Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
jdsample

Scandal, Corruption, Lawbreaking — And So What?

68 posts in this topic

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/456354/fisa-scandal-clinton-obama-corruption-lawbreaking-whats-next-prosecution
 

Quote

The wrongdoing probably includes attempting to warp a U.S. election, Russian collusion, repeatedly misleading and lying before the FISA courts, improperly surveilling American citizens, unmasking the names of citizens swept up in unlawful surveillance and then illegally leaking them to the press, disseminating and authenticating opposition smears during a political campaign, lying under oath to Congress, obstructing ongoing investigations, using federal funds to purchase ad hominem gossip against a presidential candidate, blatant conflicts of interests, weaponizing federal investigations, trafficking in and leaking classified information . . . The list goes on and on.

Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/456354/fisa-scandal-clinton-obama-corruption-lawbreaking-whats-next-prosecution

 

Edited by jdsample

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

<< divert... divert... divert >>

Like an old, deaf dog that doesn't know when to stop barking, the rwnj NationalReview is STILL out to get Hillary.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mueller has indicted 4 Trump associates

Get back to me when you guys an an iota of evidence to suggest your fantasies of Obama’s-Hillary corruption could be true...

Share this post


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

Mueller has indicted 4 Trump associates

Get back to me when you guys an an iota of evidence to suggest your fantasies of Obama’s-Hillary corruption could be true...

Let's see 145 million Russian dollars to the Clinton Foundation while Putin was cornering the market on uranium, 2500 FISA warrants on US citizens many who were then unmasked and leaked.  Read the piece.  The evidence is in plain sight but Sessions doesn't have the balls to prosecute.  

Share this post


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

Let's see 145 million Russian dollars to the Clinton Foundation while Putin was cornering the market on uranium, 2500 FISA warrants on US citizens many who were then unmasked and leaked.  Read the piece.  The evidence is in plain sight but Sessions doesn't have the balls to prosecute.  

- Uranium One is a Dud

- No laws we’re broken with any FISA warrants. You don’t like the law? Then ask Congress to change it

- As much as I dislike Sessions, he has enough respect for the Law to not try to prosecute cases built on mountains of BS

Edited by soulflower

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its really sad. You read half of the first sentence and Uranium One is mentioned, and that is proven to be a joke of a scandal, pathetic, really, and in the meantime, the Russians are gearing up to attack the country's next election, and nothing is being done.

Who will protect the citizens when the one party state benefits from the invasions of a foreign adversary?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, stevez51 said:

Don't get Joy upset ......

Why would I get upset about a right wing attempt to distract from the Russia investigation with a bunch of crazy half-baked bunk?

I think it has been pretty well-established that JD lives in his own little fantasy land.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, soulflower said:

- Uranium One is a Dud

- No laws we’re broken with any FISA warrants. You don’t like the law? Then ask Congress to change it

- As much as I dislike Sessions, he has enough respect for the Law to not try to prosecute cases built on mountains of BS

Its an attempt to distract us from the white House staff who have no security clearance and are actually security threats, some because of their alleged crimes against women, distract us from the Whiter House letting predatory lenders who contribute to their campaign off the hook for their crimes, distract us from the Whiter House-ordered Gestapo-like deportations of productive people who only know America as their home.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, soulflower said:

- Uranium One is a Dud

- No laws we’re broken with any FISA warrants. You don’t like the law? Then ask Congress to change it

- As much as I dislike Sessions, he has enough respect for the Law to not try to prosecute cases built on mountains of BS

Wishful thinking on your part.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You probably want to ask Trump and Sessions why they have chosen not to prosecute. This is so important, I suggest you climb the White House fence and walk directly up to the Oval Office; I hear Trump answers questions posed that way from time to time! :)

Share this post


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

The shocking admission?

 

The President has to ASK them to do their job?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, MiddleOfTheRoad said:

The President has to ASK them to do their job?

the sen asked because it is apparent to anyone paying attention that the POSTUS is not carrying out his responsibilities and following his oath...you know, the inconvenient one that says he will uphold the constitution and defend the nation against all enemies, foreign and domestic. Too much to ask this particular individual.. The country doesn't have a cyber strategy (which was also revealed today). I would expect you to know the POSTUS is supposed to set policy, which will then drive doctrine, policy, budgeting, funding, training, resource allocation, planning, and execution. May be I am expecting too much from you. I guess for the next four years we'll limp along until an adult takes over. Apparently expecting the POSTUS to do his job is asking too much..

Share this post


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

Wishful thinking on your part.  

no, definitely wishful thinking on your part...

can you provide CREDIBLE links that prove the illegal unmasking (don't use anything Nunes did, because it has already been debunked)

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2017/apr/06/tom-cotton/tom-cotton-its-unusual-white-house-officials-susan/

https://www.factcheck.org/2017/03/still-no-evidence-mr-president/

this one might be too nuanced for you   http://www.jacksonville.com/reason/2017-04-23/fact-check-did-susan-rice-leak-intelligence-information

ditto for FISA....I did give you the guide for how the FISC works...didn't read it obviously

and uranium one has been fact checked to death...

https://www.snopes.com/hillary-clinton-uranium-russia-deal/

https://www.factcheck.org/2016/10/a-false-corruption-claim/

https://www.factcheck.org/2015/04/no-veto-power-for-clinton-on-uranium-deal/

 

when you have to resort to restating lies, you've lost the argument and any credibility you might have had...

Share this post


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

the sen asked because it is apparent to anyone paying attention that the POSTUS is not carrying out his responsibilities and following his oath...you know, the inconvenient one that says he will uphold the constitution and defend the nation against all enemies, foreign and domestic. Too much to ask this particular individual.. The country doesn't have a cyber strategy (which was also revealed today). I would expect you to know the POSTUS is supposed to set policy, which will then drive doctrine, policy, budgeting, funding, training, resource allocation, planning, and execution. May be I am expecting too much from you. I guess for the next four years we'll limp along until an adult takes over. Apparently expecting the POSTUS to do his job is asking too much..

Couldn’t have said it better

Share this post


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

the sen asked because it is apparent to anyone paying attention that the POSTUS is not carrying out his responsibilities and following his oath...you know, the inconvenient one that says he will uphold the constitution and defend the nation against all enemies, foreign and domestic. Too much to ask this particular individual.. The country doesn't have a cyber strategy (which was also revealed today). I would expect you to know the POSTUS is supposed to set policy, which will then drive doctrine, policy, budgeting, funding, training, resource allocation, planning, and execution. May be I am expecting too much from you. I guess for the next four years we'll limp along until an adult takes over. Apparently expecting the POSTUS to do his job is asking too much..

The actions of the White House move at the policy and strategy level.  The actions of the Director of the FBI and the Intel Chiefs move at the operational level. While policy and strategy provide critical context, enforcing existing law and investigating suspected violations of current law need no grand explanation of policy and no discussion of strategy- their daily operational task is to enforce the law.

Now, should this WH have a cyber policy?  Of course they should, but they don’t have any other policy, why would you expect this to be any different?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, MiddleOfTheRoad said:

The actions of the White House move at the policy and strategy level.  The actions of the Director of the FBI and the Intel Chiefs move at the operational level. While policy and strategy provide critical context, enforcing existing law and investigating suspected violations of current law need no grand explanation of policy and no discussion of strategy- their daily operational task is to enforce the law.

Now, should this WH have a cyber policy?  Of course they should, but they don’t have any other policy, why would you expect this to be any different?

The current laws aren't the problem. It is the POSTUS refusal to acknowledge interference in the elections. The FBI and IC are continuing to do what they've always done. That is part of the problem, the doctrine they are being asked to execute is not sufficient for the problem. Also missing is the investment in new tools and techniques. However, because the POSTUS won't admit the truth, the other actions needed to fend this off like diplomacy and further sanctions isn't being done. This would be the policy and strategy piece he has no intention of formulating.

If you didn't watch the entire hearing, you should go back and watch it. The 8 guys at the table put the reality out there in very stark terms.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, jdsample said:

 2500 FISA warrants on US citizens many who were then unmasked and leaked.  

Flat out, unadulterated bull ca ca

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

5 hours ago, jdsample said:

Let’s suppose the allegations contained in this article are true.

Clinton saw all the Russian money flowing into her foundation and figured out a way to get all 14 other governmental officials involved to approve the uranium deal. How do you prove that? How can you prove that legal donations to a politician directly resulted in concrete actions? Wouldn’t that basically be an indictment of our entire campaign finance system?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Jimmy Jazz said:

 

Let’s suppose the allegations contained in this article are true.

Clinton saw all the Russian money flowing into her foundation and figured out a way to get all 14 other governmental officials involved to approve the uranium deal. How do you prove that? How can you prove that legal donations to a politician directly resulted in concrete actions? Wouldn’t that basically be an indictment of our entire campaign finance system?

Not to 'approve', to rot recommend against the deal

Edited by JoyinMudville

Share this post


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

The current laws aren't the problem. It is the POSTUS refusal to acknowledge interference in the elections. The FBI and IC are continuing to do what they've always done. That is part of the problem, the doctrine they are being asked to execute is not sufficient for the problem. Also missing is the investment in new tools and techniques. However, because the POSTUS won't admit the truth, the other actions needed to fend this off like diplomacy and further sanctions isn't being done. This would be the policy and strategy piece he has no intention of formulating.

If you didn't watch the entire hearing, you should go back and watch it. The 8 guys at the table put the reality out there in very stark terms.

The DOJ overall took the smallest budget cut of any of the executive departments in 2019 and the FBI proposal was for a 2.4% increase - and that’s before Congress adds their markups.  So much for not investing in new tools.  The 2018 budget, still operating at 2017 levels, is hung up in a battle between those who want to ignore violations of immigration law and those who foolishly think a wall will stop future violations.  New procedures are an operational task, the responsibility of the FBI and it’s professionals, not the doofuses that have been in the WH for the last two decades.

The President not admitting that Russia interfered in our election is an excuse, and not a reason for any failure to prevent future interference.  The interaction with Russia is not going to change until Mueller does something more than prosecute bit players for acts not associated with the election, so those tasked with the responsibility need to get on with it.

Trump is not going to announce a “prevent intrusion” strategy because he has no clue what that means and is too arrogant to learn.  In the absence of specific guidance, professionals take the reasonable course grounded in their experience, knowledge and legal limits.  If Wray and the IC leaders can’t do that, they should punch out and let someone who can do it have their job.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The OP's source, the National Review was founded by William F. Buckley Jr. in 1955. It has sadly morphed into a mouth piece for the right wing nuts that currently control the GOP.

If Buckley were alive today, he would be mortified by American politics. Especially the modern day "conservative" doctrine. There is nothing conservative about the Republicans of the current age.

I remember watching "Firing Line", a show that ran for 30 some years, if I remember correctly. Buckley was an intellectual whose thoughts were steeped in political history, and especially the facts of that history. Unlike most politicians today, who are little more than carnival barkers, Buckley was armed with reasonable arguments. Liberals didn't like his arguments, naturally, and I didn't always agree with him, but his arguments were sensible and his convictions were admirable.

So, to make a short story long, I have one question for the fans of Donald Trump.

If he and his former campaign and current administration are so innocent, why is he doing everything he can to stifle the various investigations?  

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