    Deleted User
    February 11, 2018 at 11:03 am

    Frumi loves to post opinion pieces from socialist rags, but chooses to ignore facts…..the angry atheist has spoken.

    • kaldridgewv2211

      Member
      February 11, 2018 at 11:28 am

      The Republican memo had classified info also. It was released. If they really wanted to prove something just release all transcripts and get the politics out of it. Nothing to see right? Shouldn’t be a big deal.

      • Unknown Member

        Deleted User
        February 11, 2018 at 11:42 am

        Sources report that the Democrats’ memo has classified information regarding JFK’s assassination that would throw the country into violent chaos aided by military-grade weapons airdropped in by the Russians; thereby forcing Trump to direct for a redaction to take place.

      • ruszja

        Member
        February 11, 2018 at 12:13 pm

        Quote from DICOM_Dan

        The Republican memo had classified info also. It was released. If they really wanted to prove something just release all transcripts and get the politics out of it. Nothing to see right? Shouldn’t be a big deal.

        The version that was released did not contain anything that hadn’t been reported in the press for weeks. Steele’s role as a an FBI snitch may have been classified at one point but once he ran to the press to talk about it, any kind of protection for that information was moot.

        • yao.bw39_792

          Member
          February 24, 2018 at 4:35 pm

          Democratic memo released with redactions
          [link=https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/4387022-Democrats-memo-rebutting-Republican-claims-of.html]https://www.documentcloud…ublican-claims-of.html[/link]

          • kaldridgewv2211

            Member
            February 25, 2018 at 5:24 am

            So it appears the GOP was playing up this dossier as being the essential thing the FBI used to get the warrant. In fact the FBI had other intelligence. Also it was approved by a GOP appointed republican judge, and they didn’t use candidate names. A lot less nefarious than the GOP wants you to believe.

            Then you get the knee jerk Trump wrong headed response to call Fox News and call it “really fraudulent”.

            • ruszja

              Member
              February 25, 2018 at 5:55 am

              What a yawner that rebuttal memo is. Nothing in there Schiff hasn’t already leaked for the last couple of weeks.

            • btomba_77

              Member
              February 25, 2018 at 6:48 am

              Quote from DICOM_Dan

              So it appears the GOP was playing up this dossier as being the essential thing the FBI used to get the warrant. In fact the FBI had other intelligence. Also it was approved by a GOP appointed republican judge, and they didn’t use candidate names. A lot less nefarious than the GOP wants you to believe.

              Then you get the knee jerk Trump wrong headed response to call Fox News and call it “really fraudulent”.

               
              That’s the big finding … the Dossier really didn’t matter

              • ruszja

                Member
                February 25, 2018 at 8:31 am

                Quote from dergon

                That’s the big finding … the Dossier really didn’t matter

                 
                Knowing the odious background of the memo, any prudent investigator would have left it out of his affidavit for the warrants if at all possible. As anything you swear to be true is subject to scrutiny down the line, you will avoid putting information from fishy sources in there. The fact that information provided by the clinton campaign was in the fisa applications indicates that it was necessary to get the continued surveillance approved.
                 
                 

              • Unknown Member

                Deleted User
                February 25, 2018 at 10:30 am

                So Mueller builds a very strong case and multiple people are indicted, prosecuted and found guilty or plead out. What prevents Trump from giving a blanket pardon? I heard state cases cannot be pardoned by Trump, but is that occurring through Mueller on any significant level?

  • btomba_77

    Member
    February 25, 2018 at 10:54 am

    Quote from tre123

    So Mueller builds a very strong case and multiple people are indicted, prosecuted and found guilty or plead out. What prevents Trump from giving a blanket pardon? I heard state cases cannot be pardoned by Trump, but is that occurring through Mueller on any significant level?

     
    Mueller has been leaving “bread crumbs”  for state AGs.   None of the intelligence/information that Mueller has discovered would disappear if he was fired and/or if pardons were given.
     
     
     
    Also, [link=https://www.politico.com/story/2017/08/30/manafort-mueller-probe-attorney-general-242191]Mueller has already been working cooperatively with NYAG Schneiderman[/link] , “having shared evidence and talked frequently in recent weeks about a potential case”.
     
    Stage AGs (most likely in New York and Virginia) would have a fairly easy time prosecuting the financial crimes (Manafort, Gates, maybe Flynn).  

    • kaldridgewv2211

      Member
      February 25, 2018 at 1:31 pm

      I’m not sure Trump would be long for the presidency if pardoned all these people.  

      • ruszja

        Member
        February 25, 2018 at 2:17 pm

        Quote from DICOM_Dan

        I’m not sure Trump would be long for the presidency if pardoned all these people.  

         
        The power of the president to pardon others has historically not been constrained. The fact that a democratic congress in january 2019 may disagree with discretionary acts taken by the president does not make those acts ‘high crimes and misdemeanors’.  What other mechanism to get rid of the president do you propose ? A coup d’etat ?

        • 100574

          Member
          February 25, 2018 at 3:02 pm

          if the house flips–he will be made a lame duck
          essentially 2 years down
          at some point like Bush he will no longer be in office so as Mexico Pres says hasta–wait it out–he will be gone and will be an ex-President

          Quote from fw

          Quote from DICOM_Dan

          I’m not sure Trump would be long for the presidency if pardoned all these people.  

          The power of the president to pardon others has historically not been constrained. The fact that a democratic congress in january 2019 may disagree with discretionary acts taken by the president does not make those acts ‘high crimes and misdemeanors’.  What other mechanism to get rid of the president do you propose ? A coup d’etat ?

          • Unknown Member

            Deleted User
            February 25, 2018 at 3:49 pm

            A bit off topic, but how is it that Trump’s taxes never were fully released by a hacker?
            His son has said they’ve had business with Russia. Would the taxes help? The accountant wouldn’t put down ‘Russian oligarch bribe’ under additional income.

            • kaldridgewv2211

              Member
              February 25, 2018 at 4:08 pm

              Quote from tre123

              A bit off topic, but how is it that Trump’s taxes never were fully released by a hacker?
              His son has said they’ve had business with Russia. Would the taxes help? The accountant wouldn’t put down ‘Russian oligarch bribe’ under additional income.

              It could all be on paper.  Yes I do believe that him showing his taxes would shed light on his money flow.  He needs to keep it hidden because it’s either embarrassing to him, or maybe he’s concealing some other wrong doing.  Like perhaps he’s not as wealthy as he tells people.  MAybe he owes a boat load of $$$ to Russian Oligarchs.

              • 100574

                Member
                February 25, 2018 at 4:47 pm

                but it is incumbent on the IRS to being detailed analysis of the submitted taxes–Nixon got tripped up

                Quote from DICOM_Dan

                Quote from tre123

                A bit off topic, but how is it that Trump’s taxes never were fully released by a hacker?
                His son has said they’ve had business with Russia. Would the taxes help? The accountant wouldn’t put down ‘Russian oligarch bribe’ under additional income.

                It could all be on paper.  Yes I do believe that him showing his taxes would shed light on his money flow.  He needs to keep it hidden because it’s either embarrassing to him, or maybe he’s concealing some other wrong doing.  Like perhaps he’s not as wealthy as he tells people.  MAybe he owes a boat load of $$$ to Russian Oligarchs.

              • ruszja

                Member
                February 25, 2018 at 9:31 pm

                Quote from DICOM_Dan

                It could all be on paper.  Yes I do believe that him showing his taxes would shed light on his money flow.  He needs to keep it hidden because it’s either embarrassing to him, or maybe he’s concealing some other wrong doing.  Like perhaps he’s not as wealthy as he tells people.  MAybe he owes a boat load of $$$ to Russian Oligarchs.

                I file separate business and personal returns. Even if you got your hands on them there would be no way for you to deduce my net worth or who I owe money to.

                If the US wants publication of tax returns a requirement for anyone running for public office (which I am in complete favor of), there is an easy way to accomplish this: Pass a law, have the next president sign it. The ‘sunshine in public service act’, doesn’t matter whether you run for dog catcher or president, your last 5 years federal returns become a public record.
                I suspect the cockroaches that make up the leadership of the democratic party would scatter in a hurry. Harry Reid was a teacher and public employee yet he amassed a multi million fortune. I am sure he was just ‘lucky’.

                And no, I don’t think DJT is worth 10B. 2 or 3 max. About 50mil in non-real estate assets with very limited liquidity and cash flow. But that’s a common scenario for the rich.

                • kaldridgewv2211

                  Member
                  February 26, 2018 at 7:57 am

                  Quote from fw

                  Quote from DICOM_Dan

                  It could all be on paper.  Yes I do believe that him showing his taxes would shed light on his money flow.  He needs to keep it hidden because it’s either embarrassing to him, or maybe he’s concealing some other wrong doing.  Like perhaps he’s not as wealthy as he tells people.  MAybe he owes a boat load of $$$ to Russian Oligarchs.

                  I file separate business and personal returns. Even if you got your hands on them there would be no way for you to deduce my net worth or who I owe money to.

                  If the US wants publication of tax returns a requirement for anyone running for public office (which I am in complete favor of), there is an easy way to accomplish this: Pass a law, have the next president sign it. The ‘sunshine in public service act’, doesn’t matter whether you run for dog catcher or president, your last 5 years federal returns become a public record.
                  I suspect the cockroaches that make up the leadership of the democratic party would scatter in a hurry. Harry Reid was a teacher and public employee yet he amassed a multi million fortune. I am sure he was just ‘lucky’.

                  And no, I don’t think DJT is worth 10B. 2 or 3 max. About 50mil in non-real estate assets with very limited liquidity and cash flow. But that’s a common scenario for the rich.

                  I think you could get an idea of his wealth and I think that would damage his ego and his brand.  I’d be fine with passing a law also but it’s been common place for presidents to release their taxes.  Trump has been under scrutiny about some of the donations he makes (or may not actually make) and his return should actually reflect his charitable giving.  You should also see foreign income credits.

                  • ruszja

                    Member
                    February 26, 2018 at 12:23 pm

                    Quote from DICOM_Dan

                     
                    I think you could get an idea of his wealth and I think that would damage his ego and his brand.  I’d be fine with passing a law also but it’s been common place for presidents to release their taxes.

                     
                    It wasn’t common until Nixon. If there was a law, he would have to release them. There is no law, so he doesn’t. Its really not that difficult. Just because you are curious doesn’t mean you have a right to see them. I am sure he has been audited many times over and as these things tend to go he has probably litigated and settled with them a time or two. If the IRS is ok with the amount of taxes he pays on his income, who are you to demand further answers ?
                     

                     Trump has been under scrutiny about some of the donations he makes (or may not actually make) and his return should actually reflect his charitable giving.  You should also see foreign income credits.

                     
                    What difference does it make ? Are you now gonna vote for him because he donated x% of his income. Simply none of your business.
                     

                    • kaldridgewv2211

                      Member
                      February 26, 2018 at 3:13 pm

                      Quote from fw

                      Quote from DICOM_Dan

                       
                      I think you could get an idea of his wealth and I think that would damage his ego and his brand.  I’d be fine with passing a law also but it’s been common place for presidents to release their taxes.

                      It wasn’t common until Nixon. If there was a law, he would have to release them. There is no law, so he doesn’t. Its really not that difficult. Just because you are curious doesn’t mean you have a right to see them. I am sure he has been audited many times over and as these things tend to go he has probably litigated and settled with them a time or two. If the IRS is ok with the amount of taxes he pays on his income, who are you to demand further answers ?

                      Trump has been under scrutiny about some of the donations he makes (or may not actually make) and his return should actually reflect his charitable giving.  You should also see foreign income credits.

                      What difference does it make ? Are you now gonna vote for him because he donated x% of his income. Simply none of your business.

                      Office of POTUS should have a higher standard.  Warren Buffet happily showed his taxes.  I think if he’s not being truthful about charitable giving it might well sway votes away from himself.  He’s come under scrutiny for charity including self dealing.
                       
                      The Forbes accounting on the golf course events is pretty good
                       
                      [link=https://www.forbes.com/sites/danalexander/2017/06/06/how-donald-trump-shifted-kids-cancer-charity-money-into-his-business/#3793e2d16b4a ]https://www.forbes.com/si…ss/#3793e2d16b4a [/link]
                       
                       
                       

                    • kaldridgewv2211

                      Member
                      March 1, 2018 at 4:42 pm

                      McMaster acknowledge s Russian meddling. Tonight news is flying McMaster might get the boot. Possible replacement John Bolton. Oy vey

                    • kayla.meyer_144

                      Member
                      March 17, 2018 at 3:08 pm

                      “Wasn’t common until Nixon” makes it seem bland or just nettlesome for someone running for POTUS but you are ignoring the reason why it became “common under Nixon.” Truth is it was because of Nixon’s finances & trying to hide them. AKA, ‘shenanigans.”
                       
                      [link=https://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/06/opinion/why-we-ask-to-see-candidates-tax-returns.html]https://www.nytimes.com/2…dates-tax-returns.html[/link]

                      Lost in the debate over Donald J. Trumps [link=http://www.politico.com/story/2016/08/donald-trump-tax-returns-226531]refusal to release his tax returns[/link] is the story of where the custom of disclosure comes from and why it can be so valuable as a measure of character. Its a tale of presidential tax shenanigans, political scandal and one of the most famous quotations in American history: Richard M. Nixons I am not a crook.
                       
                      ..the story stalled until Oct. 3, 1973, when [link=http://archive.boston.com/news/globe/obituaries/articles/2005/10/13/jack_white_63_journalist_won_pulitzer_emmy_awards/]Jack White[/link], a 31-year-old suburban reporter for The Providence Journal-Bulletin, broke the biggest story of his career. While big-time reporters prowled Washington for details about President Nixons taxes, White covered small-town politics and high-society events as manager of his papers bureau in Newport, R.I. But White, rumpled and easygoing, had a knack for earning the trust of sources. One source provided him with evidence that Nixon had paid taxes of only $792.81 in 1970 and $878.03 in 1971, despite having income exceeding $400,000.
                       
                      By donating his papers with a backdated deed, Nixon had slashed his tax bill drastically. He paid the equivalent of a family of three earning about $8,000 in 1970 dollars.
                       
                      After Whites article was published, demands rose for full disclosure. The next month, Whites colleague at the Providence paper, Joseph Ungaro, asked Nixon about his taxes during his appearance at a newspaper editors conference in Florida. [link=http://learning.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/11/17/nov-17-1973-nixon-declares-i-am-not-a-crook/?_r=0]Nixon replied[/link]: I welcome this kind of examination, because people have got to know whether or not their president is a crook. Well, I am not a crook.
                       
                      No single comment would stick more firmly to Nixon. It had never before been necessary for a president to distinguish himself from ordinary tax cheats. Yet still he wouldnt release his taxes.

        • kaldridgewv2211

          Member
          February 25, 2018 at 4:05 pm

          Quote from fw

          Quote from DICOM_Dan

          I’m not sure Trump would be long for the presidency if pardoned all these people.  

          The power of the president to pardon others has historically not been constrained. The fact that a democratic congress in january 2019 may disagree with discretionary acts taken by the president does not make those acts ‘high crimes and misdemeanors’.  What other mechanism to get rid of the president do you propose ? A coup d’etat ?

          Just like the POTUS has the ability to pardon, congress has broad powers to impeach for things like misusing/abusing pardons.
           
           

    • ruszja

      Member
      February 25, 2018 at 2:19 pm

      Quote from dergon

      Stage AGs (most likely in New York and Virginia) would have a fairly easy time prosecuting the financial crimes (Manafort, Gates, maybe Flynn).  

       
      Yet none of these disagreements about financial reporting and taxes have the slightest thing to do with improper russian influence on the election.

      • btomba_77

        Member
        February 25, 2018 at 2:21 pm

        You are right. They don’t.  
        It’s tax fraud and money laundering.

  • Unknown Member

    Deleted User
    February 25, 2018 at 5:14 pm

    Here is your weekly reminder that nobody cares.

    • 100574

      Member
      February 25, 2018 at 6:02 pm

      Trust me Thomas Barrack cares

      Quote from Jan the Third

      Here is your weekly reminder that nobody cares.

  • kayla.meyer_144

    Member
    March 18, 2018 at 1:37 pm

    That’s the trick to the declaration. I’m sure they could also declare no evidence found for extraterrestrials in that same report.

    • 100574

      Member
      March 23, 2018 at 3:05 pm

      Rudy’s law firm warned Mercer Bannon 
      oh  to see Rudy indicted or disbarred???

Page 13 of 14