Douglas Caddy Posted December 30, 2019 Share Posted December 30, 2019 From the article: Taylor explained that he feels Gaetz should address the DUI charge in a public press conference, and he erected the billboard “because he’s (Gaetz) a Trump stooge and all around TreasonWeasel,” a term Taylor uses for Republicans who whine about the Russia investigation into Donald Trump. https://politicaltribune.org/city-in-florida-sent-matt-gaetz-a-clear-message-with-mugshot-billboard-2/?fbclid=IwAR10O-j56i5NfhDLObgkh5QyPmV09TrYY_ukttdghMIl1x1ucIN1lNlYuPw Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James DiEugenio Posted December 30, 2019 Author Share Posted December 30, 2019 That's a good one Doug. One for Jordan also? Of course with what SNL does with him, we don't need one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
W. Niederhut Posted December 30, 2019 Share Posted December 30, 2019 2 hours ago, James DiEugenio said: William: Why do you keep on harping on this obstruction of justice charge? Don't you see? Trump has an out on that. And after the Horowitz Report its not just an excuse. The FBI abused the FISA process. And it was happening before the election. Even Comey admitted that. Something like 12000 applications and 12 rejections? Give me a break. A judge ordered a review of the whole process, which should have been done a long time ago. It was clearly being used as a fishing expedition for spying on Americans. When looked upon that way, then Trump was justified in firing Comey. But as Bannon said, that was a political mistake. Because it gave the Justice Department and the FBI the alternative of appointing a special prosecutor. Plus, it gave the liberal blogosphere the idea--Well heck, where there is smoke there must be fire. And Mueller went on for two years. And it ended up in smoke. Even Strzok said there was no there there. And he was in counter terrorism! Jim, I'm no fan of Comey, by any stretch, but he wasn't fired by Trump in the spring pf 2017 because of his (Email-gate) violation of the Hatch Act in October of 2016, nor because of the FISA application snafus in the Carter Page case. That's a false narrative. Trump fired Comey (and McCabe) because he was trying to shut down the FBI investigation of Flynn's December 2016 violation of the Logan Act. Trump even admitted as much to Lavrov and Lester Holt! The new Mueller Report Illustrated does a good job of laying out these facts in a chronological narrative, and can be read in 30 to 40 minutes. (I still think that you and Oliver Stone should publish a Destiny Betrayed Illustrated format like this for the general public.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Carter Posted December 31, 2019 Share Posted December 31, 2019 2 hours ago, W. Niederhut said: Trump fired Comey (and McCabe) because he was trying to shut down the FBI investigation of Flynn's December 2016 violation of the Logan Act. That’s completely ridiculous. There was no “violation of the Logan Act” - it was a pretext to set Flynn up in a perjury trap, as the late great Robert Parry explained two years ago: https://consortiumnews.com/2017/12/01/the-scalp-taking-of-gen-flynn/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
W. Niederhut Posted December 31, 2019 Share Posted December 31, 2019 3 hours ago, Jeff Carter said: That’s completely ridiculous. There was no “violation of the Logan Act” - it was a pretext to set Flynn up in a perjury trap, as the late great Robert Parry explained two years ago: https://consortiumnews.com/2017/12/01/the-scalp-taking-of-gen-flynn/ Parry was dead wrong on this one, Jeff, at least regarding the December 29th phone call that Flynn lied to the FBI about, committing a second felony. You'd better finally read the Mueller Report. If you read it, you will realize that Flynn's illegal December 29, 2016 phone call to Kislyak had EVERYTHING to do with Russia hacking the 2016 U.S. election to install Putin's Orange Asset in the White House. Why? Because Flynn was trying to directly undermine U.S. foreign policy-- the imposition of sanctions against Russia in response to their cyber warfare against our U.S. democracy. Flynn's associate, McFarland confirmed this clearly in her 12/16 Email where she mentioned not wanting to alienate the Kremlin, which had just helped Trump win the election. Your persistent denial of the 2016 Russian election hack, and Trump's obvious status as a compromised Russian asset is simply bizarre. I'll ask again. How do you explain Trump's disgraceful public denials -- in Helsinki and elsewhere-- of the fact that the Kremlin hacked our 2016 elections? How do you explain Trump's bizarre fracturing of our relationships with our closest allies in the G-7 and NATO? His reluctance to enforce bipartisan sanctions against Russia relating to the illegal annexation of the Crimea? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Ness Posted December 31, 2019 Share Posted December 31, 2019 10 hours ago, James DiEugenio said: Don't you see? Trump has an out on that. And after the Horowitz Report its not just an excuse. The FBI abused the FISA process. I'm trying to find that in the IG report. Enlighten me please. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Ness Posted December 31, 2019 Share Posted December 31, 2019 On 12/29/2019 at 7:19 PM, Cliff Varnell said: DiEugenio appears oblivious to former White House Counsel Don McGahn’s refusal to testify before the House on Trump’s extensive obstruction of justice, and the protracted court battle over that refusal. It’s been in all the papers — how could DiEugenio miss it? What I find more interesting and an ABSOLUTE UNDENIABLE FEDERAL FELONY is sworn testimony provided by McGahn to Mueller of Trump ordering him to alter documents after the fact to have Mueller fired. The usual group of enablers will fine line penmanship errors and feign outrage over them yet nary a critical comment comes in over clear and significant violations of federal law by Trump and his lawyers. Unbelievable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James DiEugenio Posted December 31, 2019 Author Share Posted December 31, 2019 (edited) What I found interesting is how Bob completely missed the point on Carter Page and the CIA. He somehow did not notice how the FBI changed the info from the CIA on Page. They told the court he was not a source, when in fact HE WAS. Now, if that is not an abuse of the process then what in the heck is? Its the kind of thing we find in the JFK case. But somehow Bob does not even mention it and he immediately jumped to conclusion that Page was being protected. When in fact it was the opposite case: Brennan did not protect him. In other words, it was more important for Brennan to go along with the massive fishing expedition of Crossfire Hurricane than to protect his own source! That is a naked B and W fact. Not any dispute about executive privilege or silly stuff about mutual defense agreements. What the FBI did to Page was a disgrace. And its prime evidence that the FISA process was being trampled on. Edited January 1, 2020 by James DiEugenio Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Ness Posted December 31, 2019 Share Posted December 31, 2019 10 hours ago, James DiEugenio said: What the FBI did to Page was a disgrace. And its prime evidence that the FISA process was being trampled on. The FISA process has always been a disgrace. What happened with Page was a disgrace (although it looks like that may be subject to some questions also). I don't disagree with that at all. If the situation with Page is all we were talking about I'd agree but that's not what predicated the CH investigation and the IG report and Horowitz's testimony made that clear. If disciplinary action is warranted so be it (although Ohr's contact with Steele is BS). What I find curious is that the "trampling" of law is very clear and my friends with Russian sympathies refuse to acknowledge it even to a slight degree. Trump's multiple and repeated attempts to get foreign assistance from foreign powers to help his election in 2016 and 2020. The multitude of indictments, convictions and mountains of evidence put forward that confirm that interference occured and Trump and his campaign welcomed and possibly (if not obscured by extensive obstruction by Trump) coordinated and encouraged those efforts. The dozens of witnesses who have been ordered to disobey subpoenas, threatened, intimidated and harassed. Almost all of the this paragraph has been either done publicly or announced by Trump lawyers, staff and cabinet officers and yet the Page FISA is the only thing of import! Give me a break already. What you're doing is what I call a Helen Keller. You're totally giving them a pass. I think you're better than that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James DiEugenio Posted January 1, 2020 Author Share Posted January 1, 2020 Bob: The FISA process on this was based on three things as far as I can tell: 1. The false suspicions about Page--which were the opposite of reality and the FBI knew it. 2. The Steele Dossier, funded by the DNC, a fact which was kept hidden. 3. What George P said in a bar. Hmm is bar talk really credible? I don't know which of these is the worst really. But the idea that you could start an investigation over them is ludicrous. Further, as the Horowitz report revealed, the FBI lied to Trump about him being a target of the inquiry. Their excuse was that he was sitting with Flynn when the briefing took place. Well Geez, I guess Comey could not pick up the phone the next day and explain that to him? Its clear now that Trump was a target of the inquiry and it looks like this began before the election. If such was the case then Trump was justified in firing him. I mean when the FBI is talking about using the 25th amendment to remove a guy from office then I think he is a target. You may also want to think about why Mueller ignored all of this. Since he was appointed by DOJ and Rosenstein was talking about removing Trump due to the 25th, was Mueller deliberately restricted because of that? If he was not so restricted then why did he ignore it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Ness Posted January 1, 2020 Share Posted January 1, 2020 1 hour ago, James DiEugenio said: Bob: The FISA process on this was based on three things as far as I can tell: 1. The false suspicions about Page--which were the opposite of reality and the FBI knew it. 2. The Steele Dossier, funded by the DNC, a fact which was kept hidden. 3. What George P said in a bar. Hmm is bar talk really credible? I don't know which of these is the worst really. But the idea that you could start an investigation over them is ludicrous. Further, as the Horowitz report revealed, the FBI lied to Trump about him being a target of the inquiry. Their excuse was that he was sitting with Flynn when the briefing took place. Well Geez, I guess Comey could not pick up the phone the next day and explain that to him? Its clear now that Trump was a target of the inquiry and it looks like this began before the election. If such was the case then Trump was justified in firing him. I mean when the FBI is talking about using the 25th amendment to remove a guy from office then I think he is a target. You may also want to think about why Mueller ignored all of this. Since he was appointed by DOJ and Rosenstein was talking about removing Trump due to the 25th, was Mueller deliberately restricted because of that? If he was not so restricted then why did he ignore it? I don't have the time now to address all of this as I'm traveling and responding from my tablet but here are a couple things. Page was being investigated for contacts and statements he made to known Russian agents that he didn't reveal to his handlers years before he joined the Trump campaign. The NYFO had plenty of suspicions about his activities and sources and was in full panic mode at the time of his joining the Trump campaign. The IG report, now twice amended for misrepresentations made in the original, errored in (IIRC) describing the type of investigation required for Page. They wrongly claimed he was subject to FARA but was actually investigated under 951 which would include a counter espionage investigation rather than counter intelligence. Opening such an investigation requires probable cause not proof beyond a reasonable doubt. Something like that. As I said, that's to the best of my recollection. I retain the option of modifying this hahaha. My point is Page is not Little Red Riding Hood getting eaten by bears. Or is it wolves? He certainly has a case that the FISA apps were badly handled and in one case actually falsified for which I'm sure his lawyers will seek their pound of flesh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kirk Gallaway Posted January 1, 2020 Share Posted January 1, 2020 (edited) Happy New Year to all!, Bob, as you can see Jim doesn't do direct questions, he'll just ask you more questions. I do appreciate that you respond by being thorough in you're attempt to answer his and Jeff's questions. But expecting Jim to own up in turn is a lesson in futility. Doing so would be conceding that government is not so sinister deep that it can actually have any hope of investigating itself. That would be too hopeful. There's just too much high school peer pressure against Jim admitting that in this forum. It's an identical paradigm to the Republicans in Congress. Yet Jim in the past has expressed that he wants the government to reopen an investigation into the JFKA. Figure that one out. You can't have it both ways. Do you know some time last week, the mean temperature for the entire continent of Australia was 105F? Whew! Edited January 1, 2020 by Kirk Gallaway Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Douglas Caddy Posted January 1, 2020 Share Posted January 1, 2020 A New York Times reporter last week observed in a TV interview that there are 17 major intelligence agencies and thousands of contractors that are being paid to collect and analyze worldwide intelligence who employ hundreds of thousands of employees but that all this is for naught since Trump and Putin talked regularly on the phone and no one knows what they talk about. So it boils down to two persons running the intelligence operations of the United States today, one of whom is a former KGB officer and the other is a t---------. Edited December 30, 2019 by Douglas Caddy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James DiEugenio Posted January 1, 2020 Author Share Posted January 1, 2020 Oh no Doug. You are now implying, based on the Times, that somehow Putin is running Trump based on their phone calls? Wait until Adam Schiff gets hold of that one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
W. Niederhut Posted January 1, 2020 Share Posted January 1, 2020 TRUMPSTER EUPHEMISMS OF 2019 Q. What do Trump cult members call a hearing where Trump and his crooked associates are questioned about crimes they have committed? A. A "perjury trap." 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