... in case you feel the need to talk about it.
२८ ऑक्टोबर, २०१७
Mulling Mueller.
I've got nothing to say, because it hasn't happened, but here...
याची सदस्यत्व घ्या:
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा (Atom)
पोस्ट्स
१९० टिप्पण्या:
Mueller is trash. A corrupt head of FBI. I think trump will be pardoning a couple of railroaded people, sacrificed to protect the “integrity” of the FBI.
My only hope is that Trump has his pardon pen out. If you're not going to indict Hilary....
From the previous thread:
Hayden said...
The indictments by Mueller that are supposed to be announced Monday have extraordinarily suspect timing. This was the week that the Russian collaboration by Trump blew up AND Mueller was discovered to have been involved up to his own eyeballs in the Uranium One Russian involvement scandal. There has been an increasing crescendo of calls for his firing and for investigation of the Uranium One scandal (including Mueller's part in it suppressing the investigation into it while FBI Director), as well as of the use made of the Trump Dossier by the FBI under his successor, Comey. I highly suspect that the indictments were procured from the grand jury on a rush basis for two reasons. First, in another week, there might no longer be a Mueller led independent counsel investigation, with its apparent justification having imploded this week. This may be their last chance to go after Trump and his Administration, and it may work as insurance against getting fired. Secondly, there may be some Deep State pushback or revenge going on. Or, there is the possibility (which, right now I expect is small) that the Uranium One scandal is being faked by the Trump people (etc).
So Monday is going to be interesting. Will it start with a dawn raid or two? One of Mueller's attorneys is famous for such, and pulled that already with Monafort. I think that would be a red flag that this was personal. Are real crimes alleged in the indictment(s)? Or are they just process crimes, like how they got Scooter Libby? The latter would be both an admission that they had nothing against Trump, and, again, that the indictments were both political and personal. For these reasons, I hope, for the sake of our government that if there are indictments Monday, that they are for substantive crimes, and that they are well supported by good evidence showing probable cause. That is because the alternative is verging on lynching time for the participating Deep State operatives, esp here in a weaponized Justice Dept. The arrogance of using the prosecutorial apparatus of the DoJ for protecting Mueller and his partisan team of prosecutors would be One Bridge Too Far. We shall see.
"Damn about to break."M
Was that intentional? Some sly double entendre, perhaps?
Obama. The corrupt gift that keeps on giving.
Let me add to my previous post, that a lot of people are going to be comparing what Mueller is alleging, as contrasted to what could be alleged against Crooked Hillary and the DNC, after this last week’s Uranium One and Trump Dossier revelations. For Mueller’s sake, he had better have stronger allegations against his alleged perps than could currently be brought against Clinton, etc, or the indictments will be seen by much of the country as political - going after Trump’s people when the Dems are far more culpable. If that isn’t the case, many will see the indictments as gross hypocrisy, with the Deep State acting with impunity against the duly elected President.
Look we don't know who is going to be indicted or for what.
Shouldn't we just wait?
I know that's no fun - people love speculation.
"For Mueller’s sake, he had better have stronger allegations against his alleged perps than could currently be brought against Clinton, etc, or the indictments will be seen by much of the country as political"
Like Comey - Mueller doesn't care what "the country" thinks. He cares what the WaPo and his DC buddies think.
Comey had this mantle of nonpartisan nobleness that was shown to be completely false. Comey and Mueller are big buddies. I'm not expecting much from Mueller, despite his great "reputation".
BTW, does anyone care to attack Trump for firing Comey after what we know now?
@Bruce, that’s what I meant in my response to Hagar in the cafe thread. I think the American people are fundamentally honest and expect the same from their alleged betters.
Crisis state escalating.
Many game pieces in motion, besides the various "Russia" investigations and related matters.
Alabama, Virginia elections
Boente resigns, unrest in the FBI?
GOP cracking wide open.
Tax bill, which has trillions at stake, in negotiation, over which leverage is sought.
And etc. and etc.
The contradictions are being enhanced.
@rcocean, based on what we know now, Comey should have arrested on the spot.
It is not out of the question that a pre-revolutionary state will be brought on by the overreaction of an establishment under threat. That was always the biggest danger in the current situation.
I wonder what the markets will say next week. They seem to have liked the tax bill.
Btw, I consider the US political situation, its current struggle, in its effect on the US itself, to be the largest current global threat, far beyond North Korea or Iran, much less Russia.
A political-constitutional crisis in the US has the potential for global economic devastation. I tried hedging against this, a US economic crisis brought on by political troubles, but its a very chancy thing. The US economy is so massive that the effects will be global. And who knows where chains of events will run, what track the falling dominos will take.
Saw a tweet. Some prankster should bang on Flynn's front door at 6AM Monday morning. I don't care who you are. That's funny.
“BERNSTEIN: TRUMP OFFICIALS FACING ‘20 TO 40 TO 50 YEARS FOR WHATEVER THESE CRIMES ARE’”
The corrupt Dems are playing for time. Their intent is to keep talking about a delusional crime of collusion with Russia that is translated into smooth Prosecutor lingo sounding as if it is a real thing every day. And then to keep that daily smoke blowing for years. That is designed to weaken the strong President so the USA can be still wiped out on schedule.
The biggest criminal in DC today is the actor Mueller and his gang of insiders who have been running Hoover's old FBI soley as a cover up tool for hiding for Clinton's and Obama's crimes by announcing the FBI is investigating what happened.( Notice, Podesta immediately suggested another such investigation.)
Maybe they can settle this by a duel between Trump and Mueller using Tweets at 20 paces.
buwaya said...
It is not out of the question that a pre-revolutionary state will be brought on by the overreaction of an establishment under threat. That was always the biggest danger in the current situation.
A political-constitutional crisis in the US has the potential for global economic devastation.
I think buwaya is losing it. Is this what they talk about on InfoWars? I have never actually been there but I imagine it to be a bit like this.
What Bruce Hayden said. Both posts.
No, I dont think I have looked at Infowars.
Just the usual that you all look at, WSJ, local news, news aggregators like Drudge, British papers, Spanish and Filipino papers and sites, sometimes Le Figaro.
As for opinion, Instapundit and Freerepublic, which is very good at finding editorials from all sides (the trend of comments notwithstanding).
Besides trade press.
This is my own judgement.
@ARM - I think that it really depends on the indictments. I think that millions are watching to see if Mueller and his team of Deep State operatives are brazen enough to go after Trump and his people with weak indictments. Going after only process crimes would constiture this level of brazenness. Ditto for going after Don, Jr or Kushner without more than the one meeting with the Obama approved Russian operative. I think that they need something substantial, beyond what we know of right now, to prevent a backlash against Mueller and the indictments.
buwaya said...
No, I dont think I have looked at Infowars.
This is my own judgement.
Maybe an example of convergent evolution?
Whatever they do on Monday, its not the end, just the end of the beginning. It is very likely to escalate from there.
This will be a long dirty struggle, and probably very costly.
Age and experience brings, often, the throwing off illusions.
Bruce Hayden said...
Mueller and his team of Deep State operatives
Mueller is a Republican, 98-0 Senate confirmation. No one is going to give a shit if Manafort and Flynn go to jail. The Trump operation distanced themselves from both a while ago.
Don Jr or Kushner would get a pardon.
Exactly bwaya, how could a serious crisis not have significant repercussions, the daily mail has some interesting elements, so does the telegraph.
If I ran the world, Comey would be in jail. Mueller and his gang of Democrat prosecutors would be standing trial for their own crimes. Shit like the Scooter Libby show trial would never happen in the US. They knew he was innocent of the original charges before they got the indictment. That's Banana Republic bullshit. Bush lost my respect when he didn't give Libby a full pardon.
I've got nothing to say, because it hasn't happened, but . . .
. . . it has happened. The reporting on this is interesting, with so many MSM outlets saying that Mueller has his "first indictments." The implication is that a prosecution was expected all along, that the whole purpose of his appointment was to prosecute -- someone, anyone on something, anything. "It" happened months ago with a prejudged appointment -- like the MSM, decree the narrative first, then look for things to back it up, and if there is nothing to back it up, make it up.
Since then been a lot of water under the bridge, the handling of that hatfill case, the Chapman ring the failure to very the uranium one deal, re the tenez translogistics one.
The no-knock SWAT raid on Manafort's house--the one where they patted down Mrs. Manafort who was in bede, wearing her negligee, is Banana Republic stuff, too. I would have fired Mueller that day and called hearings on the FBI.
Continuing my previous response - the Russian Collaboration meme exploded this week with the Uranium One and Trump Dossier revelations. Crooked Hillary, Obama, Mueller, Etc appears to have collaborated far more with the Russians than Trump and his team ever appear to have done. In the first scandal, the Clintons took in almost $150 million from the Russians for apparently expediting, or at least allowing, the sale to them of 1/5 of our Uranium. Mueller, of course, seems to have helped quash the FBI investigation of this that might have sidetracked the deal. In the second one, the Clinton campaign and the DNC appear to have paid the Russians to generate the fake Trump Dossier, which the Obama Administration (including, notably, Comey) appears to have used to get a FISA wiretap warrant, that allowed them to intercept Trump team communications between the time that Trump was elected and when he took office. What has the Trump team even been credibly alleged to have done with the Russians that was within an order of magnitude as bad? Mueller may have a smoking gun. But if he doesn’t, his indictments will be seen by many, including Trump himself, as a direct challenge by the Deep State to our Constitutional form of government.
Of course, grand jury proceedings are secret.
If Congress had a pair among them, they would frog march Mueller and all his attorneys and support staff before a committee and go down the line demanding each of them answer, all several dozen of them -- "Did you leak information of any indictment(s)? Did you discuss this information with any person outside your office, to your spouse, friends, the media?"
Same with the court, which should haul them in and demand that they show cause why any indictments should not be dismissed and why they should not go to jail for this information being publicly disclosed.
We'll know more if Hillary decides to take her book tour to Brazil.
Once, long ago, one could consider the FBI under persons like Mueller and Comey, with their stellar resumes, sound, apolitical, professional. Or at any rate, that these institutions and these gentlemen were not elements of a banana republic.
But events over the last 10-15 years make that assumption untenable. What we already know for certain about just the Clinton's behavior in office, openly selling favors and appointments, and moreover also openly playing games with secret communications, all of which were officially indulged by these gentlemen, and more, by every agency whose duty it is to oversee these matters, is telling. The Attorney General caught in secret meetings, sleazy foreign IT guys with access to secret information sources, apparently with high level indulgence, etc. and etc. and etc.
And, note, the "Republican" Mueller seems to have assembled a highly partisan staff, including several well known from past sleazy partisan investigations.
It is too much. Any foreign intelligence analyst worth his pension would smell a rat, or rather, swarms of them.
What unseen iceberg lies under all this is left to the imagination, to speculation. But at this point this would be informed speculation, as what we now see was formerly unseen, and it is probable that we will see much more. There is no reason to trust anyone in an official position in Washington.
"Mueller is a Republican, 98-0 Senate confirmation. "
If you think that makes a bit of difference, you are dumber than I thought.
The two #2 and #3 at State are sitting on resumes so Trump cannot appoint anyone to those 200 empty jobs.
They are both Republicans but residents of the swamp in good standing.
This is the uniparty attacking the threat to their pensions and perks.
The donor class has them on a string.
They are desperate to put an end to the revolution. That usually doesn't work.
Ask the Girondins.
tcrosse: "We'll know more if Hillary decides to take her book tour to Brazil."
Hillary has never been in better hands. The FBI/Justice guys that covered for her on uranium one are the guys running thus investigation with a brigade if Hillary supporting lawyers.
This is reminiscent of how the Dems/Clintons maneuvered to get Jamie Gorelick in the 9-11 commission when she had been the creator of the Gorelick Wall which forbade communications between US domestic and foreign intelligence/law enforcement agencies.
I don't think the Dems care anymore about hiding things. The press and institutions are theirs.
Mueller will go for broke.
Why wouldn't he? He's got cover with Rosenstein and Sessions will never grow a pair to undo the incorrect recusal actions which were the result of Hillary/Russia collusion lies.
The really dangerous thing is that official Washington has so mismanaged things over the last couple of decades that their corruption and incompetence has become apparent to the public.
Much was possible before that isn't, now, and much is possible now that wasn't, then, both purely from a loss of confidence, and loss of the perception of legitimacy.
And this trust and legitimacy cannot be restored by yelling at the public, demanding that they are required to trust their officials.
"Shit like the Scooter Libby show trial would never happen in the US."
As bad as that was (agree Bush was a chickenshit for not pardoning) this one is a horse of a different color. Deepstate is fighting for its life. CNN looks like they have actual skin in the game now. These folks are not going to go down easy. If they're smart Manafort and Flynn are the only ones they will go after. Flynn might even be a bridge too far. Don jr or Kushner would just look petty. If it's one of those Trump is the target. And yeah, could Mueller's timing be any more obvious?
Hopefully Sessions is all over crooked Hillary and crew's peccadillos. It looks like the best counter to me.
This is classic Clinton wag the dog.
Hers the interesting, I would say revolting element after the wall that formalized an informal partition between the bureau. Read mark reiblings wedge to see how far back? She went on the commission and subsequently defended a prince from the kingdom, with the info she gleaned from said hearings.
AReasonableMan said...
Bruce Hayden said...
Mueller and his team of Deep State operatives
Mueller is a Republican, 98-0 Senate confirmation. No one is going to give a shit if Manafort and Flynn go to jail. The Trump operation distanced themselves from both a while ago.
Don Jr or Kushner would get a pardon.
Hard to believe ARM doesn't seem to realize that this is no longer Republican vs. Democrat.
Stupid or disingenuous has been where the left has been residing for a while.
buwaya said...
No, I dont think I have looked at Infowars.
Don't waste your time, unless you want to know where FEMA is building the concentration camps.
A better site for those little oddities that can signify trends, which I think is what you're looking for, is Zero Hedge.
Zerohedge is occasionally interesting, and turns up an acorn now and then, but on the whole is not to be trusted.
Confirm from other sources anything they post.
Its like the lone gunmen, as conducted by quants, former wall street number crunches.
buwaya said...
The really dangerous thing is that official Washington has so mismanaged things over the last couple of decades that their corruption and incompetence has become apparent to the public.
They have lived in a bubble for a long time. I don't think they actually know what is going on out here. They listen to the state media too much and don't realize we have alternative sources of information now.
Gun sales during the Obama administration were at record levels for years. That should have been a tip.
Mueller (R-Uniparty).
I said yesterday the timing is very suspicious. I think he rushed out an indictment to stop the calls for his removal.
Isn't it normal for the first actions to be an announcement if an indictment and a plea with cooperation.
If it's just Manafort or Kelly money type crime then he's got nothing. If he has a crime of collusion then I'll owe him an apology.
buwaya said...
Zerohedge is occasionally interesting, and turns up an acorn now and then, but on the whole is not to be trusted.
Confirm from other sources anything they post.
They are always "interesting" anyways. The world economy is on the brink of disaster 4 or 5 times a day. Every now and then they come out with stuff like this.
We have many sources of information now and we can find out how badly the establishment is acting.
Oops Flynn not Kelly.
Interesting. Tonight we are seeing a bunch of pissed off anti-establishment types, a lot of the regulars here, willing to lead the lynching party for the Deep State operatives involved, starting with Mueller and his Clinton and Obama aligned henchmen. Sure, we are a bit more political than many, but Mueller seeming to double down here is pissing a lot of people off. This is supposed to be a government of the people. Of the governed, and not a government of government insiders and their cronies and enablers. Sure, they are trying to protect their pensions, their jobs, their turf. But it isn’t their government - it is ours.
One of the most interesting illustrations of establishment groypthink is in Andrew mare's head of state, (this is the reporter that Hillary tried to convince that brexit was due to Russian propaganda) a very dark take on the yes prime minister. It illustrates how a clique of officials surrounding an unnamed remainder prime minister,
Take extraordinary steps to prevent a brexit type event, the deep state in action.
Always confirm from other sources.
Also remember what they said last week annd the week before that and compare.
I think we'll see little-nothing-indictments which will be spun as the first steps in a chain of indictments. The idea will be that these small figures will turn on larger figures and so on up the line. But, in fact, Mueller has nothing - especially nothing compared to Uranium One and his own flawed investigation of the Russians working to gain access to Hillary. So Mueller now sees that when the Clinton-Creature from the Black Lagoon started to drag his friend Comey into its horrible lair and when Mueller jumped forward to help Comey then Mueller simply became one more victim being dragged off to the Creature's dirty cave. But Mueller can't believe it is happening to him. He will be writing a book someday, a book entitled What Happened Next.
Just an opinion, based on listening to MSM blatherers who don't seem to anticipate blockbuster revelations.
Buwaya, it's hard to grasp what incredible cowards the liberals in this country are. But it makes a revolution or a crisis of any kind coming from them very unlikely. If they were afraid to report Harvey Weinstein, can you imagine them challenging the elected President of this country? challenging Donald Trump? on the flimsy grounds that Trump's son had a twenty minute meeting with a Russian woman-lawyer whose name no one can pronounce? and maybe Paul Manafort boasted that he would have access to Trump or he did have access to Putin or something like that? and some liberal is going to risk all he has to assert that this kind of silly boastful talk means something but 145,000,000 dollars to the Clinton Foundation means nothing? Who would do that? No one.
The only people who could know that there is a sealed indictment are the judge and Mueller's team. It is highly unlikely that a federal judge would leak grand jury information, which is a crime. Mueller hired a team filled with Democratic Party political operatives and donors, blind to how that compromised the integrity of his investigation. And that is the charitable view. Sessions would be well within his rights to investigate Mueller for illegally leaking infomration. THen again, Sessions has shown hmself to be useless (also a charitable view. Uncharitably, Sessions is a clown obssessed with unimportant matters).
As for Mueller himself, he was implicated in the Uranium One fiasco, and the President has a good faith basis for firing him based upon Mueller's irreconcilable conflicts. Fire Mueller, relieve Sessions (and any other DoJ official involved with Uranium One), and appoint a new AG competent for the office.
Just about everyone who comments here, even the ones who disagree with me, knows 100 times as much about the Russian Dossier, Fusion GPS, and Uranium One as the typical well-informed American. When Mueller announces that he has gotten indictments of Manafort, Flynn, Kushner, Trump, Jr, or whoever, for "colluding with the Russians", the MSM will play it up as a major first step toward the impeachment and removal of Trump. Voices saying that Mueller, Comey, etc., are covering up their own misconduct and defending the Deep State will not be heard in the uproar.
There you are mistaken, wilDswan,there was grave rusk to reporting weinstein, halperin and now wieseltier, the middle was the son of a proud dissident he was wiretapped by kissinger, he spoke truth to power. He unmasked the lawless state, he also supported Phillip agees campaign the CIA, abetted by the dgi, but you can't make omelets... In more recent years he was at the top of soros center for American progress. This gave the son the cache to denounce a deplorable, like the huntress. With trump you van make up stuff 25/8 and you get kudos for it.
Mark suggests: If Congress had a pair among them...
But they are geldings, all. And a few old mares.
On the other hand, there are many who just don't buy this old kabuki narrative abymore, because we have seen it, or at least been made aware for 25 years now.
@Godfather
Maybe. The MSM is strong but not nearly as strong as they were, and no longer monopolize news. They learned that in 2016 and while they have not accepted that reality yet it is still a reality. Trump unlike his GOP predecessors) hits back. Sometimes it is ugly and he misses, he still hits back hard. And (like most bullies) the MSM has no idea what to do when someone hits back. They grew quite used to the BUshes and McCains, who were more than happy to roll over and beg for mercy. We are in a new era. Time will tell whether it is good or bad, but if Mueller's strategy is to overwhelm through thin indictments leaked to the press he is in for a rude awakening.
Of course, if the indictments are more related to financial shenanigans involving Manafort and the Podesta Group, the MSM will be rocked on their heels. That assumes there are any indicments at all -- this could be a head fake/disinformation from Mueller to change the narrative that had turned badly against him and the Russia collusion hoax.
Most of us believe that it is Comey, Hillary and Wasserman-Schultz--at least-- who should be indicted. I, for one, don't think buwaya is exaggerating the seriousness of Mueller's implications.
The only people who could know that there is a sealed indictment are the judge and Mueller's team.
Wouldn't more people be involved. Grand Jury members, clerks who handle the paperwork and US Marshalls for the arrest. Do they tell the defense attorney.
I think it would be very difficult to prove who leaked it. Of course the reporter knows. So time to go Obama on his ass. Charge him as a co-conspirator and tap his phone.
Money talks, Hillary walks.
Trump's best hope is that the Democrat Establsihment wants to get rid of Hillary more than it wants to weaken Trump, and both Uranium One and Fusion GPS can be played in ways that finish her off as a potential candidate in 2020.
The cave can only built wuthnreinforcing walls to quote plato:
http://dailycaller.com/2017/10/28/free-beacon-reported-on-fusion-gps-multiple-times-without-disclosing-their-relationship/?utm_campaign=atdailycaller&utm_source=Twitter&utm_medium=Social
Take the example of even Perez a colleague of Simpson at the journal
Congress is irrelevant, all the elected politicians in Washington are just pawns on the board.
Whatever their character.
The real problem is with the chess players.
I am not going to assume those fellows are likewise a bunch of cowards. They have too much at stake for cowardice.
But we have a problem because national review the weekly standard, the free beacon, the examiner to varying degrees carry the antitrump message, so an objective source is hard to find.
Probably Manafort, possibly Flynn, gets nailed by Mueller.
Trump should pardon the first two, and fire Mueller.
But perhaps that'd be too aggressive.
In a war there are no objective sources, merely a spectrum of propaganda from every side. In this struggle there are at least three significant sides. There are a couple of minor ones as well.
True, its like trying to figure out your country, we know the way duterte is painted in the press, among other things that he is too fond of china, it then I learn of for navy captain triana, who is supposed to be a foe, his even more in league. So who to believe?
To Russia With Love.
Mueller has successfully jacked up interest in the indictment. There had better be something worthy in that vault after all this buildup. And it had better be obvious.
Why are arrests needed? Why not announcement of names and dates to report to court?
Other than intimidating the public.
They blow hot and cold, but more often than not, have been on point:
https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2017/10/28/cnns-sketchy-dossier-reporting/
So what is the standard that the allegations are true, or they can snow a Washington jury, these are not the same thing
buwaya said...
The real problem is with the chess players.
You say things in this vein pretty regularly, but somehow you never actually name the chess players.
Who are they? I have a lot of trouble believing there is some group of steely-eyed cool and collected actors behind this mess. I tend to think that just like it's turtles all the way down, it's messed up folks like the rest of us all the way up.
My pet thesis, take it for what its worth. There was certainly one particular faction that was threatened by trumps middle east policies, those proposed by fLynn, gorka and crew the locale is Qatar which has taken over propagation of salaft from the kingdom, we discover that a certain law firm has particular interests regarding that, this being the firm that Mueller comes from where he drew a number of his staff.
But you look atounf and you see more than one such party:
www.wnd.com/2015/07/2251045
Now Russian happens tie be on the other end of these conflicts be it Yemen, Syria Egypt
To be an American in 2017 is like being a Soviet citizen in the 1970s and 1980s. You get your news from the media (in the USSR, Pravda) and you know it's bullshit, but you also learn to interpret the stories that are printed - who is named, who is not, whose picture is in the paper and who is being air-brushed out - and you start to figure out what is really going on. You learn to interpret the official news to get some insight into the real news.
The problem is, the Soviet Union was a totalitarian state and so it had to be this way. It doesn't have to be this way in America - we're still a free country at least as I understood it.
It just feels like there is a real business opportunity out there for a media organization that cuts through all the bullshit (e.g. media printing the press releases and talking points of the political parties as if they are real news) and tells the American people what the troglodytes who claim to represent us are actually doing.
An example is the 2016 election, when Hillary Clinton collapsed and it was caught on film. Suddenly every major network had a story about how Clinton was ill, overworked but "powering through". Someone did a YouTube montage of the words "powering through" that made it clear that every media channel had been issued the Hillary campaign's talking points about the incident and they were dutifully repeating them.
It just seems like there is a business opportunity for a media organization that would report, "In response to Hillary Clinton's recent collapse, her campaign issued talking points to various allies in the news media at all major networks, asking them to attribute the collapse to illness and overwork and emphasize that Clinton was 'powering through'. The campaign also suggested that if sympathetic media could tie Clinton's collapse to the "challenges all women face" it would be useful. All of the traditional Clinton media allies complied and the story was dutifully reported as requested. The actual cause of Clinton's collapse is still unknown and is unlikely to ever be made public."
I'd pay good money for a media organization that would give me straight-up reporting like that (not limited to Democrats but Republicans and Independents too.)
But what happened to most of those alternative outlets theybwete dmonized demonetized and otherwise scrutinized. All the rizzotto press had been lionized becausevrussia andvpokemon.
Lucien
Just because this is a free country doesn't mean it is filled with honest people. So that the news is bent isn't a function of evil, it is a function of ideology.
And how do we train these new journalists to NOT be Leftist d!ckwads when all the teachers for journalism ARE Leftist d!ckwads? When media a) is dying and b) rewards the Woodward style intrusive journalism of a Jack Tapper and not the necessary stuff of Joe Nobody?
"Can't you see that this the last act of a desperate man ... ?"
In the previous thread, I made the prediction that there will be no indictments announced tomorrow or even the rest of the week. I think CNN got played by someone.
"Who are they? I have a lot of trouble believing there is some group of steely-eyed cool and collected actors behind this mess. I tend to think that just like it's turtles all the way down, it's messed up folks like the rest of us all the way up."
No. That is wrong. There are very rich people in the world. Money is power. Many powerful people want to further their ideology. Some for humanitarian purposes, and some for, if not malice, then simple greed. We can both name some from both sides. At the top of my list is George Soros. Clinton is pretty close up there.
Corruption has always been with us. There have always have people trying to gain the upper hand. I don't think it is far fetched to liken it to a chess game. Who do think the players are? Politicians certainly.
I might draw the line at the illuminati though.
A federal grand jury is the most un-American process there is in our country.
I can't believe any lawyer would advise his client to participate. It's stupid. They can take you anywhere.
Write this down: Always use the fifth Amendment.
If they can't get you for one thing, they will get you for another. The jury is a bunch of housewives who only care about the hotel and meals they are getting. They are more than happy to give the feds whatever they want.
If there are indictments announced tomorrow, I imagine they involve financial crimes, and are likely filed against Mr. Manafort. I conditionally predict they will have literally nothing to do with collusion in the election, which I maintain there is literally zero evidence of in regards to the Trump Campaign.
If they are simple process crimes, then I think Trump should fire Mueller and pardon those involved. This is what Bush should have done with Fitzgerald in the Scooter Libby case. I predict, though, Trump won't do it. I also don't think Mueller would go after simple process crimes because of the immense political blowback such an action would cause- this isn't Scooter Libby.
Yancey Ward said...I think CNN got played by someone.
I think they made it up. Fake news.
Everyone was going to a Halloween party this weekend to have fun, and CNN wants them to instead worship their penis as an harassment tactic.
America is being harassed.
Bay Area Guy said...
Trump should pardon the first two, and fire Mueller.
But perhaps that'd be too aggressive.
Ya think?
mockturtle, you made me laugh a couple of times in this thread. Good stuff.
I plan to watch one or two of the Sunday morning political shows today. Those people usually have people who know a few secrets. Or they are smart enough not to predict things they don't know about.
Wag the dog. Nothing, nothing, nothing, suddenly the same week that the story turns on the Clinton's, it's an indictment.
BTW, did that Reddit thread include the arrest of a Russian spy ring that had been caught handing out bribes and kickbacks, had been part of an effort that put 145 million dollars into Clinton's foundation, and was rounded up because they had gotten too close to Clinton? Does it only include stuff that was reported in the mainstream press, or does it included everything on record?
Always remember, Mueller and Hillary are on the same team.
Democrats, of course, would never stoop to such a low.
Stevens was found guilty by a jury, but the judgment was immediately overturned following revelations of gross violations of Brady and other misconduct by the prosecution team of the Public Integrity Section of the Department of Justice. The verdict, however, led to Stevens' loss of his seat in the Senate.
Scored the Democrats a Senate seat and utterly disrupted, and not in a good way, the health care system in the United States by bringing us Obamacare, so the letters of reprimand that ended up in these prosecutors files probably server as feathers in their caps when it comes to future employment prospects.
And spare me that the same guy who covered for Hillary in the Russian spy ring "not a scandal" is a "Republican." He for some reason keeps hiring heavy Democrat donors for his witch hunt.
Mueller is compromised by his involvement in Uranium One and his relationship with Comey. If he had any honor he wouldn't have accepted the assignment. We now know what's closer to the truth: Mueller is the point man for deflecting the corruption during the Obama administration -- especially Clinton's Russian dealings.
"It just seems like there is a business opportunity for a media organization that would report, "In response to Hillary Clinton's recent collapse, her campaign issued talking points to various allies in the news media at all major networks, asking them to attribute the collapse to illness and overwork and emphasize that Clinton was 'powering through'."
It already exists. Rush Limbaugh. 3 hours a day, 5 days a week.
Why did Rosentein choose Mueller to head this "investigation"?
Ask yourself this question:
Which one person in the entire world is most motivated and able to white-wash the FBI in the investigation?
This is the first blow in what will prove to be a long battle. We know which side the press will be on, the same press that looked the other way through so many Democratic scandals, such as Obama's firing of an Inspector General, which is blatantly illegal, but nobody in Eric Holder's "Just us" Department bothered to look into it, fired and Inspector General who was looking into misuse of Stimulus Money.
It's unthinkable that a big city California Democrat might be misusing government money, so any investigation was probably instigated by a crazy man! Open and shut not guilty! Right ARM?
Mike Sylwester reminds that I forgot to include "covering for the corrupt FBI crooks" to Mueller's charter.
The inspector general for AmeriCorps who has been fired is Gerald Walpin, and he was investigating Kevin Johnson's St. Hope Academy. "[Walpin] found that Johnson, a former all-star point guard for the Phoenix Suns, had used AmeriCorps grants to pay volunteers to engage in school-board political activities, run personal errands for Johnson and even wash his car." This is from the Associated Press. "In April, the U.S. attorney for the region declined to file any criminal charges in the matter and also criticized Walpin's investigation. ... But at the same time Kevin Johnson and the St. Hope Academy agreed to pay back about half of the $850,000 it had received from AmeriCorps,"
That's a hell of a way to stay scandal free! To simply refuse to file charges when crimes have been uncovered, and to fire the guy, illegally, who did the investigation.
From Gawker:
Will Obama's Firing of an Inspector General Evolve Into a Major Scandal?
Now, whether or not having the "fullest confidence" in someone is a reasonable explanation for firing an inspector general is open to debate, but vague details provided in Obama's letters have led some to believe that the law may have been broken in carrying out Walpin's abrupt dismissal. In a rather cruel twist of irony, Obama was a co-sponsor of the Inspectors General Reform Act, so Walpin and others are essentially alleging that Obama is guilty of breaking a law he helped to write.
"Hypocrisy" is not spelled 'i r o n y", just sayin' Gawker. But the answer is no, because well, reasons!
Meanwhile, I can't figure out why ARM hangs out here when he thinks that all that is required to understand current events is to accept as complete the facts, and to adopt the opinions that the mainstream press serves up for us daily/ It's in the constitution! We have to believe them!
It's only reasonable!
He's a moderate!
"Shouldn't we just wait?"
-- We should, but why let a crisis go to waste?
“Former president Barack Obama’s official campaign organization has directed nearly a million dollars to the same law firm that funneled money to Fusion GPS, the firm behind the infamous Steele dossier. Since April of 2016, Obama For America (OFA) has paid over $972,000 to Perkins Coie, records filed with the Federal Election Commission (FEC) show. The Washington Post reported last week that Perkins Coie, an international law firm, was directed by both the Democratic National Committee (DNC) and Hillary Clinton’s campaign to retain Fusion GPS in April of 2016 to dig up dirt on then-candidate Donald Trump.”
Excuse me while I step away and pop some popcorn.
"BTW, does anyone care to attack Trump for firing Comey after what we know now?"
-- I'm a conservative guy who was always a bit leery about firing Comey in that, it was within Trump's rights, but I thought it was a bad idea. I revised that opinion once Comey admitted to breaking the law and manipulating the investigation against Trump, and finalized it when we learned Comey decided Clinton had done no wrong before even investigating.
Mattering on this indictment, I may revise my "Mueller may be bad, but it would be politically stupid to fire him," opinion.
It's almost as if "Obama For. America" was some big political slush fund.... Naah!
“At no point in Perez’s reporting did he disclose his close ties to the Fusion GPS operatives.”. . . . CNN’s coverage of the dossier has been relatively soft. CNN anchor Jake Tapper, usually known for his aggressive coverage, gave Fusion a pass while reporting on the story Wednesday evening.”
And it's almost as if Fusion GPS was part of the DNC - Media complex!
"Going after only process crimes would constiture this level of brazenness."
-- I normally wouldn't agree. But, whatever process crime they get brought in for is going to be directly compared to:
* Destroying subpoenaed evidence
* Lying to the FBI
* Withholding subpoenaed evidence
* Obstructing justice by refusing to answer questions without legal justification
Those things are all now accepted by the FBI. That's what the Clinton investigation taught me. If those things are suddenly now again considered crimes because Team Red does it, I'm going to think that, well, you know, MAYBE the FBI isn't non-partisan.
"Maybe an example of convergent evolution?"
Go to InfoWars and read what they're seeing, then tell us, instead of just insulting people.
"Don Jr or Kushner would get a pardon."
-- For what crime? What illegal action are you alleging they did?
"The no-knock SWAT raid on Manafort's house--the one where they patted down Mrs. Manafort who was in bede, wearing her negligee, is Banana Republic stuff, too. I would have fired Mueller that day and called hearings on the FBI."
-- See, if Manafort hadn't been cooperating or had a history of lying to the FBI, I'd be somewhat sympathetic to deciding on a raid like that. Unfortunately, even Mueller and Comey said that Manafort had provided all documents timely and requested up to that point.
What reason do people have to cooperate with the FBI when cooperating gets your home invaded by armed FBI agents, and not cooperating gets you immunity deals and pre-judged as innocent by the FBI?
@ Matthew Sablan:
You have been on fire lately.
I am Laslo.
"As bad as that was (agree Bush was a chickenshit for not pardoning)"
-- I initially agreed with Bush's "he was found guilty, he did lie, however inadvertently and the law is the law, so a pardon would be wrong" reasoning. Seeing now how the FBI treats Democrats like Clinton's team compared to Republicans like Trump's Team, Ted Stevens, etc., etc., I realize that I may be wrong.
Hillary should be indicted, but it will be a Scooter Libby shake down. The corrupt deep state runs the show.
"And that is the charitable view. Sessions would be well within his rights to investigate Mueller for illegally leaking infomration."
-- Comey admitted to illegally leaking government documents and nothing happened to him. So, I doubt that anything will happen here.
-- For what crime? What illegal action are you alleging they did?
Attempted collusion, of course!
The more I read about it, the more I think that the meeting wit that Russian lawyer, set up by one of the sources in the Steele dossier, was a variation on the olde badger game, where you get a guy into bed with a woman then blackmail him. In this case, they set up the meeting so that they could justify NSA surveillance, which they then read like the daily papers.
Bruce Hayden - excellent analysis
Interesting. Tonight we are seeing a bunch of pissed off anti-establishment types, a lot of the regulars here, willing to lead the lynching party for the Deep State operatives involved, starting with Mueller and his Clinton and Obama aligned henchmen. Sure, we are a bit more political than many, but Mueller seeming to double down here is pissing a lot of people off. This is supposed to be a government of the people. Of the governed, and not a government of government insiders and their cronies and enablers. Sure, they are trying to protect their pensions, their jobs, their turf. But it isn’t their government - it is ours.
The corrupt Hillary insiders do not think our government belongs to us.
Mueller is steepling in the pic. The guy at the table with the highest steeple is the winner, in business meetings, which is the only place steepling works.
"I also don't think Mueller would go after simple process crimes because of the immense political blowback such an action would cause- this isn't Scooter Libby."
-- What political blow back? People STILL think that Cheney was the leaker of Plame's secret identity, when in fact, on about day 1, the investigation knew it was Armitage. The Democrats got exactly what they wanted from the investigation. There's no reason for them to think they can't corrupt this investigation like they did that one.
@ Tim in Vermont
And spare me that the same guy who covered for Hillary in the Russian spy ring "not a scandal" is a "Republican." He for some reason keeps hiring heavy Democrat donors for his witch hunt.
yep.
For the Walpin thing, remember not only did Obama fire him, he called him "senile," implying he was mentally deficient.
The media is an ARM to the democrat party and they are all corrupt.
Matthew Sablan said...
Go to InfoWars and read what they're seeing, then tell us
EXCLUSIVE: MANAFORT INDICTED AS COVER FOR DEMOCRAT RUSSIA CRIMES
Pretty much the same as here.
Excellent.
So, do you consider when Daily Kos or the like come up with crazy conspiracy theories, like Trump hired prostitutes to pee on Obama's bed, that it is 'convergent evolution' with when CNN comes to the same crazy conspiracy theory, or do you think there's something else going on besides CNN and Daily Kos are both crazy?
Matthew Sablan said...
So, do you consider when Daily Kos or the like come up with crazy conspiracy theories, like Trump hired prostitutes to pee on Obama's bed
Pretty sure this is not true. Daily Kos didn't come up with this story, although no doubt they reported it, like every other media outlet, left and right.
Ok. You're almost there ARM.
You conspiracy theorists think you have hold of some great truth, but it is the same 'truth' that InfoWars is peddling.
Ah. A shame. You were so very, very, very close. But, alas. Horses and water and all that.
Close to becoming an internet conspiracy theorist? I think we have enough of those already.
See how you realized that CNN just reporting the fact that someone had a crazy idea didn't make them a conspiracy theorist? I didn't bother to read whatever was at Info Wars, but most people here? They're reacting to the reporting of Clinton's ties to Russians, to Mueller's poor investigation, the obvious disparity in how the collusion investigation was handled compared to Uranium One, etc., etc.
Maybe Info Wars is pants on head crazy, I don't know or care. The point is that questioning Mueller and Comey's investigation isn't a "conspiracy theory," it is a reaction to the actual news being reported. Mueller's investigation into Russian interference with the election he knew from the start would have to include the Uranium One deal, which he previously investigated and helped to keep from Congress.
He knew this, but didn't recuse himself.
It is not a "conspiracy theory" to say that he did those things, and then to say, "Therefore, what he did is wrong." Just like it isn't a "conspiracy theory" for CNN to say that a dossier that Clinton's campaign paid a foreign spy to conduct espionage with foreign Russian agents, including contacts in the Kremlin, to undermine her political opponent says that Trump paid prostitutes to pee on Obama's bed.
Both of those are factual reporting of what has happened.
ARM has never seen a pro-left conspiracy theory he didn't embrace, but he's here to tell us how whacky we all are. Awesome.
Also, ARM spent posts (maybe in multiple threads) complaining no one was talking about the indictment, which people explained was because the leak hadn't been confirmed, and we don't know who or what is indicted.
When he finally gets what he wants, he then complains because people have a discussion about what he wanted us to discuss.
So, go ahead ARM. You've got the thread you wanted. Discuss. Don't just use it as a forum to insult the rest of the people here.
The difference is that I, like most people, never thought the Golden Showers story was anything other than a funny story. You actually believe much of this nonsense.
This constant whining about being insulted is unseemly. No one gets more insults than the few moderates and liberals who post here. I never complain. Get a grip, man.
Ahead Of Indictment, Trump Distances Himself From Manafort And Flynn
ARM: Again, you're insulting people by implying they believe nonsense. And, if you honestly, truly, thought the dossier was just a funny story and not true -- then the *entire* collusion narrative falls apart. Without the dossier, you have one touch point where collusion may have happened -- the Donald Jr. meeting with a Russian lawyer the Obama administration trusted and brought on to meet with and brief Congress -- that was cut short and never followed up on. That's it. Without the dossier, unless Mueller has evidence that hasn't been leaked yet, that's all that exists for possible collusion. So, do you agree that the collusion story, unless there is Super Secret Evidence, is completely nonsense? Or are we going to go back and forth on whether the dossier is valuable based on whether you need to prop up collusion or whether you, "like most people" need to pretend that the actual things described in there are "nonsense"?
*No one should have believed the dossier,* and most on the right did not. When Trump was briefed on it, it was briefed as an example of *misinformation* cooked up by Russian agents. If you actually listened to the people on the right, you'd know this. What is odd is that when Trump *was* briefed on it, the FBI somehow left out that it wasn't cooked up by Russians in a vacuum. Rather, Clinton paid them to fabricate it through a foreign spy.
I'm moderate by Republican/Trump standards; I rarely if ever get insulted (if we ignore the obvious trolls who insult everyone). In fact, on several social positions, I'm markedly liberal, and even when I say things like "I think abortion should be legal" or "I think gay marriage is a legal right," I don't get insulted. If you're getting insulted for the same opinions, then it obviously isn't the *opinion*, the liberal/moderateness, that is the cause for the insults.
CNN can't be wrong - because Infowars exists.
Matthew Sablan said...
ARM: Again, you're insulting people by implying they believe nonsense.
Again, get a grip.
And, if you honestly, truly, thought the dossier was just a funny story and not true -- then the *entire* collusion narrative falls apart.
The 'dossier' makes many claims, that one is false doesn't necessarily make them all false. I have an open mind on the Russian thing, Manafort and Flynn may have been paid agents, we will see. Trump does seem to have an odd attitude towards Russia that is clearly out of line with traditional US thinking, but there could be multiple reasons for this. Time will tell.
If you wonder why all of those people involved with Uranium One gave the Clintons 145 million dollars, you are a conspiracy theorist. If you don't take every word from the Washington Post is Holy Writ, you are a conspiracy theorist.
"The 'dossier' makes many claims, that one is false doesn't necessarily make them all false. I have an open mind on the Russian thing, Manafort and Flynn may have been paid agents, we will see. Trump does seem to have an odd attitude towards Russia that is clearly out of line with traditional US thinking, but there could be multiple reasons for this. Time will tell."
-- Many of the dossier claims are provably false (the peeing on the bed, claiming someone was in Prague when they weren't, etc.) Not a single claim in the dossier has been shown to be true. There is no logical reason to assume ANY of the claims in there are true, especially now that we now Clinton paid for it, and that the majority of sources were Russian agents who, we also now know, were deliberately trying to create chaos in the American election through efforts like Facebook ads and Pokemon Go antics.
What logical reason do you have for assuming any of the claims are true, barring "Just askin' questions?"
"I'll have more flexibility after the election."
--Obama, to Russia.
How odd!
Manafort and Flynn may have been paid agents, though there's practically zero evidence of that. The Clintons, who literally received Russian money to alter U.S. policy in Russia's favor, -- do you consider them Russian agents?
When you're on the left, wanting it to be true can take you there.
The Republicans control all three arms of government, Congress, the Presidency and the Supreme Court. If the Clintons have done something illegal now would be the time to prove it. I also have an open mind on the Clintons. They are clearly shameless money grubbers but it is unclear that they have broken any laws. If they have they should play a legal penalty.
Tomorrow we will witness the dog and pony show that is the ideology enforcement wing of the entrenched bureaucracy. Make no mistake. It is a show for the masses to see what ideology is acceptable and which is not. Whatever transpires it is not about law enforcement.
but it is unclear that they have broken any laws.
Well, it is Clear that she has broken several laws, here is one that has been admitted to, but still no action was taken by Comey, who also let her off the hook on the classified info on the home brew server by saying she didn't understand that she was breaking the law. The Secretary of Fucking State, in line for the presidency, appointed by the Fucking President and confirmed by the Fucking Congress didn't understand the law.
Huma Abedin, Hillary Clinton's longtime aide, testified last week that her boss burned her schedules while serving as secretary of state.
'If there was a schedule that was created that was her Secretary of State daily schedule, and a copy of that was then put in the burn bag, that ... that certainly happened on ... on more than one occasion,' Abedin told lawyers representing conservative watchdog group Judicial Watch, according to the New York Post.
While Clinton admitted to deleting personal emails from her homebrew server, this is the first time anyone in Clinton's State Department inner circle admitted to destroying public records while on the job.
- Daily Mail, you can find it anywhere though.
18 U.S.C. § 2071(b) (“Whoever, having the custody of any such record, proceeding, map, book, document, paper, or other thing, willfully and unlawfully conceals, removes, mutilates, obliterates, falsifies, or destroys the same, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both
By the way, those illegally destroyed schedules, as well as the deleted emails, most likely contained records of her meetings with donors to the Clinton Foundation, some of them, it's difficult to believe otherwise, given the scale of the "contributions," having to do with Uranium One, the subject of an FBI investigation that got buried.
But that's a wild conspiracy theory, only a paranoid fool would make such a leap, since it was never written out in the New York Times or the WaPo or the WSJ.
If it is "unclear" at this point that Clinton broke laws, then it is obvious that no amount of evidence could possibly suffice. I don't think I've ever seen a *more* blatant example of quid pro quo than Uranium One, or more blatant evidence of a felony than the deletion of her emails.
Actually, the WSJ did call for Mueller's resignation, as a loyal reader, I am sure you read that ARM. Did you have a. comment?
https://www.wsj.com/articles/democrats-russians-and-the-fbi-1508971759
Seriously, at this point I'm trying to imagine what level of evidence could possibly exist that would lead our resident leftists to admit Hillary has violated the law (and not just violated it but kept it locked in a bathroom in a ball gag and gimp outfit to be brought out for entertaining Hollywood guests). It's obvious they'll keep lying to defend her no matter what.
I have a novel idea. Why don't we wait to see who has been indicted, what the charges are, and what the supporting evidence is. Then we can argue whether to discard the Rule of Law or not.
Trump does seem to have an odd attitude towards Russia that is clearly out of line with traditional US thinking,
That is enough to raise suspicions against Trump, but taking millions of dollars from Russian cronies of Putin and Canadians involved in Uranium One, then ruling in their favor as SoS, while the FBI buries and quickly returns to Russia, under the direction of Hillary's State Department, (No conflict of interest there!) doesn't produce a twitch in his partisan conscience.
Then we can argue whether to discard the Rule of Law or not.
Oh, I think that Mueller and Comey discarded the "Rule of Law" a long time ago. It's the rule of men now.
Quinn - I have been (unfairly) accused of being a "resident leftist" and I always thought that Comey's investigation of Clinton was seriously flawed and contrary to proper DOJ procedures. I was expecting a thorough investigation by the new administration as Trump promised. There is no double jeopardy when it comes to criminal investigations. The only person to blame at this point that Hillary's conduct has not been the subject of a thorough investigation is the commander-in-chief.
I know it isn't as much fun to be in the inside as opposed to the outside, but that is where you now find yourself. If the administration isn't behaving as you like, blame the administration.
Seriously, at this point I'm trying to imagine what level of evidence could possibly exist that would lead our resident leftists to admit Hillary has violated the law
Videotape of Herself committing said crime, accompanied by a signed confession would not be enough. The prosecution would be considered "political" because, in these matters, that's how the Democrats operate.
Look no further than Ted Stevens.
I was expecting a thorough investigation by the new administration as Trump promised.
Well, I think that Democrats decided that the best defense was a good offense, and so this Russia probe was invented, as it appears, pretty much out of whole cloth. But these things take time. I am patient.
"but it is unclear that they have broken any laws."
"Well, it is Clear that she has broken several laws, here is one that has been admitted to, but still no action was taken by Comey, who also let her off the hook on the classified info on the home brew server by saying she didn't understand that she was breaking the law. The Secretary of Fucking State, in line for the presidency, appointed by the Fucking President and confirmed by the Fucking Congress didn't understand the law."
Part of why the Comey decision not to prosecute Crooked Hillary was so egregious, was that he laid out a prima facile case of criminal violation, then, despite his being an attorney, used the wrong legal intent standard to justify his decision. She didn't have to know that what she was doing was illegal - she just had to have acted with gross negligence, and there was plenty of evidence to show just that. Years of security briefings (know someone who did this for her multiple times). Heck, her skipping the mandatory security training should be sufficient there to show gross negligence. Think of what they got Scooter Libby convicted for - his claim that he misremembered a single date or fact. Then parade the number of times she had been notified of these security requirements, etc, in over 8 years in the WH, 8 in the Senate on a committee requiring a security clearance, 4 years as Sec of State, where she was tokenly in charge of the security for all of our embassies and consulates around the world, plus 4 years of Yale Law, umpteen as an atty, etc. all the security training that she had taken, and all that she had skipped. A decent prosecutor could have proved his case standing on his head, even if the intent requirement actually were actual intent, but it wasn't. - rather it was the lower "gross negligence' standard. I think that pretty much everyone here, even the leftists, know, deep down, that the only reason that she wasn't prosecuted was political. She was too well protected, and too important to the Deep State and the Dem party to send to prison.
she just had to have acted with gross negligence,
But she didn't! She acted with "extreme carelessness"! Remember? That's why most normal people laugh at lawyer jokes, they are funny because they are true.
Innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. If she has not been prosecuted, given that all three arms of government are controlled by Republicans, that is prima facie evidence that they do not believe she can be convicted, hence innocent, legally.
You guys buy into your own bullshit too regularly. Clearly, given the vast resources invested over the years into investigating the Clintons, their legal training has kept them on the right side of the law, by and large. Although I would never exclude the possibility that they might have slipped up it is a bit late in the day to be worrying about that now. This is all just a giant squirrel. Trump is president, the Clintons are out of the picture. What Trump did or didn't do is news, the Clintons are yesterdays news. You missed your shot, if you ever had one.
"I know it isn't as much fun to be in the inside as opposed to the outside, but that is where you now find yourself. If the administration isn't behaving as you like, blame the administration."
I think that you are essentially blaming Trump for his inability to bring the government (with a > $Trillion budget and millions of employees) immediately to heel, despite the number of Obama holdovers still in their places in the various departments, thanks to Chuck Schumer and the Senate Dems slow rolling the confirmation process as much as they possibly can. Not only do the Obama holdovers need to be weeded out, but also the embeds, the political appointees who were switched over in the management ranks in the last months of the last Administration. Heck, even the litmus test hired DoJ attys in the lower ranks need to be weeded out. But that can't be done as long as Trump only has a small number of his appointees running departments with tens, if not hundreds, of thousands, of employees.
"Although we did not find clear evidence that Secretary Clinton or her colleagues intended to violate laws governing the handling of classified information," he said, "there is evidence that they were extremely careless in their handling of very sensitive, highly classified information." - James Comey.
You can't make this shit up!
This is all just a giant squirrel. Trump is president, the Clintons are out of the picture.
If they were really "out of the picture" Bill Clinton's name would be coming up in this articles about powerful sexual predators in the past. The problem is that if the Clinton's fall on this Uranium One deal, what is to protect Obama? Sorry, it's still open season on the Clintons. Had she just gone away, like she forced Trump to promise he would do during the campaign, and not started this witch hunt, maybe. But she didn't!
Extremely careless, but not grossly negligent! It's like that old joke about Nixon "I take responsibility.... but not the blame!"
Besides, Mueller, as even the Wall Street Journal has pointed out, not just InfoWars, was mixed up in the coverup of Uranium One. It's definitely not over, now matter what you are hoping to spin for the Clintons.
“Also, ARM spent posts (maybe in multiple threads) complaining no one was talking about the indictment, which people explained was because the leak hadn't been confirmed, and we don't know who or what is indicted.”
It was pretty notable I thought that we got yet another Harvey Weinstein post yesterday morning when the big news of Friday night was the expected indictment(s). WSJ had their own confirmation on it by 11 pm Friday. Eventually readers here are bedrudged a lean post on the subject by 7 pm. Your reason for not taking about it above is frankly absurd. As if that would be the approach if the investigation was one the collective you liked a little more.
Those Harvey Weinstein posts really bother you, don't they Snark? Was there no other place on the internet you could speculate about the indictments?
Bruce - You think wrong. I'm focused narrowly on an investigation of Hillary. If Trump wanted an investigation of Clinton there would be an investigation of CLinton.
Snark, ignore Tim. Tim is a very angry man who let's emotion rule reason.
You know what would be hilarious? If the indictments turn out to be against Hillary, DWS, etc. For colluding with Russia, for which we have overwhelming evidence. We know that can't happen because it would require Mueller to also indict himself, but it's fun to pretend the government is capable of functioning properly, and how the Left would respond to it. But the idea that Mueller would indict Hillary based on the actual evidence acquired so far is so patently absurd that no one is even suggesting the possibility. Every last person here, right or left, knows the fix is in, and every single leftist is ok with that.
If Trump wanted an investigation of Clinton there would be an investigation of CLinton.
Yeah, which is why this Russia shit was cooked up, to force him onto the defensive and make any investigation into Hillary look like retaliation. I think that if she had just accepted the result of the election, everybody would have let it go, but. we still have the mystery of who was "unmasking" people in the Trump campaign under Samantha Powers name? Who was using the NSA to spy on political enemies. This stuff is coming out, and Trump has nothing to lose chasing this crap down. In fact, now that they have taken a shot at the king, the deep state, he better take it to the end or he will be destroyed by this kind of wag the dog shit from them.
Tim is a very angry man who let's emotion rule reason.
That's very convenient for you, isn't it? You could provide a simple example of it, couldn't you, but you can't, so you won't.
I am just having a fun discussion, bringing some facts to bear. All of which come from mainstream news sources or quotes from actual political figures, like the story about Samantha Powers denying that she made all of the unmasking requests that were made in her name. You probably didn't see that, because the New York Times and Washington Post didn't see fit to print it. I am just looking for some back and forth, instead I get name called. I am shocked, shocked!
Tim _ Trump said on November 22, 2016 that he would not investigate Clinton because "it's just not something I feel very strongly about." Way before Russia became a big news story. His decision had nothing to do with Russia.
Too bad that an investigation of someone who almost became president doesn't happen because the president doesn't "feel" strongly about it. His personal feelings should play no role in the decision.
Related, I just saw a tweet that says something like, "If they fire Mueller, we take to the streets."
If only the left cared this much about good government when Obama was illegally firing inspector generals like Walpin, instead of saving it for now. It makes me suspicious that their taking to the street has less to do with integrity in investigations.
"Innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. If she has not been prosecuted, given that all three arms of government are controlled by Republicans, that is prima facie evidence that they do not believe she can be convicted, hence innocent, legally.
You guys buy into your own bullshit too regularly."
The only government arm relavant to prosecuting Hillary's server was Obama's DOJ. Everyone (including you, though you won't admit it, I'm sure) can recite the multiple shady actions taken by them to shield Hillary and her associates.
Yes, now the DOJ is Republican and they could prosecute her, though her unpunished destruction of evidence probably would make that quite difficult. Many, including myself (maybe) would be opposed to that on the grounds that it would be a dangerous precedent for a new Administration to use the power of government to prosecte the previous Administration. But your "three arms of government" argument is the real bullshit here.
Steve/Tim: it made sense at the time for Trump to say there'd be no more investigation. She'd destroyed tons of files, the FBI had passed out immunity deals and refused to prosecute. The investigation was over, and re-opening it would most likely be seen as just political pay back.
Now though, we've learned that Comey decided the result of the investigation before it finished and that Comey and Mueller both conpsired to keep things about Uranium One away from Congress. Re-opening the investigations now may be painted as vindictive by Trump's opponents, but there's a strong argument that the FBI corrupted and mishandled the investigation deliberately, and re-investigation is worthwhile.
I was all for letting Hillary fade away unpunished, but it seems like her misdeeds won't quit bearing poisonous fruit.
ARM prefers that we adopt other people's bullshit. No matter how obvious.
"I was all for letting Hillary fade away unpunished, but it seems like her misdeeds won't quit bearing poisonous fruit."
She had the opportunity, but she won't go away. In the end, this may turn out not to have been wise, though I think (and she apparently thinks so too) that she is immune.
The MSM has given all these recent bombshells the page 23 treatment, but I think most people know about it by now. The evidence, even minimized as much as possible by that same MSM, is too obviously a game changer to be buriable.
“Trump said on November 22, 2016 that he would not investigate Clinton because "it's just not something I feel very strongly about." ”
We really don’t want to be in a position where losing candidates are routinely investigated for illegalities. That makes too much incentive to win at any cost, including, so far, fairly flagrant voter fraud, but maybe in the future even assassinations, etc. to the victor go the spoils, and, in that country, that includes the DoJ and FBI. But, then, we need a clean transition of power, not the outgoing administration bugging the phones of the incoming one, or Executive Branch employees trying to take down the new administration. Or, the losing candidate trying to take control and leadership of the “resistance”. If Crooked Hillary had just faded away like most in her position have in the past, I think that she would be safe from prosecution. Now? Maybe not. And if conspiring with the Russians was presumably enough to get Trump people sent to prison, shouldn’t that be the case for the opposition?
“Extremely careless, but not grossly negligent! It's like that old joke about Nixon "I take responsibility.... but not the blame!"”
Thought for a minute there that you meant that I was wrong about the law. I easily could have been - which is why one of the things my father taught me about the practice of law was to always look it up (unless it is something that you use constantly, like I did with much of 35 USC). But then realized, I think, that you were characterizing her actions, and not the intent requirement. Here is the relevant portion of that part of the Espionage Act:
18 U.S. Code § 793 - Gathering, transmitting or losing defense information
(f) Whoever, being entrusted with or having lawful possession or control of any document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, note, or information, relating to the national defense, (1) through gross negligence permits the same to be removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of his trust, or to be lost, stolen, abstracted, or destroyed, or (2) having knowledge that the same has been illegally removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of its trust, or lost, or stolen, abstracted, or destroyed, and fails to make prompt report of such loss, theft, abstraction, or destruction to his superior officer—
Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both.
It was Comey who called her "extremely careless."
Looking a bit more closely at the Espionage Act, James Comey’s problem may have been just bad lawyering, and not really intentional (I.e. gross negligence versus willful intent). Most Espionage cases seem to be brought under 793(e) and not (f). This section reads:
(e) Whoever having unauthorized possession of, access to, or control over any document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, or note relating to the national defense, or information relating to the national defense which information the possessor has reason to believe could be used to the injury of the United States or to the advantage of any foreign nation, willfully communicates, delivers, transmits or causes to be communicated, delivered, or transmitted, or attempts to communicate, deliver, transmit or cause to be communicated, delivered, or transmitted the same to any person not entitled to receive it, or willfully retains the same and fails to deliver it to the officer or employee of the United States entitled to receive it; ...
The difference here is that (e) applies to giving classified information to the enemy (or at least other countries), which is presumably why it has a “willful” intent requirement, while (f) applies to just mishandling it, which is why a “gross negligence” standard is utilized. Bradley/Chelsea Manning didn’t negligently pass classified information to the enemy - it was clearly intentional. But much of what Crooked Hillary did was not really “willful”, just extremely careless, which usually translates to gross negligence. You really don’t want the section of code requiring that that classified information be protected to require willful intent to misuse it, because then everyone could use the Sandy Berger/Sgt Shultz defense when misusing it to get off. Being able to use “Sorry, I didn’t mean to leave the classified information laying around (or in my socks) - I just got distracted” would inevitably result in a lot of loose behavior when handling classified/information.
rcocean said...
Look we don't know who is going to be indicted or for what.
Shouldn't we just wait?
I know that's no fun - people love speculation.
Of course we should wait. Rather, we should have waited. But somebody leaked grand jury information - a federal crime - to make sure this would be the news for the weekend.
I don't care who's indicted. But we should definitely be talking about who benefits from leaking on Friday a snippet of what will come out Monday anyway.
“It was Comey who called her "extremely careless."”
Maybe we are talking across each other, but my problem has always been that Comey essentially said that her behavior was extremely careless, but he couldn’t prove that it was willful (of course they could - just look at the Scooter Libby prosecution), when the legal standard for the relevant portion of the statute involved was gross negligence and not willful intent. If he had been doing a competent job as an attorney, he would have explained why her behavior could be extremely careless, but not grossly negligent but, of course, that would be laughable, because they aren’t that far apart. Which is why I always have said that his statement didn’t make sense - he laid out a case why she could be potentially convictable under the 793(f) gross negligence standard, but then used the 793(e) willful intent standard to explain why she wasn’t going to be prosecuted (presumably under 793(f)).
Let me add to my last point - I think that most of us do understand why Crooked Hillary was never prosecuted for her gross mishandling of classified information - she is a Clinton, and by then, the presumptive nominee of Obama’s party to replace him. It was politics all the way. But Comey was apparently facing an incipient revolt from his FBI troops, which is why staying silent (as Andrew McCade (who is still at the DoJ) managed to do with the Clinton foundation scandal - after his wife got campaign contributions through Gov McAuliffe, long time Clinton crony) was, ultimately, not an option. My guess is that this non-indictment statement was the only way for Comey to satisfy Lynch and Obama on the one hand, and a lot of his troops on the other hand.
I wonder if the facts of this other investigation make it impossible to assume that Hillary destroyed the evidence innocently.
Impossible? Probably not. But beyond a reasonable doubt? Definitely a chance there.
In June 2016 ATT/Cricket were down for most of a day, and cell service for all carriers in the DC area was down for about an hour. Not a word has leaked out about how this happened.
Just a few weeks ago, a deranged man shot up Las Vegas. Not a word had leaked out from the feds about his motive. Anyone believe they don't know it by now?
And yet we know about a sealed grand jury indictment to be released on Monday, before it even happens, with much speculation over it's contents.
Feds sure can keep secrets they don't want us to know. Funny how the "free" press hasn't found anything out about the outage or the deranged man's motives.
tim in vermont said...
I was all for letting Hillary fade away unpunished, but it seems like her misdeeds won't quit bearing poisonous fruit.
This isn't really about Hillary It is about the people that funded her against the American People.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा