We live in such strange times that the media ignored the most blatant examples of presidential campaign-cycle collusion in memory, while seeking to invent it where it never existed. Remember, Barack Obama on a hot mic not only got caught reiterating to a Russian leader the conditions of Putin-Obama election-cycle collusion, but he also spelled out the exact quid pro quo: promised Russian quietude abroad during Obama’s reelection campaign was in exchange for “flexibility” (i.e., cancellation) of U.S.-Eastern European missile-defense projects. Should Trump ever be caught making the same “deal” in 2020, he would probably be impeached.I ran into that new piece because I was looking for something else written by Victor Davis Hanson that Meade was reading to me last night.
Ah! Here it is. It's at American Greatness:
Imagine that it is now summer 2024. A 78-year-old lame-duck President Trump is winding down his second term, basking in positive polls. His dutiful vice president in waiting, Mike Pence, is at last getting his chance to run for president. Imagine also that Pence is a shoo-in, facing long-shot, hard-leftist, and octogenarian Senator Bernie Sanders. Polls show an impending Pence landslide.There follows a very elaborate visualization of the Trump administration doing to Sanders the equivalent of what the Obama administration did to Trump in 2016. We're used to these flips, of course, but this one was very striking to me because time after time I experience weird surprise to see (in flipped form) the things that really happened.
Team Trump is nevertheless horrified about the slight chance that the nation could conceivably elect an ossified, self-proclaimed socialist....
I'd excerpt some of the detail, but it's best experienced as a torrent of outrageous behavior.
Posts
233 comments:
1 – 200 of 233 Newer› Newest»Meade has a very positive influence over you. ;-)
What if Trump did to Sanders what Clinton did to Sanders. That would be enough.
"Despite Obama’s recent projection that his eight-year tenure was “scandal-free,” along with the reality that the media’s biased compliance sought to make such a startling fantasy true, the Obama administration was in many respects lawless. It will eventually rank as the most scandal-ridden administration since Warren G. Harding’s.
The Fast and Furious scandal was inter alia about deliberate government gun-running of weapons to Mexico, perhaps in a warped effort to discredit current U.S. firearms laws. The Benghazi debacle involved a cover-up of a preplanned terrorist hit on our consulate, an attack that was possible only because it was well known that the consulate’s security was lax. The Benghazi cover-up involved U.N. ambassador Susan Rice lying five times on national television in a single day, when she claimed that the terrorist operation was the result of a spontaneous riot over a video. And to justify that reelection-cycle concoction, the video maker, a foreign resident on U.S. soil, was summarily jailed on a trumped-up probation charge.
An IRS regional high official, and Obama partisan, Lois Lerner, weaponized and discredited the IRS, by hounding conservative groups that were seeking tax-exempt status. Lerner staged a self-serving public stunt to leak her misbehavior to friendly ears — she had a reporter ask her a planted question about targeting conservatives. At her later congressional testimony, Lerner invoked the Fifth Amendment to avoid self-incrimination. She was never charged by the Obama State Department. Indeed, Obama himself, after expressing initial pseudo contriteness in the face of public furor, waited the public out before finally announcing that there was not a “smidgeon” of corruption in the IRS. Lerner, in effect, was rewarded for successfully neutralizing many conservative activist groups just months before the 2012 election. In October 2017, facing a lawsuit by conservative groups, the IRS admitted in court that it had unfairly targeted them during the Obama administration. It agreed to a multi-million-dollar settlement, and the current attorney general, Jeff Sessions, apologized to the more than 450 conservative organizations in question."
Nadine Strossen, a liberal and the former president of the American Civil Liberty Union, conceded — but only in hindsight when both Obama and she were out of their respective offices — that Obama was one of the most hostile presidents to civil liberties in history. Perhaps she was referring to the fact that Eric Holder’s and Loretta Lynch’s Justice Department had spied on Associated Press reporters, monitored the communications of Fox reporter James Rosen, and subpoenaed New York Times reporter James Risen to force him to reveal his confidential sources. Holder was also the first Attorney General in U.S. history to be held in contempt of Congress for refusing to hand over subpoenaed documents.
But it was during the 2016 election cycle that the Obama administration descended to a level of corruption not seen in a century. Right in the middle of the FBI investigation of Hillary Clinton’s email server, Obama, as judge and jury, announced that candidate Clinton had violated no criminal law while secretary of state. Obama also lied when he stated that he’d known nothing about such an unlawful server, although emails prove that he himself had communicated over it on several occasions. His FBI director, James Comey, deliberately scrambled the law and exonerated Hillary Clinton from wrongdoing, not because she had not broken the law, but, according to Comey’s own invented interpretations of the statute, because she had not intended to violate the law. Comey also admitted to tailoring his circus-like investigation of Clinton around the assumption that she would soon be president.
Brennen and Clapper belong in prison.
I had just finished the Hanson column. He's pretty much the only one left worth reading at National Review. It's remarkable that he and Prager have been so pro Trump, I could not have predicted that, but maybe should have, especially with Hanson. Another is Larry Arnn, President of Hillsdale College.
"No collusion!"
Um, okay. So Victor Davis Hanson is speculating about a hypothetical impeachment, based on a non-impeachment, using evidence that is largely unknown to Victor Davis Hanson.
I don't know if there will be an "collusion." I haven't seen much evidence of any collusion yet. But I will just wait and see instead of speculating wildly, like Victor Davis Hanson (whom I've enjoyed reading for years, and with whom I agreed about 98% of the time, before Trump).
I sort of expect that instead of finding any criminal "collusion," as if "collusion" were a violation of one of the criminal provisions of the United States Code, the Special Counsel's office will instead turn up lengthy list of far more mundane -- and also painfully clear -- violations of other federal criminal statutes.
Victor Davis Hanson is helping Trump define deviancy down, with the focus on "collusion." Trump wants everybody to keep repeating, "No collusion!", so that anything else that comes out of the Special Counsel's office is delegitimized by virtue of there having been no "collusion," such that there never should have been an investigation in the first place.
"a torrent of outrageous behavior" Yeah, so?
I do appreciate your residual capacity for outrage, but this is deep-state progs we're talking about. They went after Trump with everything they had. They thought Hill would cover up the shenanigans. They failed, but managed to keep at it with renewed FISA warrants and Mueller and Brennan smears.
Of course, the Hanson hypo is a little implausible: the deep state protects progs, and Pence ain't O.
The idea that Clinton had not intended to break the law is a bad joke. Of course she knew exactly what she was doing.
Without double standards and all. Why there's no perp walks is a bigger mystery.
Chuck said...
"No collusion!"
Um, okay. So Victor Davis Hanson is speculating about a hypothetical impeachment, based on a non-impeachment, using evidence that is largely unknown to Victor Davis Hanson...
You mean evidence that is completely unknown to everybody. Evidence that does not exist. Give it up you loser.
...media ignored the most blatant examples of presidential campaign-cycle collusion in memory, while seeking to invent it where it never existed...
Accuse your enemies of that which you are guilty. It still works!
"I'll have more mellifluous malleability after the election."
I was just trying reading the second piece - it’s excellent.
And unbelievable what was done by the Obama administration and Hillary campaign to Trump. And what even more unbelievable is Trump has survived it.
The latest twist is Papadopoulos was threatened by Mueller as being an Israeli agent.
And Manafort with witness tampering for using an app to communicate.
And there is more to come out, that will shock everyone.
- Hints of 5 eyes malfeasance
- When did the FBI contact Halper
- Use by a third party, perhaps even fusion, to mine nsa intercepts in a data warehouse of all us communications are stored
- what if the mueller investigation causes a red wave at mid-terms?
- OIG report shows how biased the justice department is
- people in the Obama administration are charged for this by the Utah based prosecutor
Obama, as judge and jury, announced that candidate Clinton had violated no criminal law while secretary of state. Obama also lied when he stated that he’d known nothing about such an unlawful server, although emails prove that he himself had communicated over it on several occasions.
Well, he had to be judge and jury, since he saw to it that there was no IG at State during Clinton’s entire term there. Probably something she demanded. The White House Travel Office was just the minors, when she turned the Department of State into a graft operation, she knew she had hit the big time and there was no way that she was going to let a pesky Inspector General rain on her parade!
But the Democrats take good old Bill Clinton’s advice, as caught on a taped phone call with one of his, this time at least freely willing paramours, “Denial, Denial, Denial!”
No one seems to be saying, yet, what seems obvious to me -- Obama had to know & approve of the intelligence operation against the Trump campaign.
The great liberal project requires that citizens trust their government with enormous power, but liberals do everything they can to foster distrust and fear of the government.
Say, where is that OIG report, anyway. Wasn't it due out today ?
Imagine Althouse married to Chuck instead of Meade...
Andrea Mitchel LOVES the Clinton crime machine.
...this one was very striking to me because time after time I experience weird surprise to see (in flipped form) the things that really happened.
Is that surprise because you haven't followed the reporting of the details of what happened, or were you already aware but found it shocking to see it all laid out?
Tank said...
Chuck said...
"No collusion!"
Um, okay. So Victor Davis Hanson is speculating about a hypothetical impeachment, based on a non-impeachment, using evidence that is largely unknown to Victor Davis Hanson...
You mean evidence that is completely unknown to everybody. Evidence that does not exist. Give it up you loser.
No; I mean all of the evidence that has been collected so far by the Special Counsel. I don't know what all that is. And I presume that you don't, either. If you do know, I'd appreciate you telling us exactly what it is that the Special Counsel is or is not working on. Put it in writing now, so that in 4 or 14 or 40 weeks, we can all compare what you wrote to what is made public in a federal indictment. Or maybe a dozen federal indictments.
"Mellifluous illegality" brings the late Clark Clifford to mind.
I really am having a hard time deciding which of the two to propose marriage to--mockturtle or "Dickin' " (the former AprilApple)--except my wife of 45 yrs might object. :)
Mueller is the captain of the corruption ship. Sent to hide all of the corruption on the left.
If you and your wife can cook, Virgil, I accept.
By the way, over at Slate Dahlia Lithwick has been repeatedly asserting that President Trump’s team keeps using the word “collusion”, even collusion isn’t a crime. In her view of recent history only they have been using that term. The idea that the Democratic media had used the term seems unfamiliar to her.
Does anyone here remember things differently?
So, Chuck, to cut to the chase, you are saying that if Trump directs the CIA, FBI and DOJ to take the same actions that Obama Administrati0n took against his campaign (FISA warrants, implanted spies/agents provacateurs, spending millions around Iran, Russia, UK to get people to compile opposition research dossiers that then form the basis for investigation) you are fine with that. This is just how US politics is run in the 21st century.
Democrats are fuming that they didn’t run somebody else other than the corrupt-to-putrescence harridan that was their candidate. But chin up Dems! This can all be waved away with the term “Whataboutism”!
”Trump wants everybody to keep repeating, "No collusion!", so that anything else that comes out of the Special Counsel's office is delegitimized by virtue of there having been no "collusion," such that there never should have been an investigation in the first place.”
An investigation of anything other than collusion IS illegitimate.
Democrats are fuming that they didn’t run somebody else other than the corrupt-to-putrescence harridan that was their candidate.
They would have loved H>er if she had won, corruption and all. A lot of them still do.
This is just how US politics is run in the 21st century.
As Inga has reminded us with her excerpt from Longfellow, it is the patriotic duty of Americans to undermine the rule of law if that’s what it takes to put a Democrat in the White House!
Blogger brylun said...
"Imagine Althouse married to Chuck instead of Meade..."
It could never happen. Althouse has excellent aesthetic taste. Chuck could never pass muster.
They would have loved H>er if she had won, corruption and all. A lot of them still do.
They certainly love winners who can keep their snouts firmly in the trough, Bill used to be a winner, but she is a loser, and so would have shmould have.
Chuck could never pass muster.
For one thing, he wouldn't pass the physical.
Victor Davis Hanson is a treasure. No matter where his work appears.
POLITICIZING THE FBI: How James Comey Succeeded Where Richard Nixon Failed
But we are scolded endlessly by the hive mind that is Mueller must be allowed to keep up the witch hunt for eternity, and that Trump's firing of Comey is "Obstruction"
Firing of Comey was NECESSARY.
"In the years running up to the 2016 presidential election, Comey made sure not to make the same “mistakes” of Felt that plagued Nixon. The IRS conservative harassment scandal was swept under the rug. The Clinton Foundation, seemingly overtly corrupt, was given a pass even after the Uranium One sale by a large Clinton Foundation donor was approved by the Clinton State Department. Comey even went so far as to take the unusual step of exonerating Hillary Clinton for her grossly negligent handling of classified materials, not a decision that was his to make. More shockingly, he permitted the destruction of 30,000 Clinton emails and relevant hard drives. It strains credulity to contend that Comey would have done the same for President Donald Trump if the occasion arose.
Comey’s exoneration of Clinton clearly transgressed clear DOJ standards, although Comey makes a tenuous argument that this was made necessary by the clear bias of Attorney General Loretta Lynch. In so doing, though, he admits that the proper course would have been to recommend a Special Counsel. But, stunningly, he also admits in his recent book that he did not do so because the public might think she was guilty, a political calculation if there ever was one."
”Well, he had to be judge and jury, since he saw to it that there was no IG at State during Clinton’s entire term there. Probably something she demanded.”
Not a even a smidgen of corruption, indeed.
It will eventually rank as the most scandal-ridden administration since Warren G. Harding’s.
There is a big difference.
Harding and Grant were pretty much scandal free personally (aside from Harding's mistress) but they were undone by their friends and members of their administration who saw a chance to profit.
Obama is the one who directed most of this although I have never figured out why he would want Hillary at State.
Mellifluous is one of my favorite words!
In the last couple of days, The Conservative Treehouse has published a couple of informative articles about George Papadopolous -- in particular about how he was treated by the FBI and Special Counsel.
One commenter, pen-name tav144, wrote an explanation of Papadolopous that convinced me completely. I summarize the explanation as follows.
Papadopoulos was an FBI informant when he joined the Trump campaign staff in March 2016. As soon as Papadopoulos became an official adviser, he began trying to arrange meetings between the campaign staff and Russian officials.
Furthermore, the FBI wired Papadopolous wired him in order to record his personal conversations with staff members and with Trump associates.
That is why the FBI did not apply for a FISA warrant against him or even interview him during the year 2016.
After Trump became President, the FBI concocted the fictions about Papadopoulos discussing "thousands of e-mails" with Joseph Mifsud and with Alexander Downer. Papadopoulos never discussed "thousands of e-mails" with anyone during 2016. Such a discussion happened for the first time when Papadopoulos was interviewed by the FBI for the first time on January 27, 2017. The subsequent FBI report insinuates falsely that such discussions happened with Mifsud and Downer in 2016.
In order to shut Papadopoulos up about the FBI, Robert "The FBI Whitewasher" Mueller arrested Papadopoulos on July 27, 2017, and subsequently charged him with making false statements to the FBI.
The Conservative Treehouse provided a lot of new information about the arrest, indictment and guilty plea of Papadopoulos in yesterday's article titled Spy Games: George Papadopoulos, via Sketchy Simona Mangiante, Begins Media Tour
.
Chuck said... But I will just wait and see instead of speculating wildly...
Instead Chuck will speculate mundanely.
Naah! I rank ‘mellifluous’ near the bottom, kicking around cans with his best friend ‘ingratiating.'
Chuck said...
... Victor Davis Hanson is speculating about a hypothetical impeachment, based on a non-impeachment, using evidence that is largely unknown to Victor Davis Hanson.
Speculation is bad!!!
I expect that ... the Special Counsel's office will ... turn up lengthy list of far more mundane -- and also painfully clear -- violations of other federal criminal statutes.
Unless I'm doing the speculating!
Clarifying my comment at 9:22 AM
Such a discussion happened for the first time when Papadopoulos was interviewed by the FBI for the first time on January 27, 2017.
The FBI communicated often with Papadopoulos in 2016, when he was the FBI's informant in Trump's campaign staff.
The FBI interview on January 27, 2017, is the first communication that is known to the public.
Possible but seeing that tbe girlfriend was itroduced by mifsud she may have been an mi 6 minder.
"Imagine that it is now summer 2024. A 78-year-old lame-duck President Trump is winding down his second term, basking in positive polls. facing long-shot, hard-leftist, and octogenarian Senator Bernie Sanders."
78 year old and a 83 year old?
By 2024 I predict a generational change in politics.
If you live in a place surrounded by Lefties, you appreciate that in practice radical Utopianism, fiscal insanity, vague Marxism and endless protest really don’t lead to Equality, Social Justice and Peace, even if it’s desirable to want those things.
Anyways this operation was ych like with plame, strzok and protap were the ones running the investigation, yates was feeding the usual suspects re flynn to create the cinditions for a recusal then a special counsel appointment
Pretty ham fisted recounting of 2016, but if that would enrage you in 2024, why aren't you enraged now?
FYI: "Becuase Trump!" is a pathetic and useless reason.
The media won't touch Obama's corruption. Won't. Touch. It.
Instead we are treated to the doubling down of a corrupt democrat hack press. Our media is an arm to one political party. but if we dare say it, the poor democrat hacks yell "we are under attack".
Pure fantasy. VDH must be on the tawny port.
This could never happen in America.
Its really a caste war.
Trump and the details of all this are incidental.
If not Trump, someone or something else, different details, same fundamentals.
These details all serve simply as evidence feeding a larger inductive conclusion.
Your institutions are captured and corrupt, and there is no way out until they are overthrown and remade, along with the caste of people that staff them (not merely the higher leadership).
Its interesting to run through all the tactical maneuvering, but the truly important thing is the strategic situation, which Codevilla, for one, laid out long before Trump.
From Ben Macintyre:B.M. I can tell you what the veterans of the S.I.S. [the British Secret Intelligence Service, or MI6] think, which is yes, kompromat was done on him. Of course, kompromat is done on everyone. So they end up, the theory goes, with this compromising bit of material and then they begin to release parts of it. They set up an ex-MI6 guy, Chris Steele, who is a patsy, effectively, and they feed him some stuff that’s true, and some stuff that isn’t true, and some stuff that is demonstrably wrong. Which means that Trump can then stand up and deny it, while knowing that the essence of it is true. And then he has a stone in his shoe for the rest of his administration.
We shall see if the shoe fits.
It's remarkable that he and Prager have been so pro Trump, I could not have predicted that,4
Follow your audience or else they will no longer listen.
Hansen does get in some good shots at Trump's style, though.
ChucKKK said...
"No collusion!"
Um, okay. So Victor Davis Hanson is speculating about a hypothetical impeachment, based on a non-impeachment, using evidence that is largely unknown to Victor Davis Hanson.
I don't know if there will be an "collusion." I haven't seen much evidence of any collusion yet. But I will just wait and see instead of speculating wildly, like Victor Davis Hanson (whom I've enjoyed reading for years, and with whom I agreed about 98% of the time, before Trump).
I sort of expect that instead of finding any criminal "collusion," as if "collusion" were a violation of one of the criminal provisions of the United States Code, the Special Counsel's office will instead turn up lengthy list of far more mundane -- and also painfully clear -- violations of other federal criminal statutes.
Victor Davis Hanson is helping Trump define deviancy down, with the focus on "collusion." Trump wants everybody to keep repeating, "No collusion!", so that anything else that comes out of the Special Counsel's office is delegitimized by virtue of there having been no "collusion," such that there never should have been an investigation in the first place.
I sort of expect that instead of finding any criminal "collusion," as if "collusion" were a violation of one of the criminal provisions of the United States Code, the Special Counsel's office will instead turn up lengthy list of far more mundane -- and also painfully clear -- violations of other federal criminal statutes.
Uh, ChucKKK, what are those crimes? I mean shouldn't there be knowledge of a crime to warrant an investigation? Especially the POTUS?
I know you are just a traffic court lawyer...
Bill Priestap is to make his first appearance before Congress today. I was startled to learn that his wife, Sabina Menschel,is not only a Goldman-Sachs heiress, but also runs a spy agency herself.
And then he has a stone in his shoe for the rest of his administration.
We shall see if the shoe fits.
And then what?
Does he sell out Europe’s missile defenses agains the Russians and Iranians the way Obama did?
Does he give Putin control over a vast tranche of North American uranium supplies, like Obama did?
Does he kill pipelines that threaten oil prices, the sale of oil props up Putin.
Does he try to ban fracking so as not to threaten Russia’s monopoly position on providing natural gas to Europe?
Does he shepherd Syria into Russia’s waiting arms the way Obama did?
What is he going to do for the Russians that he wasn’t getting already from Hillary and Obama before her?
robother said...
So, Chuck, to cut to the chase, you are saying that if Trump directs the CIA, FBI and DOJ to take the same actions that Obama Administrati0n took against his campaign (FISA warrants, implanted spies/agents provacateurs, spending millions around Iran, Russia, UK to get people to compile opposition research dossiers that then form the basis for investigation) you are fine with that. This is just how US politics is run in the 21st century.
I don't recall ever once defending the Obama Administration on any specifics as you list them.
TrumpWorld is alleging that there were corrupt FISA warrant applications; that there was U.S. governmental corruption involved in the compilation of "the dossier"; that there were government "spies" embedded in the Trump campaign in an unlawful and corrupt manner.
If those things are true, any criminal prosecution based on those features is doomed. And if true, there is a large and well-funded media environment to expose them as anti-Trump illegality. Fox News. Drudge. Breitbart. Many of the Wall Street Journal's columnists and investigative reporters. Writers just like Victor Davis Hanson. And Althouse?
I don't know. I won't speculate. But if I were a betting man, I'd say that it is more likely that we will find out that (1) Donald Trump -- and not Elliott Broidy -- paid for a Playboy playmate to keep quite about an abortion after getting her pregnant, than (2) the Trump campaign was the victim of illegal FBI surveillance.
On Sunday, the Liberty Unyielding website published an article titled Following the money in Spygate’s London connection: A small but crucial piece of the puzzle, written by J. E. Dyer, a former Navy Intelligence officer who has written many articles about the RussiaGate hoax.
George Papadopoulos worked on Ben Carson's campaign staff into January 16, and then joined Donald Trump's campaign staff in March 2016.
Dyer's article points out events involving Papadopoulos during the interim -- during February 2016.
During February, Papadopoulos was hired by the London Centre for International Law Practice (LCILP), specifically to the position of Director for International Environment, Energy and Natural Resources Law. This appointment vastly improved Papadopoulos's credentials as a foreign-policy expert.
The appointment also made Papadopoulos a colleague of Joseph Mifsud, who was LCILP's Convenor and Director for International Strategic Development.
On February 16, 2016, a certain Stephen Roh, formed a new company that initially was called Global Global but in June 2016 was renamed the London Centre for International Law and Diplomacy (LCILD). This Roh seems to be the funder for both LSILP and LCILD and is a major investor in Link University, located in Rome, where Mifsud is on the faculty.
Roh is a Swiss citizen, married to a Russian woman.
Roh has some personal association with Papadopoulous. In fact, Roh recently co-authored a book titled The Faking of Russia-gate: The Papadopoulos Case, an Investigative Analysis, which strives to exonerate Papadopoulos from all suspicions and accusations.
It seems that special, expensive actions were taken in the middle of February 2016 in order to position Papadopoulos as a qualified candidate for selection to become a foreign-policy adviser on Trump's campaign staff.
Sometimes elites seem like a completely different species from me. They seem to place so much importance on a leader's fastidiousness, appearance, and demeanor while either completely disregarding (or outright encouraging) venality and corruption. Personally I care about results far more than appearances. I care much more about what a leader actually does rather than what they may say or how they say it.
Don't missunderstand me, I'd love to have an effective and lawful president who was also well spoken, not a lout, and even keeled in their demeanor. But since I can't have that, I'll settle for effective and lawful. Maybe that's Trump's message with that Stones song?
VDH is the man!
they were saying something about witness tampering,
http://dailycaller.com/2018/06/05/mueller-fbi-wrongful-conviction-case/
Yes Victor David Hanson is a treasure.
He actually pays attention and makes detailed mental notes about what he sees in his California farming community, the local Walmart, his office at Stanford Univ, the Stanford campus and community, etc and compares and contrasts those observations to what he hears emanating from the state capital in Sacramento and the nation's capital in DC.
Your answer is more revealing than you imagine, Chuck. You don't accept any evidence from Congressional investigators that any of the Obama Administration actions happened (i.e., these are just Trump "allegations"). Bottom line, you (like Bill Kristol) have no problem with the Deep State taking down Trump by any means necessary, while applying the strictest standards of criminal law to Trump and anyone associated with him.
Prager willingly admits Trump was his last choice during the primary. So what?
Now that Trump has won - he's delighted, like most of us are, that the most corrupt person in American history is not president.
Those of you who demand 100% Trump loyalty, and in hindsight too, - don't you find that a bit creepy?
I don't worship any leader or president. They are All imperfect.
I'll take imperfect over corrupt. Those of us who were unhappy that Trump won the primary were only so because we were horrified of a Hillary presidency. Sorry but get over it already.
Under British law regarding surveillance, all that would be required to spy on Trump’s electronic communications would have been the judgement of the government that it was in the best interests of the United Kingdom to cozy up to the next president, who was all but certain to be Hillary Clinton.
because you can't get a recusal otherwise:
https://amgreatness.com/2018/06/05/what-didnt-trump-know-when-didnt-he-know-it/
Am I the only one laughing because Chuck missed Hanson's point ENTIRELY?
No Chuck, Swift did not think Irish infants were delicious with milk.
I'm having difficulty imaging Republicans doing this because it's just so impossible. This is a vivid example of truth being stranger than fiction.
There are many improbable and unlikely elements to what has happened the last several years but several things had to be true for any of this to have occurred.
First if the left weren't so extremely tribal this could not have happened.
Second, although it may seem a stretch, I think this is connected with the way the left has wiped out conservative or right-wing viewpoints at the universities. That's what sets the stage for all of this (and likely many further nasty surprises down the road.) The connections are complicated and hard to prove but I believe it's there.
Third, the government has to be overwhelmingly left-wing for them to have believed that they could get away with this.
I was solemnly assured by no less than the President of the United States that there were no scandals, not even a smidgen of corruption in his administration. Sounds like a preemptive self pardon to me. But then your mileage may vary.
But I'm happy; no more being shat on from a great height while receiving a lecture from my moral superior. I can live with that.
Mandrewa
1 yes
2 creation of the mindset: siege mentality, lack of dissent, denigration of red America
3 all it takes is Hillary winning
on to more serious matters:
https://pjmedia.com/richardfernandez/epitaph/
CStanley said, Is that surprise because you haven't followed the reporting of the details of what happened, or were you already aware but found it shocking to see it all laid out?
You're speaking to Ann Althouse of course but speaking for myself it's difficult to hold all of this in your head at the same time. We are in the habit of looking at these bad acts one thing at a time, because people are limited, and when you do that each thing is bad but by itself, and I don't want to say that they aren't problems, but we get used to seeing this kind of stuff in the political arena.
But when you pull back and you look at all the things that have happened, and then it's kind of overwhelming. It's such a staggering pile of bad behavior by the left.
Watergate wasn't even one-tenth as bad as this.
Lifelong feckless cunt Chuck emerges from his den to autistically screech in defense of the lawless Obama administration.
Sees his shadow, you know what that means. 7 more years of Trump.
During 2015 and the first months of 2016, the Trump-hating leaders of our Intelligence Community were expecting and striving to prove that Trump was being blackmailed by Russian Intelligence.
It was not until the summer of 2016 that the goal shifted to proving that Trump was colluding with Russian Intelligence to affect the US election.
George Papadopoulos became involved in the anti-Trump effort in February 2016, when the goal still was to prove the blackmail. That's why Papapoloulos's conversations did not mention the Russians having "thousands of e-mails". For sure, those conversations were recorded without Papadopoulos's knowledge, and those conversations might be discoverable.
The "thousands of e-mails" were not added to the Papadopoulos story until the end of January 2017 (seventeen), when he was interviewed by the FBI. The subsequent FBI report insinuated belatedly that his 2016 conversations with Mifsud, Downer and Halper had discussed "thousands of e-mails".
What Papadopoulos discussed with Mifsud and Downer in 2016 was not Russian possession of e-mails.
Rather, what was discussed in those 2016 conversations was Russian blackmail of Trump and of his associates. Papadopoulos was being tasked to collect information or to entrap people along blackmail lines.
When Mifsud, Downer and Halper communicated with Papadopoulos, foreign women were involved in the communications. The first known such woman was "Putin's niece", introduced by Mifsud.
Practically everyone interested in the RussiaGate hoax assumes that these foreign women were supposed to lure Papadopoulos himself. Now, however, I speculate that foreign women were being provided to lure Trump's associates. Papadopoulos was supposed to introduce foreign women to Trump's associates in order to concoct situations that appeared to be Russian blackmail.
It seems that we easily lose track of a trend that has been intensifying over the last 50 years.
The Mainstream Media is increasingly obvious in their efforts to be the propaganda arm of the Democratic Party, liberals, progressives and more importantly anti-conservatives and anti-libertarians.
The actions and words differ on specific situations, but still serve the same purpose. All "mistakes' that they admit are universally those that advantage the Left. Any hysteria they generate is to promote leftist or anti-conservative causes. The information they ignore is that which protects the Left.
Imagine if A Democrat were n the White House and the "facts" regarding the Trump investigation were the same. How do you think the media would be treating the situation? If you think it would be the same, you are deluding yourself.
Media stone cold disinterested in democrat corruption
I recall Chuck on many, many occasions positively ridiculing the idea that Obama would "wiretap" Trump.
He defended Obama with great passion.
And now? Where is that defense of "no wiretapping!" now, Chuck, that you defended for months? Or are you reduced to "I only said Obama himself didn't crawl through the ducts of Trump tower and personally tap Trump! I never claimed he didn't order it!"
Blogger Ken B said...
. . .
No Chuck, Swift did not think Irish infants were delicious with milk.
Are you sure about this, Ken B? There is a growing consensus, among the people who care about these things, that Swift was as mad as a hatter.
Vance I still say that Obama did not wiretap Trump Tower. Moreover, I ask if Trump wants to continue to claim that Trump Tower was wiretapped in a way that would indicate that Obama was a bad (or sick) person, Trump ought to be very specific. He’s never spent five minutes answering questions about that Tweeted allegation.
And for my part, I am completely unconcerned about Obama or defending him. I am only concerned with the point that Trump took some minor snippet of fact and turned it into a spectacularly false and reckless allegation. In a way that is “trademark Trump.” With a series of Tweets that we’re as vague as they were inflammatory.
Chuck is like if Bill Kristol had a butt baby with planet of the apes.
the fisa intercept was on carter page, who had an office in trump tower, it was issued three times by McCabe, page and Rosenstein, this was in conjunction with mifsud, halper and other parties
Blogger robother said...
Your answer is more revealing than you imagine, Chuck.
Agreed. I wonder if chuck is a government employee. Maybe, like Patterico, a deputy DA.
I'm still trying to understand the motives of all the NeverTrumpers. Some, like Bill Kristol, are dependent on donors who hate Trump because they were doing well in crony capitalism.
Government employees may just be a tribe.
Some, like George Will are just snobs who think they are setting the standard for conservatives.
Trial lawyers, like one of my kids, just seem to prefer the left.
narciso, I read Fernandez every day. I wish others would.
We are in uncharted waters. The Navy, especially, has to think about strategy. Are those nuclear carriers worth the cost ?
The Air Force has been starved by the uniparty.
Could we win a war ?
At the end of the day I suspect Trump's labeling Hillary as crooked and the chant of lock her up is at the heart of the Obama-Clinton-DNC RussiaGate scandal. At first they helped Trump through their media house organs to get him nominated under the theory no Democrat but Sanders could lose to him. Insurance policy number one. Insurance policy number two was to sabotage Sanders. Insurance policy number three was to generate enough dirt on Trump to stink up the Republicans ability to retain the Congress and thus hinder President "Crooked" Hillary's agenda. When to their shock and horror Trump won, insurance policy number four was to either get him to resign or so weaken him that he wouldn't be able to uncover and lawfully go after these criminals. So far all of these policies haven't paid off. I suspect that come November if there isn't a Blue Wave in Congress then Trump will go after the Democrats all out. The Left and the Democrats will scream like stuck pigs but it won't matter then since the election ( if the Republicans remain in control of Congress) will be a mandate to jail the crooked Democrats. Indeed even Mueller might be in jeopardy. It is starting to look like the Democrats have spent on ton on worthless policies.
Mellifluous is an example of its own definition. That is fairly rare in language from my observation.
well when you know the players on the board, you know the script, so kristol is part of an alliance, with hayden and morell, which is 'deplatforming' any samizdat voice, so they say the same lines, the former's 'assault on our intelligence' which of course leaves out the fact that the Obama administration had investigated him, and he gives the right narrative re admiral rogers,
The big TruCon/NeverTrump objection to the Trump Tower meeting--the one they never stop saying "I can't believe they took the meeting, no one would take that meeting, it's a sure sign of criminal intent and criminality!" about--is that the campaign met with people directly.
Clinton's campaign benefited from plenty of foreign help, you see (extremely well-documented in the form of the Ukrainian hits on Mantafort, but also Steele/Brit. intelligence, etc), but they were nice enough to use an extra layer of cutouts (lawyers, mostly).
It's clearly criminal to do it yourself but when a friendly Media outlet or campaign-affiliated law firm does it for you, well that's just fine. That's the kind of hardcore principles the TruCons want to make sure we know they have (and we ain't).
"Some, like George Will are just snobs who think they are setting the standard for conservatives."
I vividly remember George will saying on The McLaughlin Group that it was absurd to think that the American people are taxed too much. Taxes need to be higher.
This was during the Reagan administration when tax cuts were being proposed.
George has a Ph.D. from the U. of Illinois. His father was a Ph.D professor. I think both were in Political Science (an oxymoron). He really thinks that he is an intellectual.I think his depth of thought is remarkably thin.
the latest boomlet about manafort, doesn't make sense either, of course, they were lobbying in the states, that's why they hired mercury and podesta, baker and skadden, cozzen, and all other tentacles from fusion, now podesta embezzled the money in bad art, and had to shutter his firm, mercury's weber, is like a basenghi, baker doesn't seem to have anybody in Mueller's piñata, even though they hire veselnitskaya, and craig and sloan, seem to have skated clean away,
Francisco D:
"I vividly remember George will saying on The McLaughlin Group that it was absurd to think that the American people are taxed too much. Taxes need to be higher."
This was a theme of his through the 1980s: "America the Undertaxed." He changed his mind after the Bush (41) budget deal, when the Democrats got all the tax increases they wanted, got Bush to break his Read My Lips pledge, and then increased spending. His new position became: More money? For them? No.
I disagreed in the 80s, but his underlying point is still with us: We want more government than we're willing to pay for, year in, year out; in recession and in boom times. Something's going to give.
The problem is that most of the hard, vocal left *trust* Obama with that power. They don't trust Trump with it. They don't see that as a reason *not* to give the government that power; they see it as a reason not to give the government to certain people -- elected or otherwise.
"The idea that Clinton had not intended to break the law is a bad joke."
-- Exactly. If she hadn't intended to be breaking the law, why were people communicating using pseudonyms, and why were Mills and others shocked to find how lax her security was, and why destroy devices with hammers?
No other person would be given so much benefit of the doubt.
"An investigation of anything other than collusion IS illegitimate."
-- Like a cop pulling you over claiming your brake lights were out, finding out they were working, then proceeding to subpoena your bank records anyway.
Re Fernandez' (Belmont Club) article on the coming cold wars. Or hot wars.
The most telling line is "it seemed irresponsible or unlucky to admit things were breaking down even when they manifestly were."
He is speaking about the international strategic situation, but this applies across the board. Nothing about the decline of the US and the "West" is an event, a thing willed by any one person, not even a President, but an impersonal process that may or may not be punctuated by an event that draws specific attention to the process. Barring an event it is psychologically comforting to whistle past the graveyard.
The US and western elite are unwilling to acknowledge the process of degeneration. Among them the degeneration of all US institutions, and even the collapse of the virtues of their people.
Some events will be needed to make the processes clear. Trump was one such event, but not, yet, painful enough to make the elite caste acknowledge their decadence.
“Obama is the one who directed most of this although I have never figured out why he would want Hillary at State”
Call me naive, but I find his claims about being clueless about what was going on around him almost credible. I don’t think that he has ever been that curious, or really that energetic. And not really that bright - I expect that a number here are as good, if not better than he at extemporaneous speaking. What he does well is read a TelePrompTer and maintain a sharp crease. We have talked for the last decade about someone pulling his strings. I think that the obvious answer, at least at the first level is Valerie Jarrett. ValJar apparently first met a young attorney, an angry black woman named Michelle, and hired her. She then met Michelle’s fiancé, a young, well groomed, well spoken, mulatto community organizer, fairly fresh out of Harvard Law School, where he had been president of the law review, without having had to write any articles. Perfect. And everything else was history, with ValJar introducing him to the movers and shakers in Chicago politics, getting their two daughters into the same exclusive schools, then with these introductions, into politics, first at the state level, then at the national level. Political offices were opened up for him all the way up to the US Senate, as well as the speaking gig at the Dem Nat Convention in 2004. And, of course, Jarrett followed him to the White House, and then moved in with the Obamas in their mansion in Georgetown, where they are trying to claim leadership over the Resistance.
One of the things that bothered me about the end of the Obama Administration was that they sold out to Iran so completely, giving them $150B, much in the form of large pallets of cash, without any real curtailment to their nuclear program. And refused to confront their surrogates and allies in Syria. Obama should have been much more sympathetic with the Sunni powers in the Middle East, and Sunni factions in Syria, since he was apparently raised, for awhile, in a moderate Sunni Islam. Instead, his Administration sided with the center of Shi’a Islam - Iran. Then, I discovered that ValJar had been born in Iran of American parents, and was fluent in three languages growing up: English, Farsi, and French. Farsi is the significant one here, because it means that she still very likely had Persians in her life after her family left Iran. Then it hit me - that was most likely Jarrett picking sides, and not Obama. She was the one who picked sophisticated Persia over the dirty Arabs, the Shi’a over the Sunnis. He did what he was told to do, and got the resulting perks. He could live in the big house, golf around the country, using his private jumbo jets and helicopters, hang around with celebrities, and all he had to do was not ask too many questions. And no wonder that she sat in on pretty much every meeting he had - she was the one really making most of the decisions, and pulling Obama’s strings, while he was off having fun. (I am not claiming that others weren’t involved here, just that they very likely operated through Jarrett). The relationship worked well for both of them. He almost had plausible deniability when he claimed to discover scandals, improprieties, and gross lawlessness of his Administration in the papers and on TV. And no one ever asked ValJar when she had first discovered them. No doubt, she very likely knew them from the first, but no one ever thought to ask her, just her “boss”. And when the “scheme team” at the FBI talked about keeping the WH in the loop, about their illegal “insurance policy”, they meant Jarrett, and her minions, and not Obama.
"to concoct situations"
That's what the "investigation" was about from the outset.
”-- Like a cop pulling you over claiming your brake lights were out, finding out they were working, then proceeding to subpoena your bank records anyway.”
Yeah, this is dangerous. Chuck either thinks we should investigate every president as he comes into office just to see if we can find anything or, more likely, he just wants to investigate those he does not like.
Bruce, I agree.
The problem is that most of the hard, vocal left *trust* Obama with that power.
No, see above. They trust the ventriloquist.
The US and western elite are unwilling to acknowledge the process of degeneration. Among them the degeneration of all US institutions, and even the collapse of the virtues of their people.
China may be planning the next lesson. I saw a scenario of a quick digital war with China Some of it may be here.
narciso said...
"the fisa intercept was on carter page, who had an office in trump tower.
Paul Manefort owned a condo apartment in Trump Tower.
Carter Page only had/has an office NEAR Trump Tower.
Global Energy Capital LLC
Management | Carter Page, CFA
590 Madison Avenue, 21st Floor • New York, NY 10022
http://www.globalenergycap.com/management/
Interestingly (if you notice such things) Carter is a CFA (Chartered Financial Analyst). Definitely not a joke credential in the financial world compared to being a garden variety Registered Representative (AKA stockbroker). But almost all the highly paid CFA number crunchers failed to foresee the market crash of 2008.
BTW, Trump tweeted "wiretapped" (with quotation marks), not wiretapped. Meaning surveillance in the broadest sense.
Sort of like what Sharyl Attkisson is complaining about:
Attkisson v. DOJ: The Computer Intrusion Lawsuit against the Federal Govt:
"...I’m frequently asked about the status of my lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Justice over the secret, unlawful intrusions into my computers, exposed in 2013. As my federal case moves slowly through court system, there is a new development: ongoing forensic work of my computer laptop system has revealed a second government Internet Protocol (IP) address used in the illegal cyber-attacks on my computer laptop system.
https://sharylattkisson.com/2017/08/01/new-attkisson-v-doj-the-computer-intrusion-lawsuit-against-the-federal-govt/
Maybe Trump can ask that Attkisson's DOJ FOI requests be expedited instead of slowwalked.
'...Attkisson's computer was famously hacked in 2012 while she was reporting on the Benghazi scandal for CBS - which the journalist captured on video given to Politico in 2014. A cybersecurity firm hired by the network "determined through forensic analysis" that "Attkisson's computer was accessed by an unauthorized, external, unknown party on multiple occasions in late 2012."'
https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-03-01/hacked-ex-cbs-journalist-says-obama-doj-swapped-her-hard-drive-while-inspecting
Buwaya asserts: He is speaking about the international strategic situation, but this applies across the board. Nothing about the decline of the US and the "West" is an event, a thing willed by any one person, not even a President, but an impersonal process that may or may not be punctuated by an event that draws specific attention to the process. Barring an event it is psychologically comforting to whistle past the graveyard.
The US and western elite are unwilling to acknowledge the process of degeneration. Among them the degeneration of all US institutions, and even the collapse of the virtues of their people.
Agree. But would awareness stop, or even slow, our inevitable decline?
When you look at everything that Obama did for the Russians, it makes you wonder about what kind of kompromat that they had on Obama, who was involved with anti war terrorists like Bill Ayers. We all know that the Russians were involved with those groups. Imagine the kompromat that the Russians had on Hillary, with their spies having gotten close to her during the Uranium One thing.
The Democrats are not steaming about "fake news," BTW, they are steaming about true stuff that came from Wikileaks.
"It's a republic, if you can keep it!" - Ben Franklin
The author needs to work in the 35,000 sealed Federal Indictments and the Executive Order of Dec 21, 2017 forfeiting the property of those engaged in serious Human Rights abuses OR corruption and ordering the Sec'y of Treasury to collect their hidden assets from all over the Globe. That would be 60% of the American Political class since Reagan and 80% of the Technology Monopolists.
>>the Special Counsel's office will instead turn up lengthy list of far more mundane -- and also painfully clear -- violations of other federal criminal statutes.
But if they didn't intend to break the law, and were only extremely careless, there will be no charges.
That's the new standard, right, Chuck?
Once our universities were converted into madrassas for leftism, it was all over. The problem comes when you send so many to college, you can no longer maintain the standards nor do you want the hoi polloi to know how stuff actually works, that's all secret.
NR hasn't been this mellifluous since the days of the sesquipedalian and euphonious Mr. Buckley.
Hillary Clinton is "extremely careless," Trump will be "grossly negligent."
I'd bet a year's pay that Sanders won't ever be the Dem presidential nominee.
”But if they didn't intend to break the law, and were only extremely careless, there will be no charges.”
Saw today that the sailor imprisoned for taking a photo in a sub (the one Trump just pardoned) is planning to sue. Good for him.
That’s a big part of the Clintom email whitewash. Different “justice” for different folks.
"You don’t necessarily need the choice of 23 underarm spray deodorants or 18 different pairs of sneakers when children are hungry in this county."
-Bernie Sanders
I'd vote for him if he could explain how having only 12 varieties of deodorant would make children less hungry. Is he proposing eliminating the ones kids don't like to eat?
6/5/18, 10:06 AM
Blogger robother said...
Your answer is more revealing than you imagine, Chuck. You don't accept any evidence from Congressional investigators that any of the Obama Administration actions happened (i.e., these are just Trump "allegations"). Bottom line, you (like Bill Kristol) have no problem with the Deep State taking down Trump by any means necessary, while applying the strictest standards of criminal law to Trump and anyone associated with him.
No; I am focusing on Trump Tweets about “wiretapping” because that is the original allegation (and “allegation” may be glorifying it given the laughably rough form in which Trump blurted it out in his Twitter account) that I first responded to and called bullshit. I am absolutely not giving Trump any credit for anything more specific because he didn’t specify what the hell he was talking about at the time, and hasn’t since.
I am not trying to help or defend anybody in the Obama or Clinton camps. I am attacking Trump for a reckless allegation that he has never backed up.
I hear Chuckles plans on suing his parents because they lied to him about Santa Claus and the Easterbunny.
I chuckle at the boilerplate Professor Hanson inserts that prefaces each essay about "Spygate".
If not for that "disclaimer", it couldn't be published.
”I am absolutely not giving Trump any credit for anything more specific because he didn’t specify what the hell he was talking about at the time, and hasn’t since.”
Yeah, I’m sure he’s really concerned about that.
”I am absolutely not giving Trump any credit for anything more specific because he didn’t specify what the hell he was talking about at the time, and hasn’t since.”
He’s turned out to be correct, and you’re clinging to some legalistic interpretation of “wiretap” that no honest person has any interest in parsing because it’s not worth the time.
Yeah, I’m sure he’s really concerned about that.
I think (and hope, to be honest) that Trump takes some pleasure in the demented-ness of his Chuckian detractors.
"Donald Trump -- and not Elliott Broidy -- paid for a Playboy playmate to keep quite about an abortion after getting her pregnant"
Cuck-a-doodle-doo!
The Markets Work website has published a new article titled "The Strange Flight of George Papadopoulos", written by Jeff Carlson.
The article describes how Papadopoulos flew from Munich to New York City on July 27, 2017, and was arrested without a warrant at the airport.
This flight happened on the same day as the DOJ Inspector General Michael Horowitz formally notified Robert "The FBI Whitewasher" Mueller about Peter Strzok's text messages.
The article suggests that the notification caused the airplane trip.
https://themarketswork.com/2018/06/04/the-strange-flight-of-george-papadopoulos/
Chuck said...
Vance I still say that Obama did not wiretap Trump Tower. Moreover, I ask if Trump wants to continue to claim that Trump Tower was wiretapped in a way that would indicate that Obama was a bad (or sick) person, Trump ought to be very specific.
Two question here. First I thought it was already an accepted fact that the Obama administration had purposefully intercepted communications inside of Trump Tower. What more needs to be proven that Trump Tower was wiretapped? It is an earnest question, and I look forward to your answer.
Chuck said...
But if I were a betting man, I'd say that it is more likely that we will find out that (1) Donald Trump -- and not Elliott Broidy -- paid for a Playboy playmate to keep quite[sic] about an abortion after getting her pregnant, than (2) the Trump campaign was the victim of illegal FBI surveillance.
A) are you a betting man?
B) in order to satisfy the illegal part of "illegal FBI surveillance" do you need a conviction or will an indictment suffice?
"But if I were a betting man, I'd say that "
You would have to be a "man" before you could be a "betting man," you dickless Lifelong Feckless Cunt. Your fellation of the spying by your paramour Obama is obvious, no matter how many times you lie about it.
Your fellation of the spying by your paramour Obama is obvious, no matter how many times you lie about it.
Obama may be a closed-minded caricature totally incapable of understanding - much less explaining - any philosophy other than his own, but there’s no reason to assert that he would consort with a loser like Chuck.
Once again, utterly unexpectedly, LLR Chuck "Chadwick" has his talking points in absolute perfect alignment with the execreble Adam Schiff-ty and the leftists.
LLR Chuck is still asserting Trump wasnt "wiretapped" long after it has been determined that obama and hus Chuck-beloved minions did much much worse.
LOL
There is literally no insane and demonstrably false lefty assertion our #StrongDemDefender wont advance.
Btw, there remains no evidence, none at all, that LLR Chuck voted for Trump.
None.
Nor will there ever be....but likely not for the reasons our Noted Racist Commenter puts forth...
Chuck can be envisioned perfectly as Judge Elihu Smails.
MNGH: "Two question here. First I thought it was already an accepted fact that the Obama administration had purposefully intercepted communications inside of Trump Tower. What more needs to be proven that
Trump Tower was wiretapped?"
Nothing.
Which is why the lefties who are forced to address the issue have already moved on to a "its for your own good" lie.
Mueller is desperate to change the subject given where the real evidence and polls are pointing, hence the hilarious indictment of russian companies and people that dont exist, claiming Pappydappydopolous is an Israeli spy (!), manafort is witness tampering...
LOL
Poor poor Chuck. All his dreams of returning his dem buddies to power are coming up short.
Not even his "brilliant" Maddow can convince anyone!
CHLOROFORM AMPUH DI RIAU
CHLOROPHYLL AMPUH DI RIAU
LIQUID SEX AMPUH DI RIAU
TRIVAM AMPUH DI RIAU
SLEEPING BEAUTY AMPUH DI RIAU
"No; I am focusing on Trump Tweets about “wiretapping” because that is the original allegation (and “allegation” may be glorifying it given the laughably rough form in which Trump blurted it out in his Twitter account) that I first responded to and called bullshit. I am absolutely not giving Trump any credit for anything more specific because he didn’t specify what the hell he was talking about at the time, and hasn’t since. "
-- He meant wiretapping in the obvious, colloquial sense. Pretending he meant Obama literally broke in to tap his wires is deliberate obfuscation.
The fun part of Mueller's Hail Mary indictment is one company decided to say, "come at me, bro."
Chuck reminds Tank of the head nod moment in the Bush Gore debate. "But what about ..."
Matthew Sablan said...
"No; I am focusing on Trump Tweets about “wiretapping” because that is the original allegation (and “allegation” may be glorifying it given the laughably rough form in which Trump blurted it out in his Twitter account) that I first responded to and called bullshit. I am absolutely not giving Trump any credit for anything more specific because he didn’t specify what the hell he was talking about at the time, and hasn’t since. "
-- He meant wiretapping in the obvious, colloquial sense. Pretending he meant Obama literally broke in to tap his wires is deliberate obfuscation.
That is what you say. Trump has never said that. Trump has never bothered with even the most basic explanation as to what he meant.
And no; I am not suggesting anything like Obama "literally broke in to tap his wires." Nothing of the kind. You are usually a pleasant and sensible commenter, Matthew. You should give me the same courtesy.
Did Obama sign off on a FISA warrant? Any other warrant request? What, exactly, was Obama's personal role? I get to press that button, Matthew, because Trump is the guy who personalized it. Trump called Obama a bad (or sick!) guy for the alleged offense. Sick? What is that all about?
Go ahead, Matthew, and be as euphemistic as you want. But the further you get, from Obama having any direct involvement in surveillance of phones in Trump Tower, the further you get into the deranged nature of Trump's Tweets on the subject.
Pretending he meant Obama literally broke in to tap his wires is deliberate obfuscation.
That argument is only meaningful to people with integrity. You have (perhaps mistakenly) addressed it to the integrity-free human measle who posts under the name “Chuck”.
Fabi said...
"Donald Trump -- and not Elliott Broidy -- paid for a Playboy playmate to keep quite about an abortion after getting her pregnant"
Cuck-a-doodle-doo!
This may be the first meaningful use of the word "cuck" that I have seen in print since Trump was elected President of the United States.
Elliott Broidy; Trump's willing, completely corrupt cuckold. Taking the blame, perhaps for a Trump-arranged abortion?
Chuck can be envisioned perfectly as Judge Elihu Smails
Heh. Shorter Chuck: Don't you people have homes?
LLR Chuck "Chadwick" is in full blown obama defense mode now baby!
If you thought LLR Chuck was going to sit around and let any of you disparage his "magnificent" obama without an Adam Schiff Talking Point Powered Defense by our "Bowe Bergdahl republican" then you have another thing coming!!
LOL
It is interesting that the dems and their LLR allies are lining up to create a firewall to protect obama from the clear actions of his own government. Actions that are so serious and consequential there is no way they would be undertaken without obama knowledge and approval.
Which is why LLR Chuck is spinning so furiously now and trying to relitigate previously lost battles, obfuscate like a Schiff-ty-ite demon, and throw out more mud (all the while "Not Speculating" (tm)!).
LLR Chuck and his dem allies know how devastating this can be coming just months before an election where Chucks dem allies have already lost their generic ballot advantage...because they are insane.
Hence the furious and hilarious defense offered up by Chuck.
Good luck Chuckie!! Your dem pals are going to need it!
"Elliott Broidy; Trump's willing, completely corrupt cuckold. Taking the blame, perhaps for a Trump-arranged abortion?"
So fucking what, Chuck?
You can always count on LLR Chuck "Chadwick" to toss out every single rumor (without exception) conjured up in the deepest recesses of the lefty fever swamps.
But only every single one...every single time. Without fail.
But only every single one...every single time. Without fail.
At least he’s not speculating!
Fabi said...
"Elliott Broidy; Trump's willing, completely corrupt cuckold. Taking the blame, perhaps for a Trump-arranged abortion?"
So fucking what, Chuck?
That will be the moment, won't it? Just remembering, when Trump's campaign trashtalk was about how he could shoot somebody in the middle of Fifth Avenue and his base of supporters wouldn't care. The moment when Trump's supporters say, "So fucking what?" to a story that Trump's paying for silence for an abortion, and having gotten another guy to cover for him; that will be such a moment.
Filthy fucking pig. "Hypocrite" doesn't even come close. You'd have to imagine the Fox News Channel's programming for a week if a story broke that Barack Obama had impregnated a Playboy model, and had arranged for a non-disclosure agreement of more than a million dollars with the help of a campaign supporter, who had lied and said the child was his. Think of that.
You don't have to imagine much, Fabi. Remember there was a time when the John Edwards presidential campaign started to try to claim that Rielle Hunter's affair was with the Edwards staffer Andrew Young.
LLR Chuck is reliving his pre-election dream scenarios all over again.
It's like therapy, sad therapy, playing out on the internet.
Attacks on Trumps child cannot be far behind...as it was in the past with Chuckie...
I repeat: so fucking what, Chuck? What are you going to do about it? Lulz
I repeat: so fucking what, Chuck? What are you going to do about it? Lulz
Really? Does Chuck strike you as someone that does anything (other than furied masturbation)?
Calling Obama sick means Trump thinks his actions were immoral or illegal. I think the fact Obama spied on journalists and Congress is "sick."
We now know that using a thin excuse he spied on Trump's campaign. Now if you want to argue the buck doesn't stop with Obama fine. It is a convenient shell game where Republicans are responsible for their staffs and underlings but Democrats aren't. A rather standard double standard.
But what we know is that based on a political smear job they couldn't authenticate and payments from Clinton to known FBI tools like Fusion the government spied on Trump. If Obama didn't know, he should be trying to find out who ordered this. Who used his staff members names to unethically unmask Americans?
*furried
Mind you. I dislike Trump. But to pretend the wire tap tweet is not clear boggles me
Matthew Sablan said...
Mind you. I dislike Trump. But to pretend the wire tap tweet is not clear boggles me
What was Obama's personal role in any surveillance of any member of the Trump campaign? Presidents basically never request, nor do they approve, any requests for DoJ/FBI/CIA wiretaps or other surveillance. That Obama my have done so is an amazing allegation. Or is Trump mot making that allegation. Be very specific in your answer. In doing so -- if you can do so -- you'll be specific in a way that no one in the White House ever has been.
Trump claimed, "...my wires" were wiretapped in Trump Tower. Which wires? Which phones? What does wiretap mean in this context?
What did the surveillance consist of? Recording conversations? Whose conversations? When? Why? Was there a warrant? Or not? Be very, very specific. Do you mean that conversations were recorded? If so, under what circumstances?
Matthew you are suggesting that "the buck stops with Obama." My question is how is the buck even linked to Obama in the first place?
You can try to answer these questions with the benefit of hindsight and months of further investigation. Trump has done nothing to answer them himself, after his Tweets gave rise to this entire kerfuffle.
It was his administration. It is literally his job to prevent abuses. Maybe if he had kept his IGs around instead of firing them, he'd have known sooner. Also. We know he knew since we have the "do it by the book" meeting minutes where Obama told his people to not tell Trump about the investigation.
"What was Obama's personal role in any surveillance of any member of the Trump campaign? Presidents basically never request, nor do they approve, any requests for DoJ/FBI/CIA wiretaps or other surveillance.
Using that logic Chuckles, what I the basis for your accusations of Trump masterminding al kinds of things including the conspiracy to defraud democracy with his vague "Russian Collusion?"
Interesting how you give the benefit of the doubt to Obama, but not Trump.
One would think that you are really a leftist Democrat pretending to be an LLR. Wouldn't they?
This by the way is legalistic parsing designed to throw up sand and ignore the facts. Obama's administration spied on the Trump campaign using what they knew to be bought and paid for Clinton propaganda.
Shorter Chuck: Obama didn't actually climb the telephone pole to "wire tap" Trump Tower so he's not involved. Lulz
Lifelong Feckless Cunt Chuck speculates about Trump ordering Playboy models, then writes several paragraphs demanding detailed specific evidence against his paramour Obama. You know, the one who he never defends.
It would be a major story if Obama was linked to a Playboy playmate, given the tranny beast he is married to.
So what if Trump paid for an abortion? Isn't that the same as paying to support free speech?
They are both, after all, constitutional rights.
”Trump has done nothing to answer them himself, after his Tweets gave rise to this entire kerfuffle.”
There are many possible progenitors to this entire kerfuffle (my money’s on Brennan) but Donald Trump is way down the list.
Fabi said...
Shorter Chuck: Obama didn't actually climb the telephone pole to "wire tap" Trump Tower so he's not involved. Lulz
Shorter Fabi: The DoJ, continuing a years-long investigation into Manafort, obtained a warrant to trace calls made by and to Manafort. Obama wasn't asked about the warrant, Obama didn't ask or suggest that a warrant application be made. Obama didn't approve the warrant. But Obama is still a "bad (or sick)" guy for being the president when the warrant application was made, and the warrant approved by an Article III judge.
Lulz.
I gotta say, however; the theory that Obama "wiretapped" Trump Tower is slightly less fucked up and laughable, than the theory that Obama wasn't really born in Hawaii, and that Trump investigators had turned up some amazing things in that regard.
”So what if Trump paid for an abortion?”
He should have been smart like Clinton and, well, you know ...
You can smell the fear from LLR Chuck and his dem allies.
I wonder why that is....(no I don't....)
LOL
Matthew Sablan: "Mind you. I dislike Trump. But to pretend the wire tap tweet is not clear boggles me"
LLR Chuck is deciding which hills to die on for his beloved obama...and in the end, as expected, LLR Chuck will die on them ALL!
Nothing is too much to ask to get the dems back into power...
Chuck is setting a record for speculation. I suppose he has no clue what's in a PDB. Lulz
These good economic numbers are scaring the piss out of LLR Chuck!!
LOL
Good old Paul Krugman-lovin' Chuck.
Too too funny!
Fabi: "Chuck is setting a record for speculation."
Oh no. You've got it all wrong! Wrong I tell ya!
Why, LLR Chuck himself stated quite clearly that he was "Not Speculating" (tm)!!
In fact, everytime LLR Chuck engages in democrat spin-speculatin', he always says that! That's how you know he means it!
That is, whenever he isn't posting racist things, which, to be honest, happens far too often for my taste. But then again, you know those lefties/libs/LLR's...
Victor Davis Hansen. Where all law professors go to get their bizarre legal and political analysis.
So George Bush was directly responsible for what some privates and sergeants did at Abu Ghraib. Direct line of responsibility, as every single leftist and media outlet told me, with literally more than 30 straight days of above the fold headlines in the New York Times.
And that's the correct use of the word "literally".
But Obama's direct underlings in the Department of Justice, the people who reported directly to him, engaged in spying on Trump, and Chuck claims Obama's got no responsibility at all?
How many administrative levels do you think were between the prison guards who put some underwear on some prisoner's heads at Abu Ghraib and President Bush, and how many administrative levels between Brennan/Comey/Mueller and Obama? Does the latter number even exceed 1?
That Chuck would claim that the link is "absurd" between Obama and his direct underlings is probably the most awesome and complete willful abdication of all possible credibility I've ever read.
Qwinn -- you're misunderestimating Chuck. You ain't seen nothing yet!
Chuck,
We all know you are a Moby.
From your days in Detroit making sure that Democrat turnout was 115% to now.
Is it worth the pay?
I posted this comment in the overnight cafe:
@gadfly said...
VDH is out with a piece entitled "The Scandal on the Other Foot" intended to mimic the Trump/Russian/DOJ/FBI fiasco that began in 2016 and is now into the second year of the Robert Mueller investigation.
In this 2024 version of the 2016 election and afterglow, Trump plays Obama, Pence is the GOP candidate and the Dems put up 84-year-old Bernie Sanders - who worries Trump because Bern wants to do in free-market capitalism - which is just as unbelievable as an octogenarian running for president since free-market is not associated with limiting trade through tariffs.
6/5/18, 2:20 AM
Qwinn: "But Obama's direct underlings in the Department of Justice, the people who reported directly to him, engaged in spying on Trump, and Chuck claims Obama's got no responsibility at all?"
That is precisely what LLR Chuck is claiming, all the while holding Trump accountable for every butterfly that falls in the forest.
Precisely the tactics of every single far left activist and partisan.
Precisely.
But only precisely.
Feel free to draw obvious and inescapable conclusions....
Qwinn: "That Chuck would claim that the link is "absurd" between Obama and his direct underlings is probably the most awesome and complete willful abdication of all possible credibility I've ever read."
But it serves the purposes of his lefty/lib/dem team.
yet another anomaly, they didn't explain,
http://dailycaller.com/2018/06/05/stephen-miller-carter-page-spygate/
Is the Russia deal still a thing? Didn't you guys get the memo?
Howard: "Is the Russia deal still a thing? Didn't you guys get the memo?"
Yes, but it was in cyrillic so, you know, not easy to decipher....
cyrillic schmerillic, just admit the dyslexia
Howard: "cyrillic schmerillic, just admit the dyslexia"
EverN!
Nor will there ever be....but likely not for the reasons our Noted Racist Commenter puts forth...
6/5/18, 3:02 PM
Funny thing is, Roseanne was fired/canceled/obliterated,for less than Chuck has said. Certainly, for no more.
Chuck, fopdoodle extraordinaire, is lying. I hope none of you take that True News too hard.
Hanson's essay is a gem of its genre. Its effectiveness depends on the reasonableness of the comparisons, and for the most part, he plays it straight: The Sessions-meeting-Mrs. Pence-on-the-plane analog for Lynch-meeting-Bubba-on-the-plane isn't a stretch and seems like a pretty fair re-casting of roles.
He couldn't keep it up all the way through, though: What the hell is Mueller doing in this story? And this sentence doesn't remotely resemble Trump's firing of Comey: "In a furor over the conduct of holdovers from the Trump FBI, Sanders finally fires FBI Director Wray." For this to be comparable, Sanders would also have had to have given multiple, mutually inconsistent explanations.
In civil and criminal procedure in the courts, there's a concept known as viewing a record "in the light most favorable" to one side or the other. When a defendant moves to dismiss a plaintiff's civil complaint under Rule 12(b)(6), long before a jury is ever picked, the court is supposed to consider the plaintiffs allegations as being true arguendo, with all credibility decisions or ambiguities resolved in favor of the plaintiff for purposes of argument on that motion — even though later in the case, the plaintiff has the burden of proving his allegations. To excellent rhetorical effect, before he flipped it into the alternative future universe in which Sanders wins in 2024, Hanson has indeed viewed the current situation in the light most favorable to Trump. He's marshaled evidence accordingly, meaning he's ignored a lot of other facts or arguments that are unfavorable to Trump in creating the narrative that he flips.
Still, the first three-fourths of it are pretty powerful, and I commend him for his imagination and energy in constructing this fantasy.
it's short hand beldar, it resembles Clinton dispatching of William sessions, at the time we didn't know how deep comey was part of this resistance movement, like the stay behinds in post war Europe,
Beldar,
As a Trump hater who is now seeing the lies and scandals of Democrats (that you have never supported) revealed, w/rt Trump, are you willing to reconsider every misconception you and your ideological kin built onto those lies?
The NSA 702s were political malfeasance onto the wider Republican field into March 2016. After those were stopped by Admiral Rogers, the FBI/DOJ/CIA developed a different strategy. It was illegal from soup to nuts. The illegality included the FISA court applications.
Do you see the mote in the Left's eye? Or are you too concerned with the splinter in Trump's?
Francisco D said...
Chuck,
We all know you are a Moby.
From your days in Detroit making sure that Democrat turnout was 115% to now.
Is it worth the pay?
You miserable lying sack of shit. The reason that you know that I have been an election day volunteer for the Republican Party in Detroit is because I said so. And I also said that while I volunteered for almost all of the elections between 2000 and 2014, I did not volunteer to help in 2016. So I wasn't in Detroit for election day 2016. And that is the one that you have consistently mischaracterized as somehow representing a big overvote. When in fact the Detroit story was all about what a low-number turnout it was, with Democrats carrying their standard overwhelming majorities.
I have corrected you before on this. You know that I have. And yet you persist with making up stupid shit about me.
You're reflective, Francisco D, of what a nasty downturn these comments pages have taken in the age of Trump.
Chuck, fopdoodle extraordinaire: "...what a nasty downturn these comments pages have taken in the age of Trump."
Quit lying about everything and it will be better. Q.E.D.
It's cool to see so much effort being spent re concocting a story line re the victimization of DJT by law enforcement.
Simultaneously: plenty of jabber re DJT's self-pardon immunity re laws being enforced.
I wonder why?
Foollow up: if you fall for this flimflam what does that say about you?
@ Birkel: I voted for neither Trump nor Clinton, because I thought, and continue to think, them both to be deeply unfit and unworthy of my vote. I am heartily glad she is not the POTUS; I am sorry that Trump is. I am genuinely open-minded as to the Mueller investigation, having not seen its results. I am certain, however, that Trump continues to be his own worst enemy by acting as if he's guilty as hell of something significant, whether he is or isn't. The man whose catch phrase as a reality TV star was "You're fired" turns out to be magnificently incompetent in executing a simple personnel decision, for instance. I am, and have been since long before the election, extremely critical of the Lynch DoJ's handling of the Clinton email investigation, and I hope the IG's investigation results in criminal referrals and convictions for those involved, which should include not only Comey and a couple of others from FBI, but DoJ personnel from EDNY all the way up to and through Lynch.
So no, I haven't reconsidered much of anything. Is that a useful summary? :-)
You're reflective, Francisco D, of what a nasty downturn these comments pages have taken in the age of Trump.
Awwww....
Do you call Rush Limbaugh to tell him that, for the first time in your life, you will vote for a Democrat ?
I think I might have heard your call.
Qwinn said...
So George Bush was directly responsible for what some privates and sergeants did at Abu Ghraib. Direct line of responsibility, as every single leftist and media outlet told me, with literally more than 30 straight days of above the fold headlines in the New York Times.
And that's the correct use of the word "literally".
But Obama's direct underlings in the Department of Justice, the people who reported directly to him, engaged in spying on Trump, and Chuck claims Obama's got no responsibility at all?
How many administrative levels do you think were between the prison guards who put some underwear on some prisoner's heads at Abu Ghraib and President Bush, and how many administrative levels between Brennan/Comey/Mueller and Obama? Does the latter number even exceed 1?
That Chuck would claim that the link is "absurd" between Obama and his direct underlings is probably the most awesome and complete willful abdication of all possible credibility I've ever read.
I never made any argument that President Bush 43 had any responsibility at all, for Abu Ghraib. I would never make such an argument. I'd argue the opposite. That a bunch of rotten, lazy, undisciplined lowlife Guardsmen were responsible for Abu Ghraib. It was not President Bush.
The surveillance of Mueller by the FBI began in 2014, it has been reported. Long before Trump ran for president, before Manafort joined the campaign and before Mueller was brought back into the DoJ as special counsel. I don't know how or why the federal district court or the FISA warrant applications were made, but I know that they were not made by Obama.
I am certain, however, that Trump continues to be his own worst enemy by acting as if he's guilty as hell of something significant, whether he is or isn't.
Yes, we know. And you will vote for the Democrats next election.
In a sentence: I see beams (rather than motes) in the eyes of both Clinton and Trump supporters.
Let's see, we have FBI and DOJ text messages showing actual FBI/DOJ malfeasance. But those are just "story lines" of "victimization" and not quite obvious criminal behavior.
And we have hypotheticals of behavior that has not happened and which has no factual basis. But those FAKE NEWS hypotheticals are supposed to teach us things.
Or ADSS is just full of shit, again. And again.
@ narciso: No one who has a clue about the Rule of Law, the basic difference between a policeman and a prosecutor, should have been in any doubt about whether Comey was a weasel after his August 2016 press conference announcing the non-prosecution of Hillary. Trump kept him on anyway, and that was the first in a long string of mistakes he made with or about James Comey.
"You miserable lying sack of shit.
Actually I am very happy, not miserable. As to lying, that is your province. I have been truthful.
You have been a volunteer election judge and as Sgt. Schultz you saw "Absolutely nothing. Nothing." It doesn't matter which elections you worked. I did not base my remarks on any specific election.
I guess you are trying to say that Detroit elections were only blatantly crooked when you were not working as a judge. LOL!
You are a shameless, pitiful old phony and a fool. I suspect that you are a coward who insults people with vulgarity on the internet because you would otherwise get your ass kicked.
Beldar,
The above reads as a sad statement about your ability to read the available evidence.
You ought to know better but neither I nor anybody else will get you to reconsider the unlawful behavior of the DOJ/FBI/CIA that led you to believe so many of the false things you continue to believe.
I hope you recover your sense. Judge Trump by his policy, as you judged Obama by his.
Foollow up: if you fall for this flimflam what does that say about you?
That we are honest enough to recognize Trump’s many flaws, and objective enough to observe that they do not warrant the abuses of power committed by Team Obama.
@ Birkel: Policies are important. So, too, is character.
Who would have removed him. First they had to get sessions confirmed and that couldnt be done until all the other cabiney officials had been confirmed then yates set off the first booby trap using a partisl leak of what crossfire hurricane had provided.
Post a Comment