Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
mrdeltoid

Joe Scarborough speechless!!

79 posts in this topic

Jonathan Turley appeared on Anderson Cooper 360 last night night. He spoke about the raid on Manaforts home, and spoke in what seemed negative terms concerning Manafort. Here it is:

Mediaite · 10 hours ago

  So this morning Joe Scarborough tossed a softball to him asking about the pre dawn raid. He was stunned when Turley said I think there are too many people thrilled about somebody associated with Trump being raided in such a manner. He said, and I'm paraphrasing, he didn't think the no knock warrant was necessary. He said "What did they think? Did they think he was going to flush a laptop down the toilet? These raids are for dangerous drug dealers." There was about 30 seconds of dead silence, which felt like 30 minutes. Then Mike Barnacle took over trying to say they feared loosing valuable evidence. Turley didn't back off a bit. He said "What were they thinking Mike? That he was going to start swallowing thumb drives and answer the door with a Glock?" He continued that it was totally inappropriate for white collar crime. Two other MSNBC lackys took shots at him but no luck. They obviously thought he was going to affirm that oh yes, this is definitely a bombshell for the Trump crime family. I hope there is a clip of it somewhere. It was hilarious!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, mrdeltoid said:

Jonathan Turley appeared on Anderson Cooper 360 last night night. He spoke about the raid on Manaforts home, and spoke in what seemed negative terms concerning Manafort. Here it is:

Mediaite · 10 hours ago

  So this morning Joe Scarborough tossed a softball to him asking about the pre dawn raid. He was stunned when Turley said I think there are too many people thrilled about somebody associated with Trump being raided in such a manner. He said, and I'm paraphrasing, he didn't think the no knock warrant was necessary. He said "What did they think? Did they think he was going to flush a laptop down the toilet? These raids are for dangerous drug dealers." There was about 30 seconds of dead silence, which felt like 30 minutes. Then Mike Barnacle took over trying to say they feared loosing valuable evidence. Turley didn't back off a bit. He said "What were they thinking Mike? That he was going to start swallowing thumb drives and answer the door with a Glock?" He continued that it was totally inappropriate for white collar crime. Two other MSNBC lackys took shots at him but no luck. They obviously thought he was going to affirm that oh yes, this is definitely a bombshell for the Trump crime family. I hope there is a clip of it somewhere. It was hilarious!

So this guy has been caught in lies. Was an unregistered agent of a foreign govt and involved in money laundering, while at the heart of a Presidential campaign.

But he would be above destroying evidence?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

10 minutes ago, ms maggie said:

So this guy has been caught in lies. Was an unregistered agent of a foreign govt and involved in money laundering, while at the heart of a Presidential campaign.

But he would be above destroying evidence?

of course he would......his level of dishonesty wouldn't go that far, after all he is a repugnican and respecting the rule of law is something they preach...you know that personal accountability they preach but don't practice.....a no-knock raid is appropriate in this case....he hasn't surrendered his passport and he is under no travel restrictions.....hopefully they seized his passports,,,

Edited by can you hear me now!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, can you hear me now! said:

of course he would......his level of dishonesty wouldn't go that far, after all he is a repugnican and respecting the rule of law is something they preach...you know that personal accountability they preach but don't practice.....a no-knock raid is appropriate in this case....he hasn't surrendered his passport and he is under no travel restrictions.....hopefully they seized his passports,,,

People seem to think white collar criminals aren't really criminals, when in fact they're often sociopaths.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, ms maggie said:

People seem to think white collar criminals aren't really criminals, when in fact they're often sociopaths.

yes they are.....especially the lack of conscience....that lack of conscience manifests itself everyday on the right....he fits perfectly in the "everything for me" category.....I can see why trump picked him as a campaign manager for 5 months...a very "minor" role according to those paid to lie for a living....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Of course he's hiding something . That's obvious .  That's not really what I was laughing about. It's funny when pundits set up a situation and the response is the opposite of what they expected. It doesn't read as comical as it sounded. I wonder if there's any way to retrieve that segment ? I couldn't find it on you tube. The way he said stuff was just so funny . He's a big civil rights guy and believe these no knock warrants are being abused over the last few years. His point is why does it have to be no knock? If you knock and he doesn't answer then they can take the door down. When you think about it, he already testified. If he thought he had evidence that would hurt him, he already got rid of it. I don't know, when he said flush laptops down the toilet and swallowing thumb drives, the picture in my mind was just funny. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, can you hear me now! said:

of course he would......his level of dishonesty wouldn't go that far, after all he is a repugnican and respecting the rule of law is something they preach...you know that personal accountability they preach but don't practice.....a no-knock raid is appropriate in this case....he hasn't surrendered his passport and he is under no travel restrictions.....hopefully they seized his passports,,,

So if they knocked first, what? I mean he isn't gonna jump out the window, run to a jet and fly to Brazil . After all it was 5AM

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, mrdeltoid said:

So if they knocked first, what? I mean he isn't gonna jump out the window, run to a jet and fly to Brazil . After all it was 5AM

having been involved in a no-knock raid (not by choice), the purpose is to make sure nothing gets disturbed before entry. It is all about surprise. Trust me I was surprised, but not quite as much as the subject of the search warrant. Can't pick your family is the moral of that story.

Someone had reason to believe this was necessary and had to testify to a judge to obtain such a warrant. Obviously he'd be under surveillance for quite sometime. That probably included electronic surveillance. If/when the search warrant is made public (after any trials) all the answers will be contained in the search warrant. It is very unusual for a "white collar" criminal case....but this particular case is unusual in itself. This is the first presidential campaign with foreign entanglements, through business and association. And the only time where the agent of a foreign power had a seat on the National Security Council. There is a lot of concern regarding national security as you have a counter-intelligence and a criminal investigation going on simultaneously

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, can you hear me now! said:

of course he would......his level of dishonesty wouldn't go that far, after all he is a repugnican and respecting the rule of law is something they preach...you know that personal accountability they preach but don't practice.....a no-knock raid is appropriate in this case....he hasn't surrendered his passport and he is under no travel restrictions.....hopefully they seized his passports,,,

I wonder if he used Bleach Bit and destroyed a bunch of Blackberrys with hammers.  Oh wait.....:lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, mrdeltoid said:

Jonathan Turley appeared on Anderson Cooper 360 last night night. He spoke about the raid on Manaforts home, and spoke in what seemed negative terms concerning Manafort. Here it is:

Mediaite · 10 hours ago

  So this morning Joe Scarborough tossed a softball to him asking about the pre dawn raid. He was stunned when Turley said I think there are too many people thrilled about somebody associated with Trump being raided in such a manner. He said, and I'm paraphrasing, he didn't think the no knock warrant was necessary. He said "What did they think? Did they think he was going to flush a laptop down the toilet? These raids are for dangerous drug dealers." There was about 30 seconds of dead silence, which felt like 30 minutes. Then Mike Barnacle took over trying to say they feared loosing valuable evidence. Turley didn't back off a bit. He said "What were they thinking Mike? That he was going to start swallowing thumb drives and answer the door with a Glock?" He continued that it was totally inappropriate for white collar crime. Two other MSNBC lackys took shots at him but no luck. They obviously thought he was going to affirm that oh yes, this is definitely a bombshell for the Trump crime family. I hope there is a clip of it somewhere. It was hilarious!

Yeah.  They hate it when someone unexpectedly goes off-script.  :P

It's as funny as those posters who always come up with some kind of anecdote and claim that they've been in a similar situation to try and create some kind of credibility out of a completely different and unrelated scenario.  :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, veritas said:

I wonder if he used Bleach Bit and destroyed a bunch of Blackberrys with hammers.  Oh wait.....:lol:

right on cue, the but Hillary deflection......stale, old, and lacks imagination, but when all you can do is defend your hero by traveling back in time, desperation is high and grasp of reality is low.....

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, veritas said:

I wonder if he used Bleach Bit and destroyed a bunch of Blackberrys with hammers.  Oh wait.....:lol:

:P:P 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Ode2Joy said:

Yeah.  They hate it when someone unexpectedly goes off-script.  :P

It's as funny as those posters who always come up with some kind of anecdote and claim that they've been in a similar situation to try and create some kind of credibility out of a completely different and unrelated scenario.  :D

well not all of us live under our mommy's apron......you are the last person to question anyone's credibility.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, can you hear me now! said:

right on cue, the but Hillary deflection......stale, old, and lacks imagination, but when all you can do is defend your hero by traveling back in time, desperation is high and grasp of reality is low.....

 

Yet you defending your heroine is perfectly legitimate, of course.  When the raid on Manafort turns up something, let me know.  My grasp of reality is fine.  I'm not the one imagining international intrigue on a grand scale.  Next thing you know, you'll be talking about SPECTRE.:lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Scarborough speechless is a good start. Now how about the rest of the cable tv pundits join him?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, ms maggie said:

So this guy has been caught in lies. Was an unregistered agent of a foreign govt and involved in money laundering, while at the heart of a Presidential campaign.

But he would be above destroying evidence?

What he is saying, and I know some people hate hearing it, is that he is white and not some "common" street thug who should be treated with dignity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, can you hear me now! said:

having been involved in a no-knock raid (not by choice), the purpose is to make sure nothing gets disturbed before entry. It is all about surprise. Trust me I was surprised, but not quite as much as the subject of the search warrant. Can't pick your family is the moral of that story.

Someone had reason to believe this was necessary and had to testify to a judge to obtain such a warrant. Obviously he'd be under surveillance for quite sometime. That probably included electronic surveillance. If/when the search warrant is made public (after any trials) all the answers will be contained in the search warrant. It is very unusual for a "white collar" criminal case....but this particular case is unusual in itself. This is the first presidential campaign with foreign entanglements, through business and association. And the only time where the agent of a foreign power had a seat on the National Security Council. There is a lot of concern regarding national security as you have a counter-intelligence and a criminal investigation going on simultaneously

You definitely are more familiar with this stuff than me that's for sure. I didn't realize the threat from Manafort was that high. I hope they throw all the power we got at him. I have ZERO TOLERANCE for traitors of any stripe. That aside, I promise you , if you get a chance to hear or see that Turley interview, you will get a chuckle or three. BTW your insight on the spook world is appreciated. It's informative.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, veritas said:

Yet you defending your heroine is perfectly legitimate, of course.  When the raid on Manafort turns up something, let me know.  My grasp of reality is fine.  I'm not the one imagining international intrigue on a grand scale.  Next thing you know, you'll be talking about SPECTRE.:lol:

I'll be sure to let you know.....defending the system son, maybe you ought to try it....

it's not imaginary....you'll have to explain my Manafort and Flynn were made to register as agents of a foreign power.....retroactively....not to mention ignoring the FBI about Flynn being subject to blackmailing....see those are real issue that involve foreigners and foreign governments...you've been in denial so long reality is out of your grasp....good day....we're done...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, mrdeltoid said:

You definitely are more familiar with this stuff than me that's for sure. I didn't realize the threat from Manafort was that high. I hope they throw all the power we got at him. I have ZERO TOLERANCE for traitors of any stripe. That aside, I promise you , if you get a chance to hear or see that Turley interview, you will get a chuckle or three. BTW your insight on the spook world is appreciated. It's informative.

appreciate the civility. I will have to find the interview and watch it.....

I have zero tolerance as well for traitors...they deserve no more than a last meal and a bullet.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, can you hear me now! said:

I'll be sure to let you know.....defending the system son, maybe you ought to try it....

it's not imaginary....you'll have to explain my Manafort and Flynn were made to register as agents of a foreign power.....retroactively....not to mention ignoring the FBI about Flynn being subject to blackmailing....see those are real issue that involve foreigners and foreign governments...you've been in denial so long reality is out of your grasp....good day....we're done...

Manafort and Flynn may have improperly failed to reveal their connections.  That doesn't equate to some nefarious international plot to collude with the Russians in getting Trump elected.  When proof of same is presented, if it ever is, we can talk about it.  That's the reality at this point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

1 hour ago, veritas said:

I wonder if he used Bleach Bit and destroyed a bunch of Blackberrys with hammers.  Oh wait.....:lol:

Bunch?  No. 2  (So Trumpian, inflate inflate!)  Which btw is SOP for old cell phones by the DOS.

Read for yourself:

In December 2014, Clinton gave the State Department 30,490 work-related emails that she sent or received while secretary of state. There were another 30,000 emails or so that were deemed personal by Clinton. Those were not turned over to the department.

An outside contractor for Platte River Networks wiped Clinton’s computer hard drive of all emails sometime between March 25 and March 31, 2015, according to the FBI. PRN used a free software program called BleachBit to delete the emails. That’s what Trump means when he says the emails were “bleached.” (Other times he has said that Clinton “used chemicals” to “acid wash or bleach” her emails. See our story, “Trump, Pence ‘Acid Wash’ Facts.”)

During the campaign, Trump accused Clinton of destroying work-related emails that should have been turned over to the State Department. His tweet makes the same insinuation. But FBI investigators found no evidence of obstruction.

During its investigation, the FBI recovered nearly 15,000 deleted emails that were not part of the 30,490 work-related emails that Clinton gave to the department. About 5,600 of the 15,000 emails that were forensically recovered by the FBI were work-related, but a “substantial number” of them were near duplicates of emails that were already released to the public.

More important, Comey said the FBI “found no evidence that any of the additional work-related emails were intentionally deleted in an effort to conceal them.” At his July 5, 2016, press conference, where he announced that he would recommend no charges against Clinton, Comey said “like many e-mail users, Secretary Clinton periodically deleted e-mails or e-mails were purged from the system when devices were changed.”

The department’s policy allows its employees to determine which emails are work-related and must be preserved. “Messages that are not records may be deleted when no longer needed,” according to the State Department’s Foreign Affairs Manual.

Clinton also did not personally destroy any of her phones. A Clinton aide told the FBI (on page 9 of the FBI notes of its investigation) that he destroyed two of Clinton’s mobile phones by breaking them in half or hitting them with a hammer. But there’s no evidence that she directed him to do it, or that there was anything nefarious in doing so.

Clinton did not have State Department-issued mobile devices, but if she did the department would have required the destruction of data, according to the technology website Wired.

The technology website Wired said “if Clinton had been using State-issued devices, they would have gone through a similar, if more standardized, process of data deletion.

Edited by ms maggie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, ms maggie said:

Bunch?  No. 2  (So Trumpian, inflate inflate!)  Which btw is SOP for old cell phones by the DOS.

Read for yourself:

In December 2014, Clinton gave the State Department 30,490 work-related emails that she sent or received while secretary of state. There were another 30,000 emails or so that were deemed personal by Clinton. Those were not turned over to the department.

An outside contractor for Platte River Networks wiped Clinton’s computer hard drive of all emails sometime between March 25 and March 31, 2015, according to the FBI. PRN used a free software program called BleachBit to delete the emails. That’s what Trump means when he says the emails were “bleached.” (Other times he has said that Clinton “used chemicals” to “acid wash or bleach” her emails. See our story, “Trump, Pence ‘Acid Wash’ Facts.”)

During the campaign, Trump accused Clinton of destroying work-related emails that should have been turned over to the State Department. His tweet makes the same insinuation. But FBI investigators found no evidence of obstruction.

During its investigation, the FBI recovered nearly 15,000 deleted emails that were not part of the 30,490 work-related emails that Clinton gave to the department. About 5,600 of the 15,000 emails that were forensically recovered by the FBI were work-related, but a “substantial number” of them were near duplicates of emails that were already released to the public.

More important, Comey said the FBI “found no evidence that any of the additional work-related emails were intentionally deleted in an effort to conceal them.” At his July 5, 2016, press conference, where he announced that he would recommend no charges against Clinton, Comey said “like many e-mail users, Secretary Clinton periodically deleted e-mails or e-mails were purged from the system when devices were changed.”

The department’s policy allows its employees to determine which emails are work-related and must be preserved. “Messages that are not records may be deleted when no longer needed,” according to the State Department’s Foreign Affairs Manual.

Clinton also did not personally destroy any of her phones. A Clinton aide told the FBI (on page 9 of the FBI notes of its investigation) that he destroyed two of Clinton’s mobile phones by breaking them in half or hitting them with a hammer. But there’s no evidence that she directed him to do it, or that there was anything nefarious in doing so.

Clinton did not have State Department-issued mobile devices, but if she did the department would have required the destruction of data, according to the technology website Wired.

The technology website Wired said “if Clinton had been using State-issued devices, they would have gone through a similar, if more standardized, process of data deletion.

I'm not going to rehash the whole email mess again.  The point is that EVERYTHING on her server was government property, not her property and she had no right to delete anything whatsoever.  It all should have been turned over to the DOS to review and decide what was pertinent or classified and what wasn't.  That wasn't her call, yet she made it anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, veritas said:

I'm not going to rehash the whole email mess again.  The point is that EVERYTHING on her server was government property, not her property and she had no right to delete anything whatsoever.  It all should have been turned over to the DOS to review and decide what was pertinent or classified and what wasn't.  That wasn't her call, yet she made it anyway.

Personal messages on a personal computer are not govt property. And you're allowed to delete them. 

You're not going to rehash it again?  Who brought it up?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, ms maggie said:

Personal messages on a personal computer are not govt property. And you're allowed to delete them. 

You're not going to rehash it again?  Who brought it up?

hint....that creature will never sing.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, ms maggie said:

Personal messages on a personal computer are not govt property. And you're allowed to delete them. 

You're not going to rehash it again?  Who brought it up?

She conducted government business through that computer so the government decides what is theirs, not Hillary Clinton.  I'm not sure why this would be difficult to figure out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0