Paul Brancato Posted May 3, 2019 Share Posted May 3, 2019 19 hours ago, Michael Clark said: That would be us, here at the EF, the JFKA conspiracy community. Trump could, and would, I think (if he had enough support) bust all of this crap wide open. I remember him saying, and it struck me as the most candid, uncharacteristic, and probably painful thing I ever heard him say... ( to be sure, I only read this, as a quote) “I have no choice” when he had to delay the comtinued release of JFKA documents, and accept that releases in redected form. I joined this forum after his election and prior to his inauguration. I haven’t changed how I feel about him, nor have I changed what he could do for us. We, however, due to our contempt and anger at the results of the election (and I am less angry due to my fears of dynastic power) cannot see that he is OUR only possible ally. Trump is no conservative, he doesn’t even think in such terms. He is a moral, fiscal and social liberal. How many of his children for whom do you think has has payed for the abortion? He wants to be loved and adored by crowds. There is no conservative principle guiding him or his followers. His base just hates Hillary, hippies and wants to justify their own existence by affirming the life they have lived which was shaped by Howard Stern. The shameful and disgusting mantra, which is affirmed and lauded by Trump and Stern, “FHRITP”, “I can get away with grabbing.....” (or whateve he said) is a reflection of a generation of men who are absolved by Trump, and can never and never will look at themselves and say “ugh, I was wrong. I was disgusting. I need to change”. Our culture has sunk very low, and just because Trump is a Republican does not mean that he is a Conservative; in fact, that is absurd to think that way. All these terms have been thrown on their heads. Those who have disgust for Trump are the conservatives. Those who feel shame for the plight of women are conservatives. The “me too” movement is conservative. Revolution is painful. We are in the midst of a revolution of pardimgms, language, words, terminology and nomenclature. Trump is a liberal, but he is not Hillary, that is what got him elected. Labels, as you have pointed out to me, are dangerous. But calling Trump a liberal because he would pay for a family member’s abortion is very revealing. And it leads me to espouse a different way of looking at the “power elite”. They are not anti-abortion, or pro gun, or white nationalist. They just use issues to divide us and create a ruling coalition so they can go about their business. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stephanie Goldberg Posted May 3, 2019 Share Posted May 3, 2019 8 hours ago, Douglas Caddy said: The U.S. Supreme Court in Jurney v. MacCracken created the precedent under which Attorney General Barr can be held in contempt of Congress and arrested for failure to deliver to Congress the full and unredacted Mueller Report. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jurney_v._MacCracken I like the fact that there is still the theoretical possibility of holding the AG in contempt of Congress. Normal people would have already been held in contempt of Congress. And PS - I like the new photo that you posted in the thread. I never would have guessed from it that you're as old as you say you are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Bauer Posted May 4, 2019 Share Posted May 4, 2019 (edited) The Democrats are too divided for any actual implementation of seriously aggressive legal action against the Trump bullying machine to actually take place. Pelosi is pretending she's as outraged and justice seeking as most of her fellow Democratic members, but when pressed to actually approve and carry out some of these actions she pulls back and uses her leadership power to prevent them. That is a real split in this battle between Democrats who are finally saying "enough is enough" ( the majority ) and calling for Congress to be as aggressive as Trump and his minions in telling Trump, you are not going to diminish our authority in the constitutional "balance of power" between the three branches anymore than you already have. Pelosi and her supporters still don't feel it is important enough to start issuing contempt of Congress citations to all of Trump's people he is telling to ignore Congress with a real scenario of physical arrests. My view is that it is beyond time Congress did this. I have never seen Congress and their balance of power disrespected, diminished and ignored and even assaulted like I have seen with the Trump machine in this endeavor. Trump is reducing our Congress to an emasculated government body. A powerless band of wimps who complain a lot but who can be mockingly ignored, stepped on, stepped over and even made fun of. It is really sad and even pathetic to see bullied victims ( our Congress ) continually allowing themselves to be bitch slapped bullied and not realize that these particular bullies will not stop unless they are stood up to in a way that bullies understand as having some guts. Edited May 4, 2019 by Joe Bauer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Ness Posted May 4, 2019 Share Posted May 4, 2019 10 minutes ago, Robert Wheeler said: Mifsud, the “Russian Agent”, was an FBI informant who never actually worked for any Russian intelligence service. Source please (originating). I'm thinking he's on some sort of roster of Russian Spies listed alphabetically in Italian and English as well as Russian just so we can keep all the GRU, FSB etc etc assets sorted out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James DiEugenio Posted May 4, 2019 Share Posted May 4, 2019 Bob, this is not in Italian, but you may have to get behind a pay wall to read it. https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/02/us/politics/fbi-government-investigator-trump.html?action=click&module=Top Stories&pgtype=Homepage The NY times just confirmed what you were dissing about Mr. P. The girl was an undercover FBI informant working for Stefan Halper, who himself was a longtime FBI asset. (See The Intercept.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ron Bulman Posted May 4, 2019 Share Posted May 4, 2019 4 hours ago, Paul Brancato said: Labels, as you have pointed out to me, are dangerous. But calling Trump a liberal because he would pay for a family member’s abortion is very revealing. And it leads me to espouse a different way of looking at the “power elite”. They are not anti-abortion, or pro gun, or white nationalist. They just use issues to divide us and create a ruling coalition so they can go about their business. Well said Paul. imho. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Bauer Posted May 4, 2019 Share Posted May 4, 2019 1 hour ago, Ron Bulman said: Well said Paul. imho. Actions with one main interest over all others. Increasing their personal wealth. And it's never enough. Billions more desired upon billions they may already possess. It's greed in all it's manifestations. Never ending greed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Ness Posted May 4, 2019 Share Posted May 4, 2019 3 hours ago, James DiEugenio said: Bob, this is not in Italian, but you may have to get behind a pay wall to read it. https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/02/us/politics/fbi-government-investigator-trump.html?action=click&module=Top Stories&pgtype=Homepage The NY times just confirmed what you were dissing about Mr. P. The girl was an undercover FBI informant working for Stefan Halper, who himself was a longtime FBI asset. (See The Intercept.) Jim, I'm aware of the story. This isn't anything unusual. When the FBI performs an investigation, particularly a startling one such as an investigation into the possible collaboration or conspiracy of a US Presidential hopeful reportedly seeking or accepting the assistance of an adversarial government to win an election, they will engage agents or assets to try to determine what is going on. Said assets have to be able to be called to give testimony in court or give detailed information in the form of a sworn statement for furthering the investigation. When the Hell's Angels were being investigated in the 70's the FBI had paid informants that joined them, did drugs, violent acts, the whole nine yards because the nature of the group was such that the inside informants had to be credible to the people they were investigating. Couldn't get the Boy Scouts or LDS in to that group! Huge surprise!! Whether you or anyone else like it or not, the Russians were engaging in hostile activities toward us and the FBI was alerted and followed up with an investigation. It's been proven, over and over again, that the people who were investigated and charged were either convicted in court or plead guilty did so because they were guilty. Not once, even a tinsy bit, have you or anyone else here on the forum (particularly the obvious Trumpsters) ever questioned the "defense agreements" Trump engaged in, the fruits thereof or the obvious implications of them and called them into question! That's astounding to me because any fly speck of suspicion is raised by the usual suspects here and blown into a ridiculous family tree (literally) of conspirators based on who their great Aunt Edna boinked in Duluth 70 years ago. I'm just so glad now that we have a President that doesn't have to abide by even basic laws such as responding to a subpoena and thanks to the AG is immune to prosecution or Congressional oversight. I'm so proud to have a King. How long do you think it will take for him to rid the land of the two term limit? Putin was able to, why not Trump? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Ness Posted May 4, 2019 Share Posted May 4, 2019 (edited) 3 hours ago, Robert Wheeler said: Google it yourself next week when one of your trusted mainstream media publications reluctantly decide to run the story. You wouldn’t trust any source I post anyway because it does not conform to your worldview. Post your list of Russian Spies in the meantime. Mueller and myself, for different reasons, would like to see at least one. The point is Robert that Italian "reports" are often like grocery store check out headlines. If you're posting something that states "such and such" why don't you say who? Is it not credible? Why the redirect? Italian (or any) journalists can't confirm Russian intelligence assets any more than you or I. I know! Maybe we can see the UNREDACTED MUELLER REPORT!! Edited May 4, 2019 by Bob Ness Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Carter Posted May 4, 2019 Share Posted May 4, 2019 12 hours ago, Bob Ness said: Whether you or anyone else like it or not, the Russians were engaging in hostile activities toward us and the FBI was alerted and followed up with an investigation. It's been proven, over and over again, that the people who were investigated and charged were either convicted in court or plead guilty did so because they were guilty. The allegations that Russian intelligence agents “hacked” the DNC and conspired with Wikileaks have not been proven, in part because the FBI did not conduct a proper forensic examination. Otherwise, all of the events which came to the attention of the FBI were in fact initiated by persons connected to the FBI or Fusion GPS which was handling the opposition research. Papadopoulos, for example, pled guilty to “lying” to the FBI by insufficiently describing the fake credentials of the FBI’s own informant (Mifsud). No one has pled guilty to being involved in any conspiracy involving Russians or the Trump campaign. The developing record instead shows that all the basic tenets of "Russiagate" were conjured as part of the opposition research effort. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Douglas Caddy Posted May 4, 2019 Author Share Posted May 4, 2019 19 hours ago, Joe Bauer said: The Democrats are too divided for any actual implementation of seriously aggressive legal action against the Trump bullying machine to actually take place. Pelosi is pretending she's as outraged and justice seeking as most of her fellow Democratic members, but when pressed to actually approve and carry out some of these actions she pulls back and uses her leadership power to prevent them. That is a real split in this battle between Democrats who are finally saying "enough is enough" ( the majority ) and calling for Congress to be as aggressive as Trump and his minions in telling Trump, you are not going to diminish our authority in the constitutional "balance of power" between the three branches anymore than you already have. Pelosi and her supporters still don't feel it is important enough to start issuing contempt of Congress citations to all of Trump's people he is telling to ignore Congress with a real scenario of physical arrests. My view is that it is beyond time Congress did this. I have never seen Congress and their balance of power disrespected, diminished and ignored and even assaulted like I have seen with the Trump machine in this endeavor. Trump is reducing our Congress to an emasculated government body. A powerless band of wimps who complain a lot but who can be mockingly ignored, stepped on, stepped over and even made fun of. It is really sad and even pathetic to see bullied victims ( our Congress ) continually allowing themselves to be bitch slapped bullied and not realize that these particular bullies will not stop unless they are stood up to in a way that bullies understand as having some guts. Here is Pelosi's viewpoint on this as of today: https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/04/us/politics/nancy-pelosi.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James DiEugenio Posted May 4, 2019 Share Posted May 4, 2019 I give the impeachment attempt about a 25 per cent opportunity to get off the ground. Because Pelosi shows no signs of backing it. Pelosi is just not this type of leader. I mean, if you ask me, there was a much more viable reason to impeach W. Yet she would not consider that at all. She simply thinks that any attempt to impeach Trump will meet a dead end in the senate. Plus, when it does not succeed, it will backfire on the Dems. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cliff Varnell Posted May 5, 2019 Share Posted May 5, 2019 6 hours ago, James DiEugenio said: I give the impeachment attempt about a 25 per cent opportunity to get off the ground. Because Pelosi shows no signs of backing it. Pelosi is just not this type of leader. I mean, if you ask me, there was a much more viable reason to impeach W. Yet she would not consider that at all. She simply thinks that any attempt to impeach Trump will meet a dead end in the senate. Plus, when it does not succeed, it will backfire on the Dems. In the election after the impeachment of Clinton the GOP won the White House, the Senate and the House. Some backfire... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Clark Posted May 5, 2019 Share Posted May 5, 2019 On 5/3/2019 at 9:16 AM, Robert Wheeler said: Michael may have other issues with Trump, from the serious to the petty. Robert, Would you please give me an example of wahat kind of objection to Trump I might have that could be characterized as petty? Try to be a bit straight-forward here; try to be a straight shooter. What objection to Trump would I, or anyone else in this debate, have, that you would characterize as petty? Start with me, please. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Bauer Posted May 5, 2019 Share Posted May 5, 2019 1 hour ago, Cliff Varnell said: In the election after the impeachment of Clinton the GOP won the White House, the Senate and the House. Some backfire... Exactly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now