Barr identified that spying took place. The only issue that remained, as far as he said, was as to whether it was legitimate or not. Why, when Durhams job is to investigate Russiagate, do you think he is doing the things he is doing. Do you think it is to prove these people innocent of involvement, or to prosecute what appears to be a breach of law? As faras I know, innocent until proven guilty, so can we assume that there is at least possibility of wrong doing here. Or are you also objecting to Durham's investigation. In which case there is no point in continuing the conversation.
Durham’s fine in my book. Like Mueller he’s not a political hack, has a strong reputation and the necessary experience and background to fulfil the role he’s been given. As I said, I think it’s refreshing he’s being allowed to carry on his investigation without repeated attempts at openly partisan government interference like Mueller suffered. Ultimately he’s been given terms of reference for an investigation and should be allowed to follow the evidence wherever it leads. At the moment it’s led absolutely no where and certainly no where that gets us further towards showing Trump’s campaign was spied on. Everything’s at the periphery so far. Small potatoes and no signals that he’s pulling on a thread that leads to Obama, Clinton, Brennan, Comey etc. People in Trump’s orbit, and the man himself for that matter, have got a bit excited in the last week and hyped up some court filings to try and turn the focus away from an otherwise really crappy week for Trump in the courts. I don’t think anyone would expect anything less. Every lifeboat in a storm and all that. There’s still no evidence of spying - which Barr knew was a pejorative term when he used it - though.
I understand that he was spied on, but Barr pointed out that it was a question of whether or not it was properly legally justified or not. The dosier, which Steele himself, I understand, indicated was paid for by organisations with links to Clinton. The dossier was rubbish, yet it was used to justfy a FISA warrant on Trump. Even Schiff is saying that the Government should prosecute the people he acknowledged as havinf lied in it. If the dossier was not valid, then the warrant wasn't valid, and everything done to obtain the warrant was done in bad faith, and with the intention of both disrupting Trump and gaining access to otherwise private knowledge. We will see in time whether or not there is anything in it. I am not convinced either way, but I do believe that certain elements of Democrat behaviour are such that it is not unreasonable to have concerns about them. And so I think it is entirely likely that Clinton spied on Trump, and I think the Democrats are using 6 January to fish for any incriminating or advantageous information they can on their political enemies. In many respects, I see that as simply an extention of an ongoing behaviour which started with Russiagate. I may have had more respect for them if it hadn't been for last January's impeachment. Exclusively using BS media evidence, literally quoting headlines to condemn Trump, in the knowledge that they were BS, because the actual evidence would not suffice. I think its fair to make a fuss about the claims. If you take a look at the accusations and talking points made on here against Boris and Brexit, and Trump for that matter, the majority of them are pie in the sky wish fulfilment, that later turns out to be irrelevent or BS. So if I end up getting excited once in a while and overstating, possibly, a right wing talking point, I am probably going to allow myself the hit without too much concern. It doesn't make any difference. It won't change the outcome.
Peace man. You spelled that collection of random words extremely well, and I am sure your old English teacher would be very proud of you. Whatever you are on, pass it over here. Seems it may have a heavy cost on the brain cells, but anything I can do to understand you better, I'll give it a try
A lovely sentiment, but I'm rather concerned you aren't in a position to bear that cost, so I think the humane thing to do would be to keep it to myself
Ahh. Your concern is very sweet. And you are of course correct. How can I keep up my stiff defence of political integrity with impaired brain power? The stochastic effect of 'it' on the mind cannot be predicted, and it would be a shame for me to inadvertantly cross that threshold, and start supporting Joe Biden. The cost of understanding, in this case, is far too steep. I thank you for bringing me to my senses.
Peculiar goings on in the Trump fraud case... https://www.nytimes.com/2022/02/23/nyregion/trump-ny-fraud-investigation.html Is the investigation running out of steam? with even the Manhattan DA expressing doubts, despite the regular publicity getting pumped out saying "We've got him now". Whatever the case, two prosecutors resigning a month after the case appeared to be ramping up, is not the most promising indicator for those who despise the man. Could it be that, after the best part of a decade investigating Trump, his family and businesses, his detractors are now starting to think that the guy is actually about as above board as any upstanding business man? And don't forget, this is looking at everything his businesses and family members have done. They have gone after all of them, not just the orange man. And they couldn't even get him on tax when they stole his tax returns. Would they find the same if they did an investigation into Biden and his family connections with Ukraine and China?
The American Right in an absolute state about Ukraine. Bannon applauds Putin because he is not ‘woke’ and ‘knows how many genders there are’, says ‘Ukraine is not a Country (so therefore it’s ok to invade) was invented by the Clintons’. Trump describes Putin as a ‘genius’. It goes on, but it helpfully carves out these figures for what they are and speaks volumes about those who supported and relied on them.
GOP loon from 2020 on Putin. Not in her silly head the downed airliner or polonium etc etc. https://twitter.com/rightwingwatch/status/1496937857839153168?s=21
Don’t worry, Republicans must have seen some absolutely dire polling as they’ve all done a 180 degree handbrake turn in the last few days and are now condemning Putin. Even Big Don is on board.
Won't stop the original comments remerging once the 2024 campaign starts in earnest. They won't age well, that's for sure.
https://www.politico.com/news/2022/03/02/oath-keeper-to-plead-guilty-january-6-00013208 Guilty plea on a seditious conspiracy charge. This is from the shallow end of severity in that particular pool, so given that the DOJ appears to be working upwards there should be some pretty significant charges coming along later. Worth noting that a charge like this is unprecedented in the modern era. EDIT: wow, the remaining Oath Keepers are completely boned. This guy pled down to 9 years and a 300,000 dollar fine, provided testimony that incriminates the others through conspiracy, and also handed over electronic messages to corroborate what he was saying. The founder-leader of the Oath Keepers, Stuart Rhodes, pled not guilty. He's going to be hung out to dry.
Even Fox News a bit gobsmacked by the Trumper attitude to the war https://twitter.com/liz_cheney/status/1500225329595617286?s=21
It’s just another sign of the attitude towards Ukraine from the Trumpers. Convicted criminals in his circle like his former campaign chair Manafort had deep links with Russian interests in Ukraine, which the Senate GOP-led Intelligence Committee said posed a “grave counterintelligence threat” from Russia to American interests. It’s pretty clear Trump was prepared to allow Putin to carve up Ukraine if he’d have got a second term. He was impeached of course for threatening to deny promised military aid to Ukraine if it didn’t turn over dirt about Joe Biden. On the hand though, waaah, waaah, Hunter Biden, Burisma, laptop, waaah waaah!
You've done it now. Brace yourself for a rambling, incoherent yet somehow holier than thou essay citing all sorts of crackpot sources for our resident conspiracy theorist.
Just remember: major media sources that post corrections/retractions aren't trustworthy, but random Youtubers who are de facto experts on every topic can be trusted implicitly.
So, the President's son being paid vast sums of money to work for a Ukrainian business, in fields he confesses to have no experience, that was under investigation, until his father, then vice president, threatened the Ukrainian Government with withrawing a billion dollars in aid unless they got rid of the state prosecutor undertaking the investigation (Joe Biden describes this factual situation himself), in exactly the way the democrats accused Trump of behaving in the impeachment you mentioned above. A time scale was given, a threat was duly made, and the Ukrainian Government duely ousted the prosecutor, who left the country, but has now returned and is back working in government, as far as I understand. Hunter also sent verified emails that included references to payments from Russia and China, some of which included references to "the big man", who is widely believed to be Joe Biden (but who can tell, given there is no will, within Biden's administration, to investigate). This was going on nearly a decade ago. Think I am lying? But that's just waaah, waaah?
No. He believed that Obama would back him up completely. So you can add him, and his administration to the threat if you wish to do so. It is not a point I originally intended to make. Just because others were also concerned makes not a jot of difference. Biden had an interest that was not appropriate for the person responsible for US/Ukraine relations. Whatever you say, Biden directly blackmailed the Ukrainian Governement to remove a prosecutor, who has subsequently returned to a similar job since the Obama administration's demise, who was investigating a company who had taken the then US vice president's crack head son in very peculiar employment on a vast salary at a Ukrainian busines in a role for which he he had no experience in a country he had no experience of, other than that his dad was responsible for US relations with them. Whether or not others objected to the prosecutor, that is a very dodgy sounding story, and Trump was impeached over a story that, when directly compared, was arguably a lesser offence than Biden's confessed blackmail. All I am implying is that it is not waah waah, and I am unsure why you want others to believe it is.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-60670105 First trial ends in a conviction; could be anything up to 60 years. Doesn't bode well for the pending cases.
How weird do you have to be to be a Trumper? The Great Reset is trending on Twitter. Here’s Monica Crowley, who served in Government under Trump claiming that Biden’s move to cut off Russian imports of gas and oil are part of an attempt to create chaos and install a New World Order. Never mind that the US, above all other Western countries, can do this fairly comfortably. Utterly mad, but then all of her other Tweets call Biden a POS and she continues to this day to believe Obama is a Muslim. And she served in Government. And could do again!
No he doesn't. I've read it 88 times and there is absolutely no comment in that article that expresses a view about non European Americans. And no, I am not twisting your words. He really doesn't You are making it up, and you are totally incorrect. You, er. You didn't read it, did you.
Some are innocent until proven guilty, and some, in US prisons today and considered by many to be political prisoners, are still being held, without trial or bail, on charges of trespass, despite having been detained over a year ago. Not saying he is innocent, but can you blame him for fleeing from a country that treats protester, who support Trump, so differently to protesters who support BLM or antifa? Jacob Angeli, who faced no charges of violence, was sentened to three and a half years for obstructing a process of government. Basically peaceful protesting. People who were burning down police precincts and court houses were barely getting arrested, and were receiving bail funding raised by now VP, Komala Harris. Criticising people for fleeing tyrany is like shooting tuna in a tin.
He sounds a great father. A daft insurrectionist who has to flee his Country rather than do his time. Trump’s toxic legacy to his supporters continues.
Haven't you heard that they shoot Trump supporters without warning in DC? The US is not a safe place to be if you are not a Democrat.
