Below is my column in the Hill Newspaper on the finding by The House Intelligence Committee with regard to the allegation that Director of National Intelligence (DNI) James Clapper may have leaked information on the Steele dossier. The record is still surprisingly muddled on what Clapper is saying about his media contacts during this period. At best, it appears that he may have confirmed elements of the dossier after leaving office on January 20, 2017, but his comments have been (as described by the Committee) “inconsistent.” At worse, he could be accused (again) of perjury.
Here is the column:
Friday’s release of the House Intelligence Committee report generated much coverage over its finding of no evidence of collusion with the Russians. Receiving less attention was a small section entitled “Finding #44,” where the committee suggested that then-Director of National Intelligence (DNI) James Clapper leaked information from the so-called Steele dossier. Even worse for Clapper, the alleged leak was made to CNN, which later hired him as a contributor.
If true, both the national intelligence chief and then-FBI Director James Comey leaked information while denying such violations to Congress. Moreover, even if Clapper waited until shortly after leaving office, it is deeply troubling that he would confirm details of the dossier, which was under investigation.
The report recounts how Clapper gave “inconsistent testimony” to Congress when he denied ever “discuss[ing] the dossier or any other intelligence related to Russia hacking of the 2016 election with journalists.” That has proven to be untrue. Clapper later admitted he discussed the “dossier with CNN journalist Jake Tapper” and indicated he may have discussed the material with other journalists.
The timing is notable.
Clapper discussed the information in “early January 2017.” There was no compelling need to confirm the information, given the ongoing investigation and that it was still a subject of highly classified deliberations. Indeed, with FBI personnel looking into the matter, confirming the information could be viewed as unhelpful. Its most obvious value was to undermine Donald Trump.
In other words, the disclosure advanced political, not public, interests.
Clapper allegedly gave CNN the confirmation around the time that President Obama and President-elect Trump were given classified briefings on the dossier. On Jan. 10, 2017, Tapper and CNN ran with the breaking news that Obama and Trump were briefed on the “memos compiled by a former British intelligence operative.” Tapper cited “U.S. officials with direct knowledge of the briefings” and even described the “two-page synopsis” given to Obama and Trump. (The dossier was published in full by BuzzFeed after CNN’s disclosure.)
After leaving office, Clapper began regular commentary with CNN and became a paid CNN contributor in August 2017.
Clapper is accused of not only lying to the public but to the media for which he now works. After Trump objected to the leaking of the dossier story, CNN covered Clapper’s statement that he assured the incoming president neither he nor anyone in the intelligence community was responsible: “I expressed my profound dismay at the leaks that have been appearing in the press, and we both agreed that they are extremely corrosive and damaging to our national security.”
In March, Clapper, again on CNN, insisted, “I didn’t have any contact with media until after I left the government on the 20th of January, so I don’t quite understand, at least what I’ve read, that somehow I leaked about the dossier.” CNN host Don Lemon then asked, “So you didn’t leak anything about the dossier to any media?” Clapper answered, “No, not — I mean, I talked about it after I left the government, but not during that period, and certainly not between the 6th of January and the 10th when the president-elect himself talked about it.”
If Clapper confirmed the information before he left office on Jan. 20, he could again be accused of perjury. However, there remain concerns over Clapper discussing the internal review of the dossier in the midst of the ongoing investigation; doing so shortly after his departure from office does not alter its unprofessional character. It is even worse if Clapper is seen as leveraging such insider information while considering a possible media deal with CNN.
This is not the first time Clapper has been accused of giving false testimony to Congress and the public. Ironically, when Clapper was discussing this information with CNN, the statute of limitations was winding down on his lying to Congress about the controversial surveillance program that impacted virtually all Americans. Clapper denied the existence of the program to the Senate and, when later confronted over his perjury, insisted his testimony was “the least untruthful” statement he could make. That still makes it untruthful, but in Washington, people like Clapper do not get indicted for perjury. Clapper was made a CNN contributor after the statute of limitations expired on his alleged perjury.
Notably, Comey wrote in one of his memos that CNN had the information on the dossier and was looking for a “news hook” to run it. That news hook became the leak that Comey briefed Trump on the dossier. CNN has appropriately declined to answer media questions of whether Comey or Clapper were sources for its dossier story.
After leaving as DNI, Clapper was used repeatedly by CNN without mentioning his alleged perjury on the surveillance program. CNN, for example, did not mention it in using him to rebut Trump’s allegation that his campaign staff was surveilled under the Obama administration; Clapper categorically denied it and said he would have been aware of such secret surveillance. In fact, Trump associates, including Carter Page, were under surveillance.
Democrats have rushed to shield Clapper and denounced questions about his conduct as a “smear campaign.” They note that, when later confronted directly in his testimony about his discussions with Tapper, he said: “Well, by the time of that, they already knew about it. By the time it was — it was after — I don’t know exactly the sequence there, but it was pretty close to when we briefed it and when it was out all over the place. The media had it by the way.”
That, however, is different from what he said in his public statement. Nor does it change the gravity of his conduct. Having the dossier did not change CNN’s need for confirmation from government officials. Indeed, Comey admitted the media was looking for a hook and still required confirmation of the information. If Clapper gave it to Tapper, he lied to Congress, other media and the public. Moreover, Clapper told Congress “it was pretty close to when we briefed it.” The briefing (which Clapper includes himself as part of) occurred before Jan. 10, not after Jan. 20. “Pretty close” is not a defense to perjury.
Of course, neither is describing a lie as the “least untruthful answer” — but that worked fine for Clapper in his prior “inconsistent” testimony.
CNN will be rightfully celebrated for its disclosure of the dossier during Saturday night’s White House Correspondents’ Dinner. The assembled press will honor the network for its story and how “the CNN team later reported that then-FBI Director James Comey personally briefed Trump about the dossier. Thanks to this CNN investigation, ‘the dossier’ is now part of the lexicon.”
Many will be looking in the audience for CNN’s national security expert — James Clapper.
Jonathan Turley is the Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at George Washington University. You can follow him on Twitter @JonathanTurley.
CV Brown – only if it is male and anatomically correct. 😉
CV Brown – it has to cross the Rim to get here and would have to burn through all of Phoenix, Scottsdale, Mesa and Tempe before it got to me. I have plenty of time before I have to pack. 🙂
Talking to yourself again.
David Benson – CV Brown asked about the fires in northern Arizona. Evidently, the original comment was deleted, probably for being off topic. I respond to the emails, not the WordPress thread. So, I have no idea if it has been deleted or not. 🙂
So, to answer your question, no I am not talking to myself and I wasn’t before. You just do not understand how the blawg works. 😛
But now I am enlightened.
“Did James Clapper Leak Information To CNN Before Accepting A Media Deal?”
No.
OBAMA Leaked Information To CNN Before Clapper Accepted A Media Deal.
Obama used his agent,Clapper, in Obama’s coup d’etat In America.
_____________________________________________________
“It’s like an insurance policy in the unlikely event you die before you’re 40.”
– Peter Strzok/Lisa Page
______________________________________________
“We are five days away from fundamentally transforming the United States of America.”
– Barack Obama
____________________________________________________________________
All Roads Lead To Obama.
JT cherry-picks out a “Finding” from a completely political so-called report from congress that had no interest in finding out the truth about anything, and the Trump brown shirts and supporters wave their hands and scream lock them up. Putting your credibility on Trump is like, eating clear soup with a fork.
Best comment on our politically broken culture
“Liberalism stands for nothing, means nothing, subsides in nothing except the intoxicating impulse to be right all the time about everything, even if you just changed your mind 10 minutes ago.”
Joy Reid and the forgotten value of changing your mind
http://theweek.com/articles/770023/joy-reid-forgotten-value-changing-mind
Bingo
I’m just constantly amused by how it took somone as “deplorable” as Trump to expose how corrupt every square inch of DC is.
Suicide bombs kill 31 in Afghanistan — targeted reporters
https://www.axios.com/suicide-bombs-kabul-afghanistan-targeted-reporters-3e2efce1-8f48-4c16-a13c-e450450a367d.html?utm_source=sidebar
Pity he missed the reporters
Beth, you’re saying that foreign correspondents covering Afghanistan deserve to die?? How bizarre! You must be one those deplorables Hillary Clinton referred to.
You and me both JUA =)
JAMES COMEY ASKS A GOOD QUESTION
On “Meet the Press,” James B. Comey pointed out that before pressing him to drop the investigation into Michael Flynn, Trump made sure Comey’s boss, Attorney General Jeff Sessions had left the room:
“He had just kicked out my boss, who had tried to linger … And so you have to realize that, if he didn’t know he was doing something he shouldn’t do, why was he kicking out the leadership, including my boss?”
Edited from “The Daily Plum” by Greg Sargent, today’s Washington Post
Comey also stated that although Clinton lied in various interviews, she did not lie to the FBI. We’ve seen the FBI use process crimes as leverage to expose more substantial crimes. Here you have someone that is a suspect in an investigation that is known to have lied about a crime. She would have had 2 choices: tell the truth, criminal referral or lie, criminal referral. So naturally Comey and his FBI investigative team chose to not formally interview Clinton to see if she would lie them? Does that seem logical to you?
There is no clearer evidence of where Comey’s Higher Loyalty rests and it is not with Criminal Justice; it’s with Lawfare.
Peter Hill – Comey notes in his book 3 separate private meetings with President Obama. Where was Lynch?
Comey had reason to believe Trump would be bringing up the Russia probe. Therefore Comey wanted a witness and Jeff Session was the most appropriate witness. And it seems that Sessions lingered with the expectation that Trump would include him.
But discussions Comey had with Obama were not of a nature requiring witnesses.
But discussions Comey had with Obama were not of a nature requiring witnesses.
And you know this how?
Peter Hill – Comey notes that it was inappropriate for him to have a private meeting with Trump, however he had 3 with Obama. I do not see a difference.
The difference is that Obama was under no active or pending investigations. Therefore there wasn’t any conflict of interest in having a private discussion with Obama. No law that I know of prohibits the FBI Director from conversing with the President. But Comey knew, from past experience, that Trump would want to bring up the Russia Probe.
Peter Hill – supposedly Trump was not under investigation either.
Whenever power is put into some hands for the government of the people, and is then diverted from that purpose and used to subdue the people to the arbitrary commands of those that have the power, then that immediately becomes tyranny, whether the power-holders are one or many.
— John Locke, “Second Treatise of Government”
Absolutely!
I fancy this one better:
“This makes it Lawful for a Man to Kill a Thief, who has not in the least hurt him, nor declared any design upon his life, any farther then by the use of Force, so to get him in his Power, as to take away his Money, or what he pleases from him.: because using force, where he has no Right, to get me into his Power, let his pretense be what it will, I have no reason to purpose that he, who would take away my Liberty, would not when he had me in his Power, take away every thing else. And therefore it is Lawful for me to treat him, as one who has put himself into a State of War with me, I.e. kill him if I can; for to that hazard does he justly expose himself, whoever introduces a State of War, and is Aggressor in it.”
― John Locke, Second Treatise of Government
Mark,
That has more to do with common law defense than tyranny.
I don’t think the death penalty could ever be justified in a simple murder case. It doesn’t deter murder and the burden of proof in criminal trials necessitates the existence of wrongful convictions and execution of the innocent.
However, in cases of treason, which at its root is what Dante called “complex fraud”, the death penalty is precisely what is needed to deter it in the future. Frauds scheme and plan; carefully weighing whether their risk is worth the reward; always avoiding serious commitments like risking their life for anything.
The death penalty sends a clear message to the potential traitor/fraud that there will be no mercy and no forgiveness.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dpDkYZWeeVg
It is the sword of Damocles keeping the rulers honest.
At common law, all felonies were punishable by death as you know. Harsh but effective as a primary, if not a secondary, deterrent. Locke correlates the actions of a thief at war with society with that of the tyrant similarly at war with the populace by exercising unwarranted power over them.
Hi Mespo!!! I just wrote a one act legal play, and put it on the Internet. You might be interested. Here is the link. It is not long.
https://pansiesforplato.wordpress.com/2018/04/30/the-avocado-as-a-big-green-nut/
And here is a pdf:
https://pansiesforplato.files.wordpress.com/2018/04/the-avocado-as-a-big-green-nut.pdf
Squeeky Fromm
Girl Reporter
Hey! I’m on it.
Just finished it and Brava! But I think you sell yourself short. Despite my ideological underpinnings and my occasional vituperativeness, both you and Nick through charm, wit, reason and a lot of head-butting have convinced me of things I did not originally believe. Current events surely have helped to but it was human agency mostly. Attitudes are funny things. Sometimes they need a good mallet as well as a gentle touch to be forged.
mespo and Squeek, I have learned from both of you folks.
How true! Once, I supported Hillary for President. Can you believe it? But there are some people here who will never change their minds. I think it is a waste of time to try to explain anything to them because they are simply not genuine. I think some of them are here in bad faith.
I could be wrong, but that is just my opinion. After a while, you start to realize that when a Republican does Thing A, it is bad, but when a Democrat does Thing A, there is silence.
Thank you, Mespo, for reading the play!
Squeeky Fromm
Girl Reporter
The pleasure was mine, Squeek.
Squeek, Loved your play. You consistently make me laugh.
“he tyrant similarly at war with the populace by exercising unwarranted power over them.”
“Whereas usurpation is the exercise of power to which someone else has a right, tyranny is the exercise of power to which nobody can have a right. That is what happens when someone employs the power he has in his hands, not for the good of those who are under it but for his own private individual advantage.”
“Whenever power is put into some hands for the government of the people, and is then diverted from that purpose and used to subdue the people to the arbitrary commands of those that have the power, then that immediately becomes tyranny, whether the power-holders are one or many.” – J. Locke
The first and foremost enemy of our constitutional republic is the domestic enemy of tyranny. It’s clearly spelled out within our Restatement of Social Contract — The Declaration of Independence and further illustrated by the framework of our Constitution.
Fraudulent use of the Federal powers of intelligence and law enforcement so as to “subdue the people to the arbitrary commands of those entrusted with those powers” — in furtherance of a plot to remove a legally elected president from power — is tyranny and therefore treason.
Usurpation of power isn’t commonly understood. It’s tyranny under color of authority. That’s Locke’s point which you generously quote. This needs to be taught lest kids think anything done by the government is pro warranto “legal.”
I think things started going down hill when they scrapped Civics for “Social Studies”
Bob, Esq. – technically Social Studies includes World History, US History, Civics and state history. I have taught all of them. 😉
Paul:
True enough but civics was always the stepchild.
mespo – not when I taught it. It got a full semester.
Speaks to merit of the teacher not the curriculum.
mespo – that was the Arizona curriculum. I would like to take credit, but it wasn’t me. 😉
Good on you both then!
“A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the people discover they can vote themselves largess out of the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the canidate promising the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that democracy always collapses over a loose fiscal policy–to be followed by a dictatorship.”
― Alexander Fraser Tytler
OT, although when it happens this lie by Clapper will be irrelevant.
Donald Trump,
Neither the US, nor Israel, nor Saudi Arabia owns the world. Although you,, MBS and Bibi seem bent on world destruction, it is not your right.
You are all about to begin WWIII. You will kill millions of people and help destroy our planet. To be proud of this action, to want this as your legacy (if anyone is left to hear of it) in the world is shameful and disgusting.
I do not understand what turns people like the three of you into such utter monsters. It seems your only goal is death, destruction, money and power. These are terrible things to want for one’s life and to inflict on others. I realize that all of you are too far gone to even understand just how evil you are. I can only hope that the people of this world will protest your “divine right of kings” (which you evidently believe you have) to kill anyone you want, to destroy any nation, to destroy our beautiful earth and all it’s living things.
This planet and its life is precious. People just want to live our lives. Why can’t any of you see what is good, decent, loving and honorable? It is all around you. There is another way, the way of life. For the love of all that is good in the world, do not destroy this planet with your weapons.
@Jill April 30, 2018 at 11:22 AM
“This planet and its life is precious. People just want to live our lives. Why can’t any of you see what is good, decent, loving and honorable? It is all around you. There is another way, the way of life. For the love of all that is good in the world, do not destroy this planet with your weapons.”
I second your heartfelt plea, Jill. Thank you for expressing it so lovingly.
Our home:
https://www.space.com/31422-earthrise-photo-nasa-moon-probe.html
Thank you Ken.
Autumn, I hope people will rise.
Olly and Bob, that quote is true.
Jill, which quote?
Excellent post Jill! It’s a terrible thing to realize that these cabals do not care – about people or the environment – and it won’t change – lop off one’s head another readily appears like a cursed Medusa. Money & power.
We may get just that if bellicose Bibi involves the US of A
https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-04-30/watch-live-netanyahu-addresses-israel-dramatic-news-about-iran
Goodness, decency, lovingness and honor are for chumps in Trump world.
we need a WWIII to thin the masses and save the planet for the fit who are true survivalists
Neither the US, nor Israel, nor Saudi Arabia owns the world. Although you,, MBS and Bibi seem bent on world destruction, it is not your right.
Israel is a country with a population of about 8 million and output of around $300 bn. The notion that it’s a threat to the world (and the notion that it seeks to destroy the world) is a fine indicator of malicious stupidity in someone so uttering.
SHOULD PUBLIC KNOW IF NEW PRESIDENT IS COMPROMISED?
A nightmare scenario: “The incoming President, a political novice with no experience in government, is quite possibly compromised. He is a well-established playboy with a preference for Slavic women. A dossier emerges alleging kinky group sex with Russian prostitutes. Said dossier corresponds with a pattern of odd ties to Russia. In fact, the new President refuses to say anything negative about the Russian leader; even as the public learns Russia meddled in the election! An election that resulted in a freak outcome. New President lost the popular vote by 2% but somehow managed an improbable Electoral College victory”
Had this scenario been presented as a theoretic future drama 10 years ago, the public would have said “We would want to know”.
Scarcely anyone would have said, “I’m more concerned with illegal leaks than knowing the President is compromised”.
Peter Hill,
You are a fraud.
To be clear:
Fraud and Deceit
I. IN GENERAL
60A NYJur 2d, FRAUD AND DECEIT § 1
§ 1 Nature and definitions
Although the term “fraud” has been variously defined, the wisdom of an exact legal definition of the term has frequently been questioned; indeed, it has been said that no all-inclusive definition can be framed, due to the diverse character of fraud and the great variety of attendant circumstances, and that generally each case must be determined on its own particular and peculiar facts.n1 Fraud and deceit have more than one meaning, depending on the circumstances and the relations of the parties.n2
Broadly speaking, fraud is defined as any cunning, deception, or artifice employed by one person to deceive or gain an unfair advantage to the detriment of another.n3 Over the years, fraud has generally been defined by behavior involving intentional, false representations and other connotations of scienter, such as willfulness, knowledge, design, and bad faith
Bob, if you’re worthy of the “Esq” after your name, explain how my scenario is fraudulent.
Unidentified sources in the DOJ and FBI have revealed That James Comey and James Clapper commissioned Seth McFarlane to put the Steele Dossier (about Trump and peeing hookers) to music and perform it for the FISA Court. Sources say McFarlane’s performance borrowed heavily from the “The Music Man” – replacing the character Harold Hill, the fraud in the original story, with James Comey.
McFarlane was hired to sing a revised version of the song “Ya Got Trouble”
James Comey: My next step will be to get your town out of the serious trouble it’s in
James Clapper: River city isn’t in any trouble.
James Brennan: Then we’ll have to create some. We’ll have to create a desperate need to spy on an opposing party’s presidential campaign; as well as justification for an independent counsel investigation — as an “insurance policy” in case he wins.
James Comey: Good. That’s good. Now what can we use?
Hillary Clinton: I paid nine million dollars for a phony dossier depicting Trump hiring hookers to pee on a bed that the Obamas slept in.
James Clapper: I got friends at CNN
James Comey: That’ll do.
(Seth McFarlane singing for James Comey at the FISA Court)
McFarlane: “May it please the court. Your Honor, ya got trouble… Right here in River City. Trouble with a capital T that rhymes with P which stands for Pee.”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LI_Oe-jtgdI
In light of there being no actual evidence or foundation in law to make the application, the issuance of the FISA warrant is a testament to both a tyrannical abuse of power and the brilliance of McFarlane’s performance.
Better delete your “Esq”, Bob.
Instead of explaining why my “future scenario” is fraudulent, you instead posted some witty satire from– From– From ‘where’, Bob?? You’re not even crediting the source! Unless perhaps ‘you’ composed that piece. In that case I am flattered that my post inspired you to write such clever satire in the span of 10 minutes.
I wrote it Peter. I’m the source. Just like you and people of your stripe were the source of the Russian dossier.
You and your ilk are nothing but treasonous frauds.
Whenever power is put into some hands for the government of the people, and is then diverted from that purpose and used to subdue the people to the arbitrary commands of those that have the power, then that immediately becomes tyranny, whether the power-holders are one or many.
– John Locke “Second Treatise of Government”
Peter,
Can you tell me what law or statute Benedict Arnold violated in his act of treason?
Bob, here I must point out that despite his later act of treason, Benedict Arnold played a key role in the Battle of Saratoga, the victory that led to America’s independence.
Benedict Arnold was, in fact, one of the greatest soldiers this country ever produced. Arnold, is, in fact, still considered “Father of the U.S. Navy”.
Donald Trump, by comparison, never served in the U.S. military. Trump has actually done ‘less’ for this country than Benedict Arnold.
Arnold, is, in fact, still considered “Father of the U.S. Navy”.
By whom? Let me guess, the Nobel committee? I can assure you had that been true, a class of ship would have been named after him a la John Paul Jones.
Arnold organized the first U.S. naval fleet at the Battle of Lake Champlain in 1776. Arnold was, by profession, a sea captain who sailed between Connecticut and the Caribbean. Yet his equestrian skills made him an awesome fighter on the battlefield.
And? Where is your citation for Arnold, is, in fact, still considered “Father of the U.S. Navy”. ?
OLLY – Arnold built the first fleet and stopped the first naval invasion from the interior of Canada. He lost the fleet, but it was a strategic victory. 😉
Bob, Esq. – Benedict Arnold did take an oath of allegiance to the United States. He certainly broke that.
“Benedict Arnold did take an oath of allegiance to the United States. He certainly broke that.”
As did Comey, Clapper, Brennan, et. al.
This nation is “dedicated to the proposition” of fighting tyranny. Rebelling against tyranny was our legal justification for rebelling against the sovereign King George III, and preventing tyranny is the underlying premise for the design of the constitution.
Thus, the first and foremost enemy of our constitutional republic is the domestic enemy of tyranny.
Whenever power is put into some hands for the government of the people, and is then diverted from that purpose and used to subdue the people to the arbitrary commands of those that have the power, then that immediately becomes tyranny, whether the power-holders are one or many.
– John Locke “Second Treatise of Government”
Fraudulent use of the Federal powers of intelligence and law enforcement so as to “subdue the people to the arbitrary commands of those entrusted with those powers” — in furtherance of a plot to remove a legally elected president from power is both tyranny and treason.
Peter,
What is the first and foremost enemy of our constitutional republic?
Hint: If a boat represented the constitution, what would water represent?
Bob, Trump spends his first year in office denying that Russia meddled in our election while every top official in his cabinet acknowledges it. And you’re comparing ‘me’ to Benedict Arnold?
As I said, you’re not worthy of that ‘Esq’ after your name. In fact, I’m going to file a report with the Esquire Oversight Board.
Petey, youre kinda cute
Hill Troll
http://img2.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20121014143102/lotr/images/2/2d/Hill_troll_born_of_hope.jpg
A typical Trump-esq response: attack your critic.
Beth is disappointed that that suicide bomber in Afghanistan missed the reporters. She actually posted that, as you may have noticed.
Hang in there, Peter Hill. Cartoon penguins in top-hats and bow-ties pose an extreme longshot for the violent overthrow The United State of America.
Peter,
Truth is the agreement between knowledge and its object.
Drawing inferences from a dossier that you and your ilk fabricated, for the purpose of removing him from office, is not truth; it is fraud.
Peter Hill had nothing whatsoever to do with compiling the Trump-Russia dossier. Your attribution to the contrary is false. A cartoon penguin wearing a bow-tie and a top-hat has more truth in it than Bobesque, has.
Peter,
Show us all how great an American you are.
Tell us all: What the first and foremost enemy of our constitutional republic?
Hint 2: I spelled it out in an earlier post.
Come on; you alleged patriot. Give it a shot.
The United States of America is not governed by John Locke’s second treatise On Government. Threatening treason charges against the people investigating Trump is much closer to tyranny than anything the people investigating Trump have done.
When does The Cartoon Penguin Revolution start, Bobesque???
Golden showers? Trump? And this information is coming from Russians paid by Hillary? If you believe this, then there’s no help. There exists no known cure for TDS.
Ivan, please pay attention to details: Christopher Steele, former and very well-respected British spy, was hired first and foremost by Republicans who didn’t want the rodeo clown in the White House, and this was done to prevent his nomination. After he received the nomination anyway, and because there were some very serious things discovered but not yet fully investigated, the HRC campaign was contacted about continuing the investigation into leads Steele had uncovered. These are true facts. The dossier was started by Republicans, but when Trump got the nomination anyway, they preferred HRC to Trump, so they approached her campaign with what Steele had uncovered. This is a reflection on how unqualified and undesirable he was, even to other Republicans. They preferred HRC to Trump.
Trump is the most serious threat to American values ever to occupy the White House. He exists to stoke his fragile ego, and he wanted the biggest prize of all: the American Presidency, solely for the power and prestige. No one seriously doubts that he would collude with Russians, or Satan himself, just for the adulation and bragging right to claim the American Presidency. Only, he’s finding out that the majority of Americans really, truly, don’t respect him and want him gone. Not just one isolated poll, either: polls have consistently shown overwhelming American dissatisfaction with him, and that’s because his conduct is decidedly un-American. As a nation, we’ve tried to prove we can overcome shameful things from the past like racial hatred, discrimination against women and LGBT folks and fear of people who are different. Trump’s election is a huge step backward because he panders to ignoramuses who are racist, xenophobic and misogynist. He lies constantly, about many things that aren’t even important. He needs “campaign rallies” like the one over the weekend because he needs adulation like a junkie needs a fix. This is beyond pathetic. He avoids news conferences because he can’t think on his feet or remember what lie his handlers told him to give in response to questions, like Cohen’s representation of him in the Stormy Daniels matter, which he previously denied any knowledge of. He squires around a woman young enough to be his daughter, solely because of her super-model looks, which he thinks make him look masculine and powerful, instead of a fat, bald old man with a bad comb-over who purchased an uneducated Slovenian wife. Even she publicly rejects his efforts to hold her hand for the camera.
He is insanely jealous of Barak Obama because he is deeply racist and because President Obama was so well-liked and successful as a President, so his main agenda is to try to roll back everything President Obama did. That’s why the “golden showers” incident rings true: Trump hates Michelle Obama just as much as he hates her husband. There is a too-cozy relationship between Trump and Russians–do they have audio or video recordings of the incident in Moscow? Quite likely. Does he owe some Russian oligarchs a lot of money? Quite possibly, but we need to see tax returns that he won’t disclose. Previously, Trump tried to lie about the Moscow incident by claiming he never stayed overnight in Moscow. That has also been uncovered as a lie, after Bloomberg News conducted an investigation into aviation records that proved his plane was there at least 2 overnights.
So, the Trump Broadcasting Network, a/k/a Fox News, constantly pivots to divert attention away from the failures of their President, claiming success for things he had nothing to do with, like the dialogue developing between the 2 Koreas, constantly harping about HRC, and constantly undermining our Justice system and the FBI because they are investigating Trump. So they’re trying to get dirt on James Comey and anyone else having information adverse to The Donald. Then you have Devin Nunes, wasting taxpayer resources in an effort to conduct a parallel investigation, all in an effort to undermine the truth that the Mueller investigation will eventually find. Those of you on this blog who passionately defend this person are true TBN disciples. Jon is feeding into this with things like today’s piece.
At the end of the day, do any of the arguments and claims by Fox or Jon Turley exonerate Trump? No.
“Ivan, please pay attention to details: Christopher Steele, former and very well-respected British spy, was hired first and foremost by Republicans”
Your first lie of your post.
Washington Free Beacon had Fusion GPS (no Steele) under retainer.
However, Steele’s Russian dossier was a specialty order by the DNC and HRC campaign.
very well-respected British spy,
Well-respected by whom?
was hired first and foremost by Republicans who didn’t want the rodeo clown in the White House,
He was never hired ‘by Republicans’. The Washington Examiner commissioned work from Fusion which Glenn Simpson et al later recycled.
BTW, the ‘rodeo clown’ was the incumbent president, who wasn’t running.
Steele’s reports were often shared with The State Department, FBI and CIA during the Bush years. That sounds respectable. Steele was never exclusive to only American Democrats. Though right-wing media would have you believe exactly that.
Manuel Antonio Noriega was a paid informant for the CIA for 17 years. They’ll take copy from whomever will give it to them.
Nutchacha,..
We also had an informant known as “Curveball” in the runup to the 2nd Gulf War.
It’s telling how Trump supporters will embrace any conspiracy or distrust any institution in order to make sense of Donald Trump.
Trump supporters must distrust the mainstream media, the Federal courts, The FBI, The CIA, every Democrat, moderate Republicans and the entire state of California!
One has to wonder if there ever comes a point when Trump supporters find it easier to simply distrust Donald Trump.
It’s ironic that you mention “conspiracy theories” while embracing the Trump-Russia conspiracy theory.
You’re not in any position to scoff at conspiracy theories when you buy into one yourself.
I don’t know how much U.S. intelligence used “Steele’s reports”; if those reports onvolved doing foreign opposition research on political candidates, we should look into his previous involvement in American political campaigns.
Tom, Steele is an Englishman in London. Any corporation, think tank, foundation or political campaign can commission his research. Steele isn’t concerned with the American Culture Wars. He doesn’t care about abortion, gun rights or tax cuts. Furthermore, when Steele began his research, Donald Trump did not even have the Republican nomination yet. And the Republicans were still not sure they wanted Trump as their nominee. Trump had never held high office and had a propensity to shoot his mouth regardless of facts. Lastly one should note that financial journals like Forbes and Fortune had run several articles over the years scrutinizing Trump’s business practices. In fact, Trump’s links to Russia were scrutinized by financial journals long before Americans ever heard of Christopher Steele.
Peter,..
I’m aware of Trump’s business history; he’s made news for c35 years in business journals and elsewhere.
Steele started the dossier in May or June, 2016— depending on the source you read.
Trump was the presumptive nominee at that point, although the convention had not formalized his nomination….he was clearly over the top in delehates by the time Steele started the dossier project. This isn’t a project commissioned by “any corporation”; it is foreign oppsituon research on an American presidential candidate.
And Steele isn’t naive enough to be unfamiliar with American politics and issues.
And he had a strong bias against Trump.
I’ve heard that characterization of Steele and his dossier project before…i.e., that Steele was just an apolitical, objective agent gathering information like he would for any company,government, etc.
But this wasn’t “just another project”because it involved the use of foreign oppostion research ahainst a party’s nominee.
Steele was sought because of his expertise and contacts regarding Russian affairs. It was already well-known that Trump had contacts in Russia. Why wouldn’t the Clinton campaign look into those connections? Should they have said, “Oh, it wouldn’t be fair to pry into Trump’s Russian connections”.
Nevertheless Steele’s research was scarcely used by the Clinton campaign. At no point did Hillary make any serious effort to tie Trump to Russia. Nor did Hillary publically question Trump’s business practices. She probably ‘should have’, but she didn’t.
Therefore it seems irrational that Trumpers have projected so much hatred upon Christopher Steele. I have read that Steele himself is flabbergasted to find himself the object of such hatred. Steele never imagined Donald Trump would even get the White House. From Steele’s perspective Donald Trump seemed like a fringe candidate. And Trump ‘was’ a fringe candidate. But his supporters keep forgetting that.
Peter, ..
I’ll reply to your latest comments in reply box I can use…it’ll be out of sewuence.
“At no point did Hillary seriously try to tie Trump to Russia”.
OK, Peter, when she called Trump “Putin’s puppet” in one of the debates, and made similar statements, she wasn’t “seriously trying to tie Trump to Russia?
Sure.😒
Tom, if this appearing on the thread I want to honestly thank you for mentioning that “Putin’s Puppet” reference by Hillary. Because of you I watched that again for the first time since the live debate. What a fascinating exchange to watch 18 months later.
Hillary was on the offense because Trump was still denying cyber-attacks traced to Eastern Europe. Trump was calling it “fake news” back then. Which makes you wonder why he poo-pooed it. Trump was, in fact, praising Wikileaks!
Regardless of how Wikileaks obtained the DNC emails, Trump was rejoicing in a felony by praising Wikileaks. That in itself should be considered a scandal. A presidential candidate can’t possibly praise a cyber attack in an age when cyber crime threatens institutions. For that reason alone Trump is a buffoon.
Peter Hill – that leak (not hack) exposed Hillary and the DNC for the criminals they really were. Wikileaks was kind enough to let the rest of us know. Trump just rejoiced in that. I would have, too. 🙂 I would have rubbed her nose in it every chance I got.
But Paul as President your Justice Department will be prosecuting cybercrime in the Federal Courts. You can’t put yourself on record as condoning a cybercrime. Besides, Trump possibly made the RNC an inviting target by praising Wikileaks.
For legal reasons alone no responsible politician wants to praise crimes of any type. Experienced politicians understand that principle. That’s why Presidents should have government credentials.
Trump supporters should grasp that issue when calling the Russia Probe a “witch hunt”. No President has ever invited more suspicion on himself than Donald Trump. His praise of Wikileaks is a prime example.
Trump is the most serious threat to American values ever to occupy the White House.
You haven’t a clue as to what ‘American values’ are.
Well, let’s go through Your President’s values: bragging about “pussy grabbing”, calling African countries and other nations with persons of color “shithole”, chronic, habitual lying, two failed marriages, one of which involved domestic battery, multiple business bankruptcies, expressed lust for his own daughter, braggadociousness, name-calling, arrogance, inability to cobble together a functioning cabinet, demands for personal loyalty as a condition for government service, endless departures of West Wing workers unqualified or unfit to serve, misogyny, sex with a porn star, payoff to a porn star, affair with Playboy bunny, payoff to the Playboy bunny, praise for White Supremacists, including one who ran down a protester, underlying motivation for everything based on jealousy for the previous President because he is black, the list goes on.
Missing from the list are: patriotism, respect for the rule of law, altruism, respect for women, respect for minorities, respect for those from other cultures, respect for heads of other countries, respect for the environment, respect for the office of the President of the United States, respect for the Justice Department, respect for Congress, the list goes on.
Well, let’s go through Your President’s values: bragging about “pussy grabbing”, calling African countries and other nations with persons of color “shithole”, chronic, habitual lying, two failed marriages, one of which involved domestic battery, multiple business bankruptcies, expressed lust for his own daughter, braggadociousness, name-calling, arrogance, inability to cobble together a functioning cabinet, demands for personal loyalty as a condition for government service, endless departures of West Wing workers unqualified or unfit to serve, misogyny, sex with a porn star, payoff to a porn star, affair with Playboy bunny, payoff to the Playboy bunny, praise for White Supremacists, including one who ran down a protester, underlying motivation for everything based on jealousy for the previous President because he is black, the list goes on. Missing from the list are: patriotism, respect for the rule of law, altruism, respect for women, respect for minorities, respect for those from other cultures, respect for heads of other countries, respect for the environment, respect for the office of the President of the United States, respect for the Justice Department, respect for Congress, the list goes on.
Of course, all of this is irrelevant to the point. I think we’ve all figured out by this point that each use of the term ‘Kellyanne Pivot’ by you is an act of projection.
‘Bragging about pussy grabbing’ is not a value. It was, in context, an observation about human behavior. The use of the term ‘shithole’ has as its source a Democratic member of Congress not known for integrity; you swallowed it whole. The term as reported referred to the quality of life in those loci, not the color of their inhabitants. The contention that he ‘battered’ his wife was uttered in a series of divorce filings and later withdrawn; people lie in divorce filings. He’s made equity investments in firms that went into re-organization or liquidation; no clue why this is a character defect in your mind. Not every business venture succeeds. He never praised white supremacists. Contentions about his affairs with this or that person are largely unproven; you swallow them whole. There is no evidence that he’s the least bit jealous of his predecessor for any reason and he has no reason to be. Obama’s had a simulacrum of a professional life; Trump is a man of real accomplishment. There is no indication that the president lacks patriotism; the left hates him because he appeals to patriotism. It’s pretty rich to complain he ‘lacks respect for the rule of law’ given that he’s been in the midst of a multifaceted lawfare compaign run by federal judges and Justice Department lifers. ‘Respect for women’ qua women is a pseudo-virtue. You respect people who merit respect, not generics. Neither the Department of Justice nor Congress merit any respect.
The list goes on. Your posts are verbose and tiresome. They are emotion laden. They are shot through with falsehoods. There is not one redeeming feature in any of them. Those of us who encounter you here have a reprieve: we do not have to have any dealings with you in meatworld. To those subjected to you face-to-face, we must extend our sympathies.
Bragging to a reporter that you can grab women’s genitalia because you’re famous shows arrogant depravity and extreme misogyny, not to mention stupidity. This level of disrespect for women is a value inconsistent with basic human dignity and is disqualifying to occupy the White House. We all know why your President referred to these countries using vulgar language. He is a racist. No pivoting to blame anyone else.
As to the business bankruptcies, they prove he’s no genius at business or in handling finances, contrary to what he claims. I shudder to think how much we’d have to hear if Barak Obama had even one failed busness and screwed even one creditor. More arrogance and lying, a topic you didn’t address.
Ivana swore, under oath that he beat her and pulled out some of her hair. This prompted Trump to buy her off. This conduct shows his emotional instability and need for revenge, more character flaws. We’ve seen evidence of this since he stole the election. I believe Ivanka’s pre-payoff testimony. If there’s nothing to the Stormy Daniels or Karen McDougal matters, why were they also bought off?
You think Trump has respect for the rule of law? That’s rich. He thinks the Justice Department exists to serve him to prevent prosecution for crimes he’s under investigation for. He doesn’t understand that the Justice Department exists to serve the American people by prosecuting those who break the law, even if they are the President.
He absolutely did praise white supremacists. I’ve seen the speech. He said they were good people.
His own staff claims he obsesses over Barak Obama. He constantly criticizes,laws, regulations and treaties that arose under the Obama administration, unlike all previous Presidents, who simply don’t behave like this.
It’s plainly obvious that you’ll not only buy whatever excuse Fox News comes up with but that you’ll also personally attack anyone who criticizes Trump. That’s his contribution to the American political system, and it’s divisive and un-American.
Natacha – Trump did not steal the election. He out-hustled Hillary and won the election. #HillaryLost Git over it!!!
Natacha,
Tyranny and treason are Un-American; and you peddle both.
Cartoon Penguin,
Natacha exercises her First Amendment right to speak freely and to express herself freely. To call that by the names of tyranny and treason is . . . (what’s the word) . . . un-American.
@Bob, Esq. April 30, 2018 at 11:23 AM
“Peter Hill, You are a fraud.”
Bob, respectfully, your comment implies that Peter is exclusively ethically challenged. But after reading his many light-headed comments, it’s very hard to avoid the conclusion that he’s suffering from a considerable intellectual deficit, as well.
His emotionality seems to blind him to facts that are horse flies in the ointment of his partisanship, seriously compromising his ability to think.
Ken, don’t withhold! Please share your ‘facts’ that are “horse flies in the ointment of my partisanship”.
Yes, Ken, you are a true Trump disciple. Instead of a substantive response to points raised by Peter, you pivot to ad hominem attacks on him, his intelligence and intellectual capacity.
Such behavior is un-American, but the President you admire so much does this every single day. How do people teach children moral values or critical thinking when the POTUS responds to criticism by infantile name-calling and personal attacks? How about the consistent pattern of flat-out lying and endless aggrandizing? Just Saturday, he gave himself an A+ for his “accomplishments”. Trump was never an admirable person to begin with. He has never apologized for bragging about sexually assaulting women, much less the assaults themselves. There is a huge difference between self-confidence and arrogance. Trump is the embodiment of the latter, and this is not a desirable trait.
Natacha,
“Un-American?”
Whenever power is put into some hands for the government of the people, and is then diverted from that purpose and used to subdue the people to the arbitrary commands of those that have the power, then that immediately becomes tyranny, whether the power-holders are one or many.
– John Locke “Second Treatise of Government”
Using a fabricated dossier for the purpose of weaponizing the intelligence and law enforcement powers of the Federal government to “submit the people to the arbitrary commands of officials holding such power” in furtherance of removing a legally elected president, is tyranny and treason.
Bob,
The concern by Natacha for the teaching of moral values or critical-thinking skills to children rings hollow. She hasn’t demonstrated the affinity for either, but somehow becomes apoplectic assuming it’s the POTUS that is responsible for that teaching. The civics illiteracy of her and her ilk is unAmerican.
Frederic Bastiat has them pegged:
According to their degree of enlightenment, these plundered classes may propose one of two entirely different purposes when they attempt to attain political power: Either they may wish to stop lawful plunder, or they may wish to share in it.
Woe to the nation when this latter purpose prevails among the mass victims of lawful plunder when they, in turn, seize the power to make laws! Until that happens, the few practice lawful plunder upon the many, a common practice where the right to participate in the making of law is limited to a few persons. But then, participation in the making of law becomes universal. And then, men seek to balance their conflicting interests by universal plunder. Instead of rooting out the injustices found in society, they make these injustices general. As soon as the plundered classes gain political power, they establish a system of reprisals against other classes. They do not abolish legal plunder. (This objective would demand more enlightenment than they possess.) Instead, they emulate their evil predecessors by participating in this legal plunder, even though it is against their own interests.
It is as if it were necessary, before a reign of justice appears, for everyone to suffer a cruel retribution — some for their evilness, and some for their lack of understanding.
The first and foremost enemy of our constitutional republic is tyranny.
Failure to understand that simple truth is like failing to understand order of operations in mathematics.
You keep listening to the talking heads at Fox who harp that: 1. the dossier is fabricated; so far, no proof that any of the facts are untrue; 2. The dossier is the reason why the Justice Department is going after Trump; not true. It cannot be disputed that the Russians interfered with the 2016 election. Trump, Jr. met with Russians to get dirt on HRC. Russians hacked into the computers of the DNC and HRC. Maybe they also hacked into the RNC and Trump and have good dirt on him, too, who knows? Flynn has ties with Russia, Sessions has ties with Russia, Trump lied about spending 2 nights in Moscow; 3. that the intelligence and law enforcement communities have been “weaponized”. I’ve seen hard-smokin’ Hannity [chain smokes when not on camera] pound on this allegation, which is likewise not true. It’s sad that people fall for this crap.
Truth is the agreement between knowledge and its object.
Truth or lie?
1. the dossier is fabricated; so far, no proof that any of the facts are untrue;
Natacha is a child raping pedophile.
So far no proof any of the facts are untrue.
Affirmati Non Neganti Incumbit Probatio; except when it comes to acts of treason?
What’s the weather like on your planet?
Sounds like Alan is back projecting his proclivities. You are one sick excuse of a human.
I don’t know who the hell Alan is. I merely showed how the categorical imperative can be used to show why we have the rule: Affirmati Non Neganti Incumbit Probatio,
Trump is presumed to be innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. Trump has not yet been charged with any crime at all. Trump is the subject of an investigation into Russian attempts to cultivate members of Trump’s campaign for President as well as any coordination of Trump’s campaign activities with the Russian hacking and leaking operation in the 2016 election.
The burden of proof sits squarely atop the shoulders of Robert Swan Mueller The Third who will not be deterred by cartoon penguins in top-hats and bow-ties threatening to bring treason charges against any and all who dare to investigate The POTUS, Trump.
Natacha,
It’s all fun and games until someone is hanged for treason.
A charge of treason is never to be taken lightly by anyone. And that includes, especially, the cartoon penguin hurling accusations of treason against his fellow citizens who dare to disagree with that cartoon penguin on a blawg hosted by a law professor who has repeatedly complained about the misuse and abuse of treason charges against one’s political adversaries.
“Whenever power is put into some hands for the government of the people, and is then diverted from that purpose and used to subdue the people to the arbitrary commands of those that have the power, then that immediately becomes tyranny, whether the power-holders are one or many.” – J. Locke
The fraudulent use of the Federal powers of intelligence and law enforcement so as to “subdue the people to the arbitrary commands of those entrusted with those powers” — in furtherance of a plot to remove a legally elected president from power — is tyranny by definition.
Unless you’re prepared to claim that truth is no longer “the agreement between knowledge and its object”, i.e. lie to yourself and others, no amount of “politics as usual” spin will work here. You’re free to deny that tyranny is not the first and foremost enemy of our constitutional republic; as clearly spelled out within the Declaration of Independence and further illustrated by the framework of our Constitution. Thus, you’re also free to deny that an act of tyranny is not an act of treason per se. And you’re free to deny that the exercise of said tyrannical powers in furtherance of a design to remove a lawfully elected president isn’t treason as well.
However the law of non-contradiction requires a resolution. You can either affirm the social compact that’s been in place since the inception of this country by enforcing its covenants and restrictions against tyranny; or you can affirmatively abandon the compact altogether, as progressives have been wont to do since the days of Wilson; ensuring the achievement of your political ends.
But you can’t have both.
@Natacha April 30, 2018 at 3:30 PM
“Yes, Ken, you are a true Trump disciple. Instead of a substantive response to points raised by Peter, you pivot to ad hominem attacks on him, his intelligence and intellectual capacity. Such behavior is un-American, but the President you admire so much does this every single day.”
You greatly mistake me, Natacha, probably due to your thinking exclusively in binary partisan terms. I’m no Trump admirer, let alone disciple, but he should be criticized for legitimate reasons, not on the basis of gossipy factoids such as Peter Hill has routinely appealed to.
And please see my subsequent comment directed to him in which I pointed out specific errors of fact and interpretation on his part.
The incoming President, a political novice with no experience in government, is quite possibly compromised.
We have a system of checks and balances for just that scenario. At least on paper. We just have to have the the will to use it.
On the other hand, we had a political professional with years of experience who was compromised running for President. Her record of illegal activity did not require an IC to investigate. It did not require congressional committees to investigate. It only required our chief law enforcement agency to refer the case to an unpoliticized DOJ to prosecute. And if this does not happen, 1, 5, 10, 20+ years from now, the public would still be asking, why did we ignore the rule of law?
Olly, Seven House Committees investigated Hillary. No contemporary politician has been investigated more than Hillary Clinton. What’s more, your post raises again the question of ‘why’ Republicans are so impotent when they control the government. If Hillary Clinton is indeed guilty of criminal activity, why isn’t Trump’s Justice Department prosecuting??
The idea seems to be that Hillary Clinton is an actual bona fide witch with supernatural powers. And though Republicans control the government, they are powerless to stop this witch from framing Donald Trump for all the ‘coincidences’ surrounding him.
What’s more, your post raises again the question of ‘why’ Republicans are so impotent when they control the government.
Is this the same GOP-controlled government that said they were going to repeal and replace Obamacare? Yeah, Republican-controlled does not mean the rule of law and separation of powers is now the order of the day.
If Hillary Clinton is indeed guilty of criminal activity, why isn’t Trump’s Justice Department prosecuting??
I agree and would add the Awan brothers to that question.
Here is a very basic question for you: Do you believe there is more evidence of crimes being committed by Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump?
Hillary is plainly guilty of having many classified documents in her home computer. There’s no if’s, and, or buts about how the draconian espionage act works. That’s exactly what you need for a conviction. The inequity of how this law has been applied exists regardless of your political view.
Peter Hill said, “The incoming President, a political novice with no experience in government, is quite possibly compromised.”
Olly said, “We have a system of checks and balances for just that scenario. At least on paper. We just have to have the the will to use it.”
That’s true, Chief. Congress has to have the will to use its Constitutional powers. And the people have to have the will to elect representatives who will exercise their Constitutional powers. Meanwhile, all The POTUS has to do is garner 270 or more electoral votes. The POTUS is under no constitutional obligation whatsoever to pass a security background check in order to exercise the Constitutional powers of the executive branch. Presumably the campaign for election to the Presidency is supposed to serve as the security background check for The POTUS according to the will of the people as expressed at the polls on election day.
Unless, of course, a hostile foreign power attempts to cultivate members of a campaign for POTUS who may or may not have coordinated their campaign activities with the hacking, leaking and information warfare operation conducted by that hostile foreign power for the purpose electing a POTUS who might afford that hostile foreign power lax enforcement of sanctions against that hostile foreign power because that POTUS, himself, may very well have been laundering money for that hostile foreign power who might very well be using their knowledge of that suspected crime to extort lax sanctions enforcement from that POTUS.
What’s the vaunted rule of law by means of checks and balances supposed to do in that event, Chief???
What’s the vaunted rule of law by means of checks and balances supposed to do in that event, Chief???
Your hypothetical would appear to assume once a President is elected he is free to conduct business any way he wants. IC turns off its computers, Congress goes on recess, the MSM fawning over his every move, banking regulators stop monitoring foreign transactions, blogs like this no longer debate the actions of the President, Don’t forget that President Trump has surrounded his administration with career patriots who have served this country with honor and distinction. Have they sold out to the enemy as well? And that’s just within this country. Perhaps people have woken up to discover the ignorance and apathy they had towards Obama’s reign set an unacceptable precedent in abuse of power that would be available to Trump. Oops.
Your hypothetical falls flat as we now have an actual record of the Trump presidency to measure. Of all your sky-is-falling predictions of what a compromised President Trump would do once he stole the election, what evidence exists that he is abusing power and selling our country out? He’s on the clock don’t you know?
I’ll wait.
@Peter Hill April 30, 2018 at 10:54 AM
Peter, what you don’t seem capable of grasping as yet is that you’re indulging yourself in what is essentially unsubstantiated political gossip.
For only one (but very important) example, “In fact, the new President refuses to say anything negative about the Russian leader; even as the public learns Russia meddled in the election!”
Here are only two of the facts that are flies in your gossipy anti-Trump ointment:
1) Trump has repeatedly publicly castigated Putin, not to mention having twice bombed a country in which Russian troops are stationed, and
2) There is much more technical and testimonial evidence than not that the infamous DNC emails were leaked, rather than hacked.
As former NSA Technical Director William Binney has pointed out, it is fully within the surveillance capabilities of the NSA to trace any data from any server to its final destination, and if a hack of the DNC’s server had occurred, the NSA would no doubt have tracked it and been able to unequivocally assert that it had done so.
“Despite all the media coverage taking the veracity of the ICA assessment for granted, even now we have only the uncorroborated assertion of [selected] intelligence officials to go on. Indeed, this was noticed by The New York Times’s Scott Shane, who wrote the day the report appeared: ‘What is missing from the public report is…hard evidence to back up the agencies’ claims that the Russian government engineered the election attack…. Instead, the message from the agencies essentially amounts to ‘trust us.’ ”
Those same agencies, moreover, proffer a most revealing disclaimer: “Astonishingly and often overlooked, the authors of the declassified ICA [Intelligence Community Assessment] themselves admit that their ‘judgments are not intended to imply that we have proof that shows something to be a fact.’ ”
https://www.thenation.com/article/a-leak-or-a-hack-a-forum-on-the-vips-memo/
Take away the highly dubious claim that Russians hacked the DNC server and take away the uncorroborated allegations in the Clinton-funded Steele dossier, and you pretty obviously need to come up with something that’s actually probative with which to criticize Trump.
Excerpted from the article to which Ken Rogers linked above:
The implications of this leap-to-conclusions analysis of the VIPS memo—which centers on claiming as an unassailable and immutable fact that the DNC “hack” was committed by an insider with direct access to the DNC server, who then deliberately doctored data and documents to look like a Russian or Russia-affiliated actor was involved, and therefore no hack occurred (consequently, ipso facto, the Russians did not do it)—are contingent on a fallacy.
Data-transfer speeds across networks and the Internet measured in megabits per second (or megabytes per second) can easily achieve rates that greatly exceed the cited reference in the VIPS memo of 1,976 megabytes in 87 seconds (∼22.71 megabytes per second or ∼181.7 megabits per second), and well beyond 50 megabytes, depending on the capacity of the network and the method of access to that network. Speeds across the network vary greatly, and sustained write speeds copied out to local devices are often quite a bit slower.
The environment around Trump, Russia, et al. is hyperpolarized right now, and much disinformation is floating around, feeding confirmation bias, mirroring and even producing conspiracy theories.
“HOUSE INTELLIGENCE REPORT” WAS REALLY “HOUSE REPUBLICAN REPORT”
Democrats had no meaningful role in it’s preparation or findings. Therefore the report is every bit as ‘political’ as the alleged ‘leaks’ that Professor Turley addresses here. What’s more, James Clapper’s role was no less political than the activities of Committee Chairman Devin Nunes.
You really have to be kidding with all of this concern about “leaking information.” The entirety of our government is one massive sieve of information leaks. Everybody leaks all the time. Our only means of knowing anything is illegal leaks. Show me one single news story that does not contain the phrase, “according to sources that remained anonymous because they were not authorized to speak on the subject.”
Reblogged this on What i found intersting today….
Bottom line: Obama, his intelligence community, and his FBI/DOJ attempted a coup using evidence they made up. Many in the media are up to their ears in theses crimes – they are not exempt from criminal prosecution under the Espionage Act.
Their scheme to bring down the President will bring them down instead.
https://theconservativetreehouse.files.wordpress.com/2018/04/comey-clapper-and-brennan.jpg
INlegaleagle said, “Many in the media are up to their ears in theses crimes – they are not exempt from criminal prosecution under the Espionage Act.”
So Trump is going to jail journalists, now, for being enemies of the state? Is he? Perhaps you’ve discovered an impeachable offense.
Trump?
No, Trump is neither the investigator (Horowitz), or the prosecutor (Huber) or seated on the grand jury(s).
Horowitz, Huber and a grand jury are going to indict journalists under The Espionage Act for . . . staging a coup d’état???
And Trump has nothing whatsoever to do with that???
@INlegaleagle April 30, 2018 at 8:22 AM
I hope you’re right about their legal exposure, but there’s no doubt whatsoever that Leaky, Sneaky, and Freaky would benefit enormously from the ingestion of massive quantities of prune juice.
What, officials of a Democratic administration weaponizing federal agencies, engaging in unprofessional conduct, and lying to everyone in sight? This is news?
Did serial liar James Clapper leak information to CNN? Does a bear poop in the woods? Is the Pope Catholic? These are the enduring mysteries of our time. Philosophers and historians will, no doubt, be debating these questions in the decades to come.
Unclever. Try harder to be original.
Trump leaked the fact that Comey had briefed him on the dossier to CNN.
The legal definition of unclever is inadept, inept, or incompetent. You have failed to present any supporting evidence for your claim. Your comment must, therefore, be dismissed with prejudice.
Comey said Trump was obsessed with the urolagnia allegation in the dossier. Comey said Trump wanted Comey to investigate the urolagnia allegation to prove that it was a lie. The urolagnia allegation came from a close associate of Trump who made the arrangements for and accompanied Trump on his 2013 trip to Moscow for the Miss Universe Pageant.
Either Steele had an informant in the Trump campaign or Trump had a close associate who planted disinformation in the dossier for the purpose of discrediting the dossier any anyone else who got a hold of it. Until the dossier was leaked to the press, there was no way for the planted disinformation in the dossier to discredit the dossier and anyone who got a hold of it. Comey told Trump that the media already had the dossier and were looking for an excuse to publish it.
Comey briefed Trump on the dossier on January 9th, 2017. CNN reported that Trump had been briefed on the dossier on January 10th, 2017. Buzzfeed published most of the dossier hours after CNN reported on the briefing on Jaunary 10th, 2017.
Comey first briefed Trump on the dossier on January 6th, 2017.
Diane – give us the name of the close associate.
Unknown. Suspicion was placed on Keith Schiller–Trump’s body guard. But that’s just suspicion.
Diane – he signed a NDA. It would not be worth enough to give up Trump. Besides, he has already come out defending Trump.
If Trump told Schiller to plant disinformation with Steele, then Schiller would plant disinformation with Steele.
Diane – now you have really gone around the bend. There is no hope for you.
Audacity springs eternal.
Urolagnia.
Learned a new word.
Now how do I unlearn it?
Cordially, Bill
wildbill99, I’m so sorry. Please forgive me. The offending term was first posted by John Say. Let’s blame him.
I’ve already exhausted my allotted “John Say is too blame” comments for the month.
But your apology is appreciated.
wildbill99 – you could have someone pee on you. 😉
https://www.justice.gov/usao-sdny/pr/acting-manhattan-us-attorney-announces-59-million-settlement-civil-money-laundering-and
Diane – we know there is a Russian mob, so?
Excerpted from the May 12th, 2017 article linked above:
Acting Manhattan U.S. Attorney Joon H. Kim said: “We will not allow the U.S. financial system to be used to launder the proceeds of crimes committed anywhere – here in the U.S., in Russia, or anywhere else. Under the terms of this settlement, the defendants have agreed to pay not just what we alleged flowed to them from the Russian treasury fraud, but three times that amount, and roughly 10 times the money we alleged could be traced directly into U.S. accounts and real estate.”
Imteresting that Fusion GPS did work on behalf of Prevezon, the company that was fined.
Also interesting that Glenn Simpson of Fusion GPS met with Russian lawyer Veselnitskaya right before and right after the Trump Tower meeting.
I think that Veselnitskaya was representing Prevezon as well.
Diane – at no point did I see Trump’s name attached to that, did you?
I’ll pass.
David Benson – at the risk of repeating myself, it is not your field(s). You have no earthly idea what philosophers and historians will or will not be debating.
Proposed debate topic: How many coincidences can dance on the head of a pin?
And so a member of the fourth branch, the permanent bureaucracy, lies to Congress then leaves for a cushy job in the media; Democrats respond by dismissing a “smear campaign” because his leak helped them politically. I try to avoid being cynical when reviewing these stories, but sometimes it’s just not possible.
Clapper and Comey seem to have set up the President to get the Steele Dossier in the news. And Comey talks about higher ethics. BS. He has no moral compass.
“He has no moral compass.”
It is excellent (up to a point). It always points at the money.
Paul C. Schulte said, “Clapper and Comey seem to have set up the President to get the Steele Dossier in the news.”
The urolagnia allegation in the dossier came from a close associate of Trump who accompanied Trump and made arrangements for Trump’s 2013 trip to Moscow for the Miss Universe Pageant. To presume that Trump didn’t know anything at all about the urolagnia allegation in the dossier until Comey briefed Trump on the dossier is to be willfully naïve.
Diane – I am not a fan of the Comey memos or the Comey/Clapper setup. However, according to Comey, Trump wanted his trip investigated to prove he was innocent. As a noted germaphobe, this does not seem like behavior he would associate with.
That’s the point, Paul. The prostitute/urolagnia allegation is almost certainly disinformation intended to discredit the dossier. The only way to get Steele to fall for it was to make it come from a close associate of Trump. And just look at how much hay Trump has been making out of it ever since.
L4D,…
– Did you ever consider that the “pee story” was put in there to discredit Trump?
You’re so hooked on the idea that it was put there to discredit the dossier that you overlook an obvious possibity.
Why would a close associate of Trump want to discredit Trump? Wait. You may have a point, Tom.
L4D,
— I’ve never seen the source for the “pee tape” allegation identified.
I don’t think that Steele has ever named his Russian contacts, or the sources that his contacts used to gather materialfor the dossier.
So it’s a speculative stretch to claim that the pee tape story came from “a close associate of Trump”.
Don’t forget; you asked for it:
https://themoscowproject.org/dossier/
Diane – your reading skills suck. Source D, the source for the pee tapes was only present, there is no mention of being a close associate. Other mentions are of the hotel staff, you nimrod.
Paul C. Schulte,..
– The Center for Americaican Progress produces “The Moscow Project”.
George Soros is among the major contributors to the Center for American Progress, which was co-founded by John Podesta and a far left political activist whose name escapes me at the moment.
The Huffington Post article that I cited describes the Moscow Project as a lavish SuperSpin project.
That article has some other colorful descriptions for their operation.
Tom Nash – thank you for the info, although even they did not have a close associate. 😉
Some observers claim that Source D is Sergei Millian.
The article you linked said “several of the staff were aware” of the pee allegation.
…I didn’t see anything about Trump’s bodyguard neing the source.
The Huffington Post has an interesting article about “The Moscow Project” ( May 2, 2017
“How the Russia story gog its torque”.
It mentions “Klinton Kremlin Koolaid”, amoung other descriptive observations about the tactics and goals of The Moscow Project.
“GoT its torque”
Excerpted from Arthur Snell, “How To Read The Trump Dossier”:
There’s a further allegation that ‘the Kremlin had been feeding TRUMP and his team valuable intelligence on his opponents.’ This claim is made by the Foreign Ministry source and confirmed by another source, described as a ‘close associate’ of the President-elect, who organised Trump’s visits to Moscow and accompanied him on them. The Russians might have confected the allegations and fed them to Steele in order to discredit Trump; but that argument can’t account for why one of Trump’s own people repeated them, unless we suppose he had been suborned by the Russians.
The allegations of a Russian campaign to support Trump are examples of strategic intelligence. The claims about Trump’s unusual sexual activities in a Moscow hotel suite, on the other hand, are tactical: the incident either occurred or it didn’t. The report mentions four different sources referring to it. The ‘close associate’ who arranged the Moscow trips is one. It’s also claimed that the incident was ‘confirmed [by another source] … S/he and several of the staff were aware of it at the time and subsequently.’ This source appears to have had some connection with the hotel where the incident took place, and is said to have introduced one of the intelligence company’s team to ‘a female staffer at the hotel … who also confirmed the story’. All the other sources in the dossier have had their gender obscured to make it harder to identify them, so this female staffer, we can assume, was a one-off contact used to verify the hotel story rather than an established source. Finally, the Kremlin-based former intelligence officer mentioned earlier is reported to have said that ‘TRUMP’s unorthodox behaviour in Russia’ gave the authorities sufficient material for blackmail.
What “strategic intelligence” supposedly supplied by the Russians was used by the Trump campaign?
Perhaps you’re merely pretending to miss the point, Tom. Snell said, “. . . confirmed by another source, described as a ‘close associate’ of the President-elect, who organised Trump’s visits to Moscow and accompanied him on them.” Snell also said, “The report mentions four different sources referring to it. The ‘close associate’ who arranged the Moscow trips is one.”
L4D,…
Since you did not answer my question, I’ll repeat it; what strategic intelligence did the Trump campaign receive?
I’m not interested in hearing about an,alleged meeting…the question was what useful intelligence was supposedly passed on to the Trump campaign?
“How to read the dossier”….pick out an authoer like Snell who puts a particular spin on it that jives with L4D’s view.
That is, is you have time left over after plowing though her daily columns, and links plastered everywhere.
http://www.businessinsider.com/sergei-millian-michael-cohen-glenn-simpson-fusion-gps-2018-1
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/world-sergei-millian-congresss-trump-russia-investigators-hunt/story?id=53207497
Excerpted from the second article linked above:
During the 2016 campaign, Millian had contact with several of then-candidate Trump’s campaign aides and business colleagues, including George Papadopoulos, the campaign figure who has since pleaded guilty to lying to the FBI and is now cooperating with the federal probe.
Papadopoulos’s fiancé Simona Mangiante told ABC News Millian approached the young Trump foreign policy advisor early in 2016, after he became associated with the campaign, and they struck up a friendship.
Millian also briefly engaged in social media contact on Twitter with Cohen. Cohen later told ABC News that he exchanged emails with Millian in order to tell him to stop exaggerating his ties to the Trump Organization.
Excerpted from the article linked above:
Glenn Simpson, who cofounded the opposition research firm Fusion GPS, told lawmakers that a trip Trump Organization representatives took to Moscow several years ago had come onto the firm’s radar as part of their research into Trump’s business history.
The trip was organized by Sergei Millian, Simpson said. He said Millian “came up in connection with Chris’ work as one of the people around Trump who had a Russian background.” Chris is a reference to Christopher Steele, the former British intelligence officer hired by Fusion to research Trump’s Russia ties.
Millian is believed to be a key source in a collection of memos Steele wrote between June and December of 2016 outlining Trump and his campaign members’ alleged ties to Russian officials. The memos allege that Moscow and the Trump campaign worked hand in hand at points to influence the US election.
Mr. Clapper and Mr. Comey have told us conflicting statements. So one or both are lying. Of course that’s what we’ve come to expect from our law enforcement agencies.
And does anyone wonder why there’s so little confidence in the hierarchy of the FBI, DOJ and CIA?
Does Mike Peterman wonder why there’s so little skepticism about Trump amongst Trump supporters and defenders?
Nope because Trump supporters and defenders aren’t in charge of protecting the inhabitants of this country.
So again you are speculating, professor. For shame.
So again you which name you are operating under now trying to twist, redefine, reframe and manage the situation but which ever it’s shameful you hide behind a stupid name and claim speculation against another who just laid things out clearly. Sorry Comrade hollywood we’ve fallen out of the habit of given the left any credence whatsoever without backed up proof of which your eight word sentence does not qualify. When an organization announces their intention to lie about everything and then backs it uip with firm examples on a near daily basis one tends to award the proper response. REJECTED. And that’s the view of the independent self governing citizens of the Constitutional CENTER.
Clapper has already admitted to leaking the dossier to CNN during a recent CNN interview. .
Are you sure? Are you really sure?
No, it was a dream. Of course I am sure. I am not a child Late, and your way of asking was the way a parent asks a child a question suspecting of fibbing. The Clapper is a Leaker. Good Day Ma’am.
PS Late: Please stop posting links of articles for us to read. I doubt anybody clicks on those links. Have a logical point and spit it out concisely. Stop going Rachel “Mad Cow” Maddows on us.
How did you become so accustomed to giving imperative commands to other people? You cannot possibly have been born that way. FTR, you’re no longer a good sport, Bill Martin.
It’s a line from the movie “My Cousin Vinny.”