The release of the summary of findings by the Special Counsel has left much of the country in stunned silence. For two years, millions of voters have kept hope alive that the term of Donald Trump would be cut short by a type of avenging angel in Robert Mueller. They are now left with a reality that is still difficult to process: Donald Trump is likely to finish his term as President of the United States. There I said it.
Cable programs that have spent years airing assurance of criminal prosecutions seemed at a loss for words. Indeed, it is difficult to process. Matthews are going through what is a familiar process. It is called the stage of grieving. Psychiatrist Elizabeth Kübler-Ross famously laid out the stages of denial, anger, bargaining, depression, and acceptance. Judging from the responses on Sunday night, we are still a fair distance from acceptance.
Denial
For much of the last two years, many voters have been in open denial. Denial is easy when it is a collective effort. Voters quickly tuned into channels that reaffirmed their greatest hopes for prosecution or impeachment. This echo-chamber audience buoyed the ratings of MSNBC and CNN where viewers were assured by legal analysts that the evidence against Trump was overwhelming and that Mueller to set things right. As Kübler-Ross explained, people will often start by cling to a false and preferable reality.
That took an effort on collusion. From the outset, the entire theory of collusion was a bit wacky. For months, legal analysts spoke of collusion like it was a defined crime. It took months to get commentators to acknowledge that there is no such offense in the criminal code. The notion was that the Russian would collude with Trump or his family or aides to hack computer systems and then arrange for the leaking of the information through Wikileaks. One has to have a tad more respect for Russian intelligence to believe that they would place themselves at risk by colluding with Trump or Trump Jr. or a circus clown like Roger Stone. Why would they put themselves one tweet away from utter destruction? In the same vein, it made no sense to schedule a meeting in Trump Tower with half the world’s media downstairs to hold one of your secret meetings. Add to that the fact that they did not know who was going to be at the meeting and did not actually turn over the promise evidence of criminal conduct by Hillary Clinton.
Many people still seemed stuck on denial. On Friday, it was revealed that the Special Counsel had decided that he would not bring down any additional indictments. Some of us stated that this clearly indicated that Mueller had rejected the allegations of collusion between the Trump campaign and the Russians. Nevertheless, on Sunday morning, House Intelligence Committee Chair Adam Schiff was still claiming that there was ample existence of collusion even if no one seemed committed a single criminal act of collusion. Even before the summary was released, Rep. Steve Cohen (D-TN) declared that “very little credence” should be put in what Barr is saying. Others like MSNBC host Joy-Ann Reid and panelist Eli Mystal noted that Barr’s approach to the summary “feels like the seeds of a cover-up are here.” As for Intelligence Committee Chair Adam Schiff, he has doubled down on both obstruction and collusion.
Anger
Many people however are past denial and moving quickly to anger. MSNBC Chris Matthews exclaimed “How can they let Trump off the hook?” Over the last year, such anger has increased as filing after filing failed to mention collusion and even stated that no Trump campaign member knowingly dealt with the hackers or trolls in Russia. Despite these lengthy “speaking” indictments, anger simply augmented the denial. For those of us pointing out the absence of key elements and evidence, we were denounced as Trump supporters even through our columns generally denounced Trump for his conduct. Either you were all-in on the guarantee of criminal prosecutions or you were a Russian boot-licking troll for Trump. This anger rose to a crescendo when key figures from Michael Flynn to Paul Manafort were charged with things far removed from any collusion-related crime.
Nevertheless, there was considerable advantage in keeping this anger alive. Democrats ran on the expectation that they would seek impeachment after the midterm elections. Media virtually banished all other news to cover legal analysts explaining how new disclosures would easily satisfy the standard for prosecution or impeachment.
Bargaining
As 2018 turned into 2019, the bargaining stage began. Voters began to accept that Trump might not be charged but he would at least be impeached. Mueller was now portrayed not as a prosecutor but investigator who would give the goods to Congress for a swift and satisfying impeachment. After all, many Democrats rallied voters on the pledge of impeachment and Democratic leadership continued to insist that Trump was committing impeachable offense. As I wrote before the midterm elections, impeachment was always a cynical ploy for power. Democratic leadership had no interest in impeaching Trump and no intention to do so. Why bring about a Pence Administration in which he could unite the country just before the 2020 election? They want a wounded but living Trump in the White House not because it is necessarily good for the country but it is manifestly good for them.
With the release of the summary, many have shifted to the argument that, if collusion is a dry well, surely there can be relief in collateral crimes being investigated in New York and various congressional committees. Indeed, a recent poll showed support for impeachment of Trump falling, even among Democrats. Instead, many critics will be satisfied with further investigation even if they do not likely mean impeachment or prosecution.
Depression
As soon as the midterm elections were over, the Democratic leadership revealed the greatest bait-and-switch in history. Pelosi announced that impeachment was no part of their “agenda.” The members who were howling before the election about impeachable offenses now insisted that it would make no sense since the Republican Senate would not go along. That was depressing enough, but then people had to read this chilling line: “[T]he investigation did not establish that members of the Trump campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities.” That was followed by a finding by the Attorney General and the Deputy Attorney General that there was insufficient evidence of obstruction for a criminal case. In other words, your Trump condition is terminal.
Acceptance
We are now at the final stage were people begin to accept the inevitability of the final result. With Mueller not finding collusion or serious criminal acts, the two years of misleading and overhyped theories of criminality have come crashing down. Democrats can walk away with their added seats and the media can walk away with the added ratings, but voters are left with the painful reality to cope alone.
Of course, if prosecution or impeachment is unlikely, for many there is little to live for. Dr. Elisabeth Kubler-Ross was not particularly helpful on bedside manner. She assured patients that such death is “neither frightening nor painful, but a peaceful cessation of the functioning of the body.” However, rest assured, there will be no cessation of the function of one body. The House committees will continue to investigate and suggest that they could yet impeach . . . all the way up to the 2020 election.
This isn’t at all complicated in the mostly-used English language…..but a translation into convoluted Dianese can make, and is designed to make, twisted wreckage of what should be simple, straightforward concepts and communication.
Then, a beaming L4D can pat herself on the back again, congratulate herself a again on being oh-so-clever, and continue on with other games she like to play.
House Democrats Block Bill to Stop Infanticide For 24th Time, Refuse Care for Aborted Babies Born Alive
“H.R. 962, introduced by Rep. Ann Wagner (R-MO), ensures that a baby born alive after a failed or attempted abortion receives the same medical care as any other newborn. It would also penalize doctors who allow such infants to die or who intentionally kill a newborn following a failed abortion.”
“The Mueller report confirms that the Obama administration, without evidence, turned the surveillance powers of the federal government against the presidential campaign of the party out of power. This historic abuse of executive authority was either approved by President Barack Obama or it was not….
What has always seemed clear is that Mr. Obama never actually believed the now-discredited claim that the Trump campaign worked with Russia to rig the 2016 U.S. elections….
If Mr. Obama never bought into the collusion conspiracy theory, then the question is why he endorsed or allowed the use of federal surveillance tools against the party out of power—a direct threat to the democratic process that is at the heart of our country’s greatness.”
Mueller and the Obama Accounting
“The former President now owes the country an explanation for the historic abuse of government surveillance powers.
James FreemanMarch 25, 2019 1:17 p.m. ET
On Oct. 28, 2013, President Barack Obama and James Comey participate in the installation ceremony for Mr. Comey as FBI director at the bureau’s Washington headquarters.
The Mueller report confirms that the Obama administration, without evidence, turned the surveillance powers of the federal government against the presidential campaign of the party out of power. This historic abuse of executive authority was either approved by President Barack Obama or it was not. It’s time for Mr. Obama, who oddly receives few mentions in stories about his government’s spying on associates of the 2016 Trump campaign, to say what he knew and did not know about the targeting of his party’s opponents.
If he was briefed, for example, on plans by the Justice Department to seek wiretaps on Trump campaign associates, it’s hard to believe Mr. Obama would not have been highly interested in the matter. Going all the way back to his campaign for a U.S. Senate seat in Illinois, Mr. Obama had aggressively advocated for preventing federal abuse of surveillance powers.
In September of 2004, the Chicago Tribune reported that candidate Obama “is ripping the controversial USA Patriot Act for violating U.S. citizens’ civil liberties in the battle against terrorism.” The Tribune reported:
Answering a Tribune questionnaire on the issue of terrorism, Obama vows to support the repeal of several provisions of the act because he believes it failed to strike the appropriate balance between homeland security and protection of civil liberties.
…“The act goes too far in violating our fundamental notions of privacy, thus seriously eroding the very ideals at the heart of our country’s greatness,” Obama said in his questionnaire.
According to the Tribune, Mr. Obama said that “a cornerstone of our democracy” is “that actions of a sometimes overzealous and overreaching Executive Branch are subject to challenge.”
The next month, Madison, Wisconsin’s Capital Times reported on the Illinois candidate’s visit for a campaign event:
Barack Obama, the Illinois U.S. Senate candidate who became a national political phenomenon when he delivered the keynote address at this summer’s Democratic National Convention, says he would like to think he would be as courageous as Russ Feingold was when he cast the sole vote in the Senate against the Patriot Act…
“I like to think that, had I been in the Senate, I would have cast the second vote against the Patriot Act,” says Obama, who like Feingold is a lawyer and a passionate defender of the Bill of Rights.
It’s time for this lawyer and alleged passionate defender of the Bill of Rights to explain the actions of his overzealous and overreaching executive branch. If he didn’t find out about the wiretapping until after the fact, when exactly did he learn about it and how did he respond?
What has always seemed clear is that Mr. Obama never actually believed the now-discredited claim that the Trump campaign worked with Russia to rig the 2016 U.S. elections. In April of 2017, three months after Mr. Obama left office, this column noted that the former President had offered little criticism of the new President:
At the end of January, Mr. Obama broke his public silence, but it wasn’t to reveal a grand conspiracy among former or current Trump associates. The former president instead released via a spokesman a statement supporting protests of a new Trump executive order on immigration. “Barack Obama and his aides expected to take on President Donald Trump at some point, but they didn’t think it would happen this quickly,” Politico noted at the time. “Now they’re trying to find the right balance on issues that demand a response.” Politico further reported that from “his vacation spot in the Caribbean, Obama has been keeping up with news from Washington,” as well as following the anti-Trump protests that were occurring around the country.
If a former president, who had enjoyed unrivaled access to the relevant intelligence, believed that the country had been taken over by a cabal of Kremlin cronies, would he really be lying on a beach wondering which issues compelled him to criticize his successor—and having done so, decide that a Russia-engineered coup didn’t quite rise to that level?
If Mr. Obama never bought into the collusion conspiracy theory, then the question is why he endorsed or allowed the use of federal surveillance tools against the party out of power—a direct threat to the democratic process that is at the heart of our country’s greatness.
Mr. Obama might have room to deny any knowledge of the details of the surveillance abuses, given the story his FBI director told Congress—if anybody could believe that story.
The absolute bare minimum that Mr. Obama owes this country is an explanation of the actions of his government in spying on a presidential campaign.
SCANDAL EXTENDS TO OBAMA W.H. COUNSEL
So called scandal free more likely means that the DOJ and FBI leadership were so corrupt that protection of crimes were protected.
“Federal prosecutors are close to bringing charges against Greg Craig, a prominent Democratic lawyer and former White House counsel in the Obama administration, in a case that originated with special counsel Robert Mueller, according to people familiar with the matter.
The possible charges are connected to false statements Craig allegedly gave to investigators who were looking at the work he performed for Ukraine.
Though Mueller’s investigation has ended, a number of inquiries that were referred out by his office live on in other prosecutors’ offices, and Craig’s is among the earliest and most unusual.
Craig initially came into the crosshairs of federal prosecutors in mid-2017, during the investigation by Mueller. Craig and his then-firm, Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP, had performed work beginning in 2012 for Ukraine’s Ministry of Justice. It was a client relationship the Justice Department has said was forged with the assistance of Paul Manafort, who later became President Donald Trump’s campaign chairman.
The special counsel team was intrigued by the notion of using a once-obscure law, the Foreign Agents Registration Act, or FARA, to pursue cases of individuals acting as unregistered foreign agents, a charge the special counsel subsequently brought against Manafort and his business partner, Rick Gates, both of whom have since admitted to failing to register as foreign agents for their work for Ukraine. Craig and Skadden, during the course of their work for Ukraine, hadn’t registered under FARA.”
Olly,
Mueller and his team’s assistance are worthless without the expertise and hyper-spin of L4D.😉
Tom,
I’m fairly confident they all follow the Turley blog to know what is right and true. Certainly they track the P. Hill news updates as well to have a clue what’s going on in the world, just like the rest of us.
TRUMP CAMPAIGN NEVER REPORTED RUSSIAN OFFERS
The word “collusion” appears nowhere in Barr’s summary. He does write that “the Special Counsel did not find that the Trump campaign, or anyone associated with it, conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in these efforts, despite multiple offers from Russian-affiliated individuals to assist the Trump campaign.”
Here’s something else the Trump campaign didn’t do: They didn’t report any of those multiple offers by a hostile foreign power to the FBI. That in itself constitutes a profound betrayal. Indeed, history records that Trump himself vociferously and repeatedly denied what U.S. intelligence agencies said was definitive evidence of Russian skulduggery. “It could be Russia … It also could be somebody sitting on their bed that weighs 400 pounds,” the candidate claimed during one presidential debate. Trump’s strange obsequiousness toward Vladimir Putin continues to this day.
His campaign knew all about Russian hacks of Democratic National Committee emails; that much has been proven beyond a doubt. At minimum, they sat on their hands. Reading between the lines of Barr’s summary, it’s clear that the Mueller report endorses the central finding of the intelligence community: The Russians actively worked to help Trump win the 2016 election. We should be asking ourselves why.
Conspiracy, of course, is a notoriously difficult crime to prove. It becomes almost impossible when one party to a corrupt bargain is beyond the law: that is, resides in Russia and isn’t being made available to investigators.
Which is not to say that a cunning rogue like Donald Trump was ever going to enter into a quid pro quo arrangement with the Russian government and leave fingerprints. It was always naive to think that he might. The president famously doesn’t write things down. These things are done with winks and nudges. What’s said and what’s not said.
A Kremlin intermediary offers “dirt” on Hillary Clinton, as “part of Russia and its government’s support for Mr. Trump.” Donald Jr. is dumb enough to write, “I love it,” and to take a meeting — the famous June 2016 session at Trump Tower with Russian attorney Natalia Veselnitskaya — but Donald Sr. remains offstage. In the building, but not at the meeting.
What’s more, Veselnitskaya isn’t technically a member of the Russian government. Neither, however, has she visited the United States since her name first surfaced in The New York Times. Sure, the president helped Junior concoct a fake cover story, but it has never been a crime to lie to the press.
This too: Insufficient evidence to prove a criminal conspiracy isn’t the same as no evidence. As shrewdly as Attorney General Barr has played his hand so far, that’s worth keeping in mind. We’ll find out how Trump triumphalism looks after people have read the actual report, although the necessity of reading and thinking about a complex document with Sean Hannity screaming in our collective ears will certainly limit the Mueller report’s impact.
It’s also worth remembering that there are all sorts of dishonorable actions that aren’t crimes. For example, it’s not a crime for a man to have an affair with his sister-in-law, but it’s contemptible all the same. As Michael Kinsley once quipped, “The scandal isn’t what’s illegal; the scandal is what’s legal.”
Edited from: “Exonerated? As Usual Trump Is Making It Up”
Today’s CHICAGO SUN-TIMES
Word’s out that there were at least 3 attempts and those attempts were related to attempts by the FBI. Stephen Halper was apparently one of those attempts.
FBI SCREWS UP ROYALLY
“there are all sorts of dishonorable actions that aren’t crimes. ”
H CLINTON NOMINATED AS MOST DISHONERABLE
Yeah, real grieving. Seems the victory lap is more like musical chairs.
Only a third of Americans think the report clears Trump of wrong doing:
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/D21UY4RXQAELyzV?format=png&name=900×900
By a wide margin, Americans want the report made public – damn whiners!
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/D21USRWX0AEWKe4?format=png&name=900×900
PS Poll from Mar 25-27 by NPR/Marist
Trump has logged over 8,000 false assertions since assuming office. And we’re supposed to believe he’s been ‘cleared’ by Mueller because Trump claims he has..??
This is the biggest scam yet by Trump.
False assertations: It looks like rain. I only have $30 in my pocket when I have $30.01 in my pocket. It’s 5:00 when it is actually 5:01.
Yes, Peter, we know you are a nut but do you have to display it so often?
Best. News.Ever. Thank you President Trump!
——–
Executive Order on Coordinating National Resilience to Electromagnetic Pulses
Infrastructure & Technology
Issued on: March 26, 2019
By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, it is hereby ordered as follows:
Section 1. Purpose. An electromagnetic pulse (EMP) has the potential to disrupt, degrade, and damage technology and critical infrastructure systems. Human-made or naturally occurring EMPs can affect large geographic areas, disrupting elements critical to the Nation’s security and economic prosperity, and could adversely affect global commerce and stability. The Federal Government must foster sustainable, efficient, and cost-effective approaches to improving the Nation’s resilience to the effects of EMPs.
Sec. 2. Definitions. As used in this order:
(a) “Critical infrastructure” means systems and assets, whether physical or virtual, so vital to the United States that the incapacity or destruction of such systems and assets would have a debilitating impact on security, national economic security, national public health or safety, or any combination of those matters.
(b) “Electromagnetic pulse” is a burst of electromagnetic energy. EMPs have the potential to negatively affect technology systems on Earth and in space. A high-altitude EMP (HEMP) is a type of human-made EMP that occurs when a nuclear device is detonated at approximately 40 kilometers or more above the surface of Earth. A geomagnetic disturbance (GMD) is a type of natural EMP driven by a temporary disturbance of Earth’s magnetic field resulting from interactions with solar eruptions. Both HEMPs and GMDs can affect large geographic areas.
(c) “National Critical Functions” means the functions of government and the private sector so vital to the United States that their disruption, corruption, or dysfunction would have a debilitating effect on security, national economic security, national public health or safety, or any combination thereof.
(d) “National Essential Functions” means the overarching responsibilities of the Federal Government to lead and sustain the Nation before, during, and in the aftermath of a catastrophic emergency, such as an EMP that adversely affects the performance of Government.
(e) “Prepare” and “preparedness” mean the actions taken to plan, organize, equip, train, and exercise to build and sustain the capabilities necessary to prevent, protect against, mitigate the effects of, respond to, and recover from those threats that pose the greatest risk to the security of the Nation. These terms include the prediction and notification of impending EMPs.
(f) A “Sector-Specific Agency” (SSA) is the Federal department or agency that is responsible for providing institutional knowledge and specialized expertise as well as leading, facilitating, or supporting the security and resilience programs and associated activities of its designated critical infrastructure sector in the all-hazards environment. The SSAs are those identified in Presidential Policy Directive 21 of February 12, 2013 (Critical Infrastructure Security and Resilience).
Sec. 3. Policy. (a) It is the policy of the United States to prepare for the effects of EMPs through targeted approaches that coordinate whole-of-government activities and encourage private-sector engagement. The Federal Government must provide warning of an impending EMP; protect against, respond to, and recover from the effects of an EMP through public and private engagement, planning, and investment; and prevent adversarial events through deterrence, defense, and nuclear nonproliferation efforts. To achieve these goals, the Federal Government shall engage in risk-informed planning, prioritize research and development (R&D) to address the needs of critical infrastructure stakeholders, and, for adversarial threats, consult Intelligence Community assessments.
(b) To implement the actions directed in this order, the Federal Government shall promote collaboration and facilitate information sharing, including the sharing of threat and vulnerability assessments, among executive departments and agencies (agencies), the owners and operators of critical infrastructure, and other relevant stakeholders, as appropriate. The Federal Government shall also provide incentives, as appropriate, to private-sector partners to encourage innovation that strengthens critical infrastructure against the effects of EMPs through the development and implementation of best practices, regulations, and appropriate guidance.
Sec. 4. Coordination. (a) The Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs (APNSA), through National Security Council staff and in consultation with the Director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP), shall coordinate the development and implementation of executive branch actions to assess, prioritize, and manage the risks of EMPs. The APNSA shall, on an annual basis, submit a report to the President summarizing progress on the implementation of this order, identifying gaps in capability, and recommending how to address those gaps.
(b) To further the Federal R&D necessary to prepare the Nation for the effects of EMPs, the Director of OSTP shall coordinate efforts of agencies through the National Science and Technology Council (NSTC). The Director of OSTP, through the NSTC, shall annually review and assess the R&D needs of agencies conducting preparedness activities for EMPs, consistent with this order.
Sec. 5. Roles and Responsibilities. (a) The Secretary of State shall:
(i) lead the coordination of diplomatic efforts with United States allies and international partners regarding enhancing resilience to the effects of EMPs; and
(ii) in coordination with the Secretary of Defense and the heads of other relevant agencies, strengthen nuclear nonproliferation and deterrence efforts, which would reduce the likelihood of an EMP attack on the United States or its allies and partners by limiting the availability of nuclear devices.
(b) The Secretary of Defense shall:
(i) in cooperation with the heads of relevant agencies and with United States allies, international partners, and private-sector entities as appropriate, improve and develop the ability to rapidly characterize, attribute, and provide warning of EMPs, including effects on space systems of interest to the United States;
(ii) provide timely operational observations, analyses, forecasts, and other products for naturally occurring EMPs to support the mission of the Department of Defense along with United States allies and international partners, including the provision of alerts and warnings for natural EMPs that may affect weapons systems, military operations, or the defense of the United States;
(iii) conduct R&D and testing to understand the effects of EMPs on Department of Defense systems and infrastructure, improve capabilities to model and simulate the environments and effects of EMPs, and develop technologies to protect Department of Defense systems and infrastructure from the effects of EMPs to ensure the successful execution of Department of Defense missions;
(iv) review and update existing EMP-related standards for Department of Defense systems and infrastructure, as appropriate;
(v) share technical expertise and data regarding EMPs and their potential effects with other agencies and with the private sector, as appropriate;
(vi) incorporate attacks that include EMPs as a factor in defense planning scenarios; and
(vii) defend the Nation from adversarial EMPs originating outside of the United States through defense and deterrence, consistent with the mission and national security policy of the Department of Defense.
(c) The Secretary of the Interior shall support the research, development, deployment, and operation of capabilities that enhance understanding of variations of Earth’s magnetic field associated with EMPs.
(d) The Secretary of Commerce shall:
(i) provide timely and accurate operational observations, analyses, forecasts, and other products for natural EMPs, exclusive of the responsibilities of the Secretary of Defense set forth in subsection (b)(ii) of this section; and
(ii) use the capabilities of the Department of Commerce, the private sector, academia, and nongovernmental organizations to continuously improve operational forecasting services and the development of standards for commercial EMP technology.
(e) The Secretary of Energy shall conduct early-stage R&D, develop pilot programs, and partner with other agencies and the private sector, as appropriate, to characterize sources of EMPs and their couplings to the electric power grid and its subcomponents, understand associated potential failure modes for the energy sector, and coordinate preparedness and mitigation measures with energy sector partners.
(f) The Secretary of Homeland Security shall:
(i) provide timely distribution of information on EMPs and credible associated threats to Federal, State, and local governments, critical infrastructure owners and operators, and other stakeholders;
(ii) in coordination with the heads of any relevant SSAs, use the results of risk assessments to better understand and enhance resilience to the effects of EMPs across all critical infrastructure sectors, including coordinating the identification of national critical functions and the prioritization of associated critical infrastructure at greatest risk to the effects of EMPs;
(iii) coordinate response to and recovery from the effects of EMPs on critical infrastructure, in coordination with the heads of appropriate SSAs;
(iv) incorporate events that include EMPs as a factor in preparedness scenarios and exercises;
(v) in coordination with the heads of relevant SSAs, conduct R&D to better understand and more effectively model the effects of EMPs on national critical functions and associated critical infrastructure — excluding Department of Defense systems and infrastructure — and develop technologies and guidelines to enhance these functions and better protect this infrastructure;
(vi) maintain survivable means to provide necessary emergency information to the public during and after EMPs; and
(vii) in coordination with the Secretaries of Defense and Energy, and informed by intelligence-based threat assessments, develop quadrennial risk assessments on EMPs, with the first risk assessment delivered within 1 year of the date of this order.
(g) The Director of National Intelligence shall:
(i) coordinate the collection, analysis, and promulgation, as appropriate, of intelligence-based assessments on adversaries’ capabilities to conduct an attack utilizing an EMP and the likelihood of such an attack; and
(ii) provide intelligence-based threat assessments to support the heads of relevant SSAs in the development of quadrennial risk assessments on EMPs.
(h) The heads of all SSAs, in coordination with the Secretary of Homeland Security, shall enhance and facilitate information sharing with private-sector counterparts, as appropriate, to enhance preparedness for the effects of EMPs, to identify and share vulnerabilities, and to work collaboratively to reduce vulnerabilities.
(i) The heads of all agencies that support National Essential Functions shall ensure that their allhazards preparedness planning sufficiently addresses EMPs, including through mitigation, response, and recovery, as directed by national preparedness policy.
Sec. 6. Implementation. (a) Identifying national critical functions and associated priority critical infrastructure at greatest risk.
(i) Within 90 days of the date of this order, the Secretary of Homeland Security, in coordination with the heads of SSAs and other agencies as appropriate, shall identify and list the national critical functions and associated priority critical infrastructure systems, networks, and assets, including space-based assets that, if disrupted, could reasonably result in catastrophic national or regional effects on public health or safety, economic security, or national security. The Secretary of Homeland Security shall update this list as necessary.
(ii) Within 1 year of the identification described in subsection (a)(i) of this section, the Secretary of Homeland Security, in coordination with the heads of other agencies as appropriate, shall, using appropriate government and private-sector standards for EMPs, assess which identified critical infrastructure systems, networks, and assets are most vulnerable to the effects of EMPs. The Secretary of Homeland Security shall provide this list to the President, through the APNSA. The Secretary of Homeland Security shall update this list using the results produced pursuant to subsection (b) of this section, and as necessary thereafter.
(b) Improving understanding of the effects of EMPs.
(i) Within 180 days of the identification described in subsection (a)(ii) of this section, the Secretary of Homeland Security, in coordination with the heads of SSAs and in consultation with the Director of OSTP and the heads of other appropriate agencies, shall review test data — identifying any gaps in such data — regarding the effects of EMPs on critical infrastructure systems, networks, and assets representative of those throughout the Nation.
(ii) Within 180 days of identifying the gaps in existing test data, as directed by subsection (b)(i) of this section, the Secretary of Homeland Security, in coordination with the heads of SSAs and in consultation with the Director of OSTP and the heads of other appropriate agencies, shall use the sector partnership structure identified in the National Infrastructure Protection Plan to develop an integrated cross-sector plan to address the identified gaps. The heads of agencies identified in the plan shall implement the plan in collaboration with the private sector, as appropriate.
(iii) Within 1 year of the date of this order, and as appropriate thereafter, the Secretary of Energy, in consultation with the heads of other agencies and the private sector, as appropriate, shall review existing standards for EMPs and develop or update, as necessary, quantitative benchmarks that sufficiently describe the physical characteristics of EMPs, including waveform and intensity, in a form that is useful to and can be shared with owners and operators of critical infrastructure.
(iv) Within 4 years of the date of this order, the Secretary of the Interior shall complete a magnetotelluric survey of the contiguous United States to help critical infrastructure owners and operators conduct EMP vulnerability assessments.
(c) Evaluating approaches to mitigate the effects of EMPs.
(i) Within 1 year of the date of this order, and every 2 years thereafter, the Secretary of Homeland Security, in coordination with the Secretaries of Defense and Energy, and in consultation with the Director of OSTP, the heads of other appropriate agencies, and private-sector partners as appropriate, shall submit to the President, through the APNSA, a report that analyzes the technology options available to improve the resilience of critical infrastructure to the effects of EMPs. The Secretaries of Defense, Energy, and Homeland Security shall also identify gaps in available technologies and opportunities for future technological developments to inform R&D activities.
(ii) Within 180 days of the completion of the activities directed by subsections (b)(iii) and (c)(i) of this section, the Secretary of Homeland Security, in coordination with the heads of other agencies and in consultation with the private sector as appropriate, shall develop and implement a pilot test to evaluate available engineering approaches for mitigating the effects of EMPs on the most vulnerable critical infrastructure systems, networks, and assets, as identified in subsection (a)(ii) of this section.
(iii) Within 1 year of the date of this order, the Secretary of Homeland Security, in coordination with the heads of relevant SSAs, and in consultation with appropriate regulatory and utility commissions and other stakeholders, shall identify regulatory and non regulatory mechanisms, including cost recovery measures, that can enhance private-sector engagement to address the effects of EMPs.
(d) Strengthening critical infrastructure to withstand the effects of EMPs.
(i) Within 90 days of completing the actions directed in subsection (c)(ii) of this section, the Secretary of Homeland Security, in coordination with the Secretaries of Defense and Energy and in consultation with the heads of other appropriate agencies and with the private sector as appropriate, shall develop a plan to mitigate the effects of EMPs on the vulnerable priority critical infrastructure systems, networks, and assets identified under subsection (a)(ii) of this section. The plan shall align with and build on actions identified in reports required by Executive Order 13800 of May 11, 2017 (Strengthening the Cybersecurity of Federal Networks and Critical Infrastructure). The Secretary of Homeland Security shall implement those elements of the plan that are consistent with Department of Homeland Security authorities and resources, and report to the APNSA regarding any additional authorities and resources needed to complete its implementation. The Secretary of Homeland Security, in coordination with the Secretaries of Defense and Energy, shall update the plan as necessary based on results from the actions directed in subsections (b) and (c) of this section.
(ii) Within 180 days of the completion of the actions identified in subsection (c)(i) of this section, the Secretary of Defense, in consultation with the Secretaries of Homeland Security and Energy, shall conduct a pilot test to evaluate engineering approaches used to harden a strategic military installation, including infrastructure that is critical to supporting that installation, against the effects of EMPs.
(iii) Within 180 days of completing the pilot test described in subsection (d)(ii) of this section, the Secretary of Defense shall report to the President, through the APNSA, regarding the cost and effectiveness of the evaluated approaches.
(e) Improving response to EMPs.
(i) Within 180 days of the date of this order, the Secretary of Homeland Security, through the Administrator of the Federal Emergency Management Agency, in coordination with the heads of appropriate SSAs, shall review and update Federal response plans, programs, and procedures to account for the effects of EMPs.
(ii) Within 180 days of the completion of actions directed by subsection (e)(i) of this section, agencies that support National Essential Functions shall update operational plans documenting their procedures and responsibilities to prepare for, protect against, and mitigate the effects of EMPs.
(iii) Within 180 days of identifying vulnerable priority critical infrastructure systems, networks, and assets as directed by subsection (a)(ii) of this section, the Secretary of Homeland Security, in consultation with the Secretaries of Defense and Commerce, and the Chairman of the Federal Communications Commission, shall provide the Deputy Assistant to the President for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism and the Director of OSTP with an assessment of the effects of EMPs on critical communications infrastructure, and recommend changes to operational plans to enhance national response and recovery efforts after an EMP.
Sec. 7. General Provisions. (a) Nothing in this order shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect:
(i) the authority granted by law to an executive department or agency, or the head thereof; or
(ii) the functions of the Director of the Office of Management and Budget relating to budgetary, administrative, or legislative proposals.
(b) This order shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations.
(c) This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.
DONALD J. TRUMP
THE WHITE HOUSE,
March 26, 2019.
———
Squeeky Fromm
Girl Reporter
Damn that Putin! What kind of multi-level chess is he playing now?
Squeeky I notice that you can’t begin to explain what you’ve posted here.
I haven’t seen this as any actual news story. And we know Trump didn’t actually write this. What is this and why is it relevant?
Peter your favorite paper covered it, surprised you quesiton her!
https://www.washingtonpost.com/
Kurtz, your link only links the home page. No specific story pops up.
This XO about EMPs shows how wise the Great Leader is!
Peter, it’s funny that you don’t know something of considerable significance. I read it shortly after it was signed. Why are you so behind the times? You have heard there was no collusion by Trump, right? You haven’t read about Mueller disputing Barr’s testimony, have you?
You are a very confused individual.
We’d expect you to be on the cutting edge of microwaves, etc., I suggest a thicker gage aluminum foil for your hat. Reynolds Wrap is pricey but there is no substitute for fashion ware.
The fool is back. YNOT go put some diapers on and shove a pacifier back in your mouth.
Diapers and pacifiers have not been proven effective against electro-magnetic pulses. And neither has Trump’s executive order.
But the diaper keeps YNOT from peeing all over himself.
very wise. Ted Koppel had a whole book on EMP threat. THank you POTUS DJT!
The statute for Conspiracy Against the United States has two clauses under which charges can be brought–the offense clause and the defraud clause. The offense clause requires the violation of another criminal statute; such as The Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (i.e. hacking, identity theft etc.). The defraud clause does not require the violation of another criminal statute, but it doesn’t preclude the violation of another statute, either. Instead, the defraud clause requires an agreement to conceal by deceptive or dishonest means from an agency of the United States information necessary to fulfill the legitimate governmental function of that agency and at least one overt act in the furtherance of that conspiracy to conceal.
Barr’s summary of the Mueller report appears incorrectly to presume that Mueller can only charge a conspiracy against the Trump campaign under the offense clause–not the defraud clause. Mueller did, in fact, charge the 12 GRU officers who conducted the hack and leak operation with Conspiracy against the United States under both the offense clause and the defraud clause. Meanwhile, Mueller charged the Internet Research Agency and Concord Management who conducted the social-media operation with Conspiracy Against the United States under the defraud clause only. That’s how we know that Barr’s apparent presumption is wrong. But, more importantly, that’s also how we know that Mueller was most likely building a conspiracy case against the Trump campaign under the defraud clause only.
Consequently, the only way to demonstrate that AG Barr did not interfere with Mueller’s prosecutorial discretion is to release the Mueller report in full. Unfortunately, if AG Barr did interfere with Mueller’s prosecutorial discretion, then AG Barr has a vested interest in suppressing the Mueller report. And that will become a really big political issue going forward into the 2020 campaign season. You bet.
” If AG Barr did interfere with Mueller’s prosecutorial discretion”, we should be hearing about it from Mueller.
Mueller would have every right, and a responsibility, to contest the DOJ interference and distortion.
That would be an inevitable consequence of Barr’s supposed interference. I think Barr and Rosenstein were well aware of that in writing the summary.
Next we’ll be hearing that Mueller himself must be working in tandem with a DOJ cover-up to benefit Trump.
You will not be allowed to assert that there’s no evidence of conspiracy at the same time that you are suppressing the evidence of conspiracy that you claim does not exist. There’s a name for that. It’s called Three Card Monte. AG Barr says, “nothing up my sleeve.” There’s more than 300 pages of Mueller report up AG Barr’s sleeve. Get real, already.
This extended 5-6 day “suppression” of the Mueller report is, indeed, intolerable.
This complaint is from someone who bent over backwards and performed all kinds of contortions in defending the hyper-secrecy of a c.2 year disjointed series of investigations and claiming that that secrecy was essential.
There was a strong “screw the public’s need to know” sentiment repeated again and a again in multiple daily L4D’s columns.
Trump is NOT the public. The special counsel’s investigation is over. The public now has a right to know. Except for anything that compromises ongoing investigations, sources or methods and anything prejudicial to upcoming trials. Other than those exceptions, it’s time to set it out and fork it over.
Mueller is not the public. So what?
The observation that I made was about your unqualified support for a very long period of secret grand jury deliberations, no information on where the OSC was heading, etc.
Now it’s “we must put everything out there” and the “public’s need to know”.
You never gave a rat’s *** about either until this past week.
Congratulations on your conversion.
You all were given the first and only public disclosure of a FISA warrant application. You all through major-league hissy-fits in public over the Ninny Na-Na Nunes FISA warrant abuse nincompoopery. And as soon as you all got what you all had demanded, you all dropped it like the greased pig it always was to begin with. Guess what Nunes says about the Mueller report. “Burn it.” That’s what Nunes says about the Mueller report. And that means that there’s something in the Mueller report that Nunes doesn’t want anybody to read–even though Nunes doesn’t know what it is.
Threw => through
I didn’t g weigh in on the FISA warrant issue except to note that Carter Page, the NY Times, and others were pressing for the release of the application.
My comment was about the lack of any information released to the public over the past two years on the direction of the Mueller investigation.
That, eventually, became one of my complaints about the handlinof the OSC investigations.
You repeatedly defended that hyper-secrecy, and now change the subject to talk and sqawk about a FISA warrant.
You are not serious. Because you cannot possibly be serious. My “defense of secrecy,” as you call it, was all about opposing the public disclosure of the FISA warrant application and the Ninny Na-Na Nunes Nincompoopery Memo. Did you not notice that Turley never said another word on the subject once the FISA warrant application had been publicly disclosed? Why not? Because Ninny Na-Na Nunes was wrong. There was no FISA warrant abuse.
L4B’s repeated defense of the ultra-secrecy of the OSC imvestigation was consistent month after month. I expressed the opinion that a protracted and apparently disjointed period of this type of investigation warranted some type of updates for the public from time to time.
L4D consistently defended that secrecy…..the public’s “right to know” was non-existent in her view, and her position was repeated numerous times during the long course of the investigations. And it was not, contrary to her latest lie, restricted to the FISA issue.
If someone presents all kinds of reasons for lack of disclosure and does it repeatedly over the long term, that same person might show done restraint in now demanding that everything has to be put out there immediately.
There have been some strong hints that there will now be investigations of various investigations…..including the OSC investigation.
Congress might continue to tie itself up with with investigations and investigations of investigations throughout the 2020 campaign cycle.
Fans of “full disclosure”may welcome this, especially if there are open Congressional hearings.
I’d guess that to the Trump/ “collusion” and speculation about what Mueller “could have charged, or “could have” concluded, will be stretched out a long time before it dies a slow, natural death.
The same thing would probably be true if there are investigations of the investigations.
From a strictly political views point, I don’t see either side really gaining any ground or votes by dragging this thing out into 2020 and beyond.
There is exactly one side suppressing the Mueller report. There are not “two sides” suppressing the Mueller report. If there were anything in the Mueller report to warrant an investigation of the FBI, the DoJ, the SCO, or even Mueller, himself, the damned thing would’ve been posted on my computer screen by now. When you have all of the cards up your sleeve, there are no cards in your hand with which you can bluff.
There are in fact two different camps in their views of how this mess unfolded and how the investigations were handled.
I don’t expect a hyper-partisan stooge like L4B to recognize or acknowledge that fact, so I won’t bother trying to explain to her why that is.
The 300 pages said to be up Barr’s sleeve pales in comparison to the number of tems in the bag of tricks and stunt that L4D likes to rely on.
Once the Mueller report is released, how long will it be before she rewrites the entire report, and let’s us all know what Mueller “really meant”.
There’s no need to give notice repeatedly that The Tweaker is tweaking the previous tweaks she presented.The Mueller report is said to be 300 pages; L4B will probably need 3000 pages to rewrite it.
She has to practice here with rewriting the JT columns and the comments of others; her rewrites of the JT columns are likely to be longer than the original columns themselves.
The L4B rewrite of the Mueller report will probably be as eagerly anticipated as the report itself, because we’ll find out from her what Mueller “really meant”.
If you want the pain to stop, then cry Uncle and release the damned report at least to Congress. Nadler, Cummings and Schiff know what to do with it.
It won’t matter to L4B what is subsequently released to whom.
If it does not support the “real” conclusions L4B thinks it should have reached, we will keep getting L4B rewrites.
She’s more of a nuisance than “a pain”, but I suppose she could be regarded as a chronic pain-in-the-neck presence here since she hijacked this site for her daily columns.
If The Easter-Island Monolith, Himself, makes a public statement disputing the accuracy of L4D’s rewrites of Barr’s summary of Mueller’s report, then I will sit on my hands for one whole day and you all can have the run of The Professor’s house for just that one day.
Disputing L4B’s distortions of what others have actually written does not phase her.
Being repepeatedly exposed as a chronic liar does not phase L4B.
There’s no reason to believe that anything would cause her to abandon her cherished propaganda platform here for even one day.
Should be fazes
Tom, Diane’s story is a figment of her imagination. Nothing is permitted to deviate from it no matter how crazy she has to become. She also has talking points that she picks from that are either anti-American or anti-Trump which is nearly the same. Occasionally there are additions to those talking points but they don’t have to be any truer than the previous ones and they too don’t have to make sense.
Anyone questioning her narrative is immediately hit with one of those talking points whether it responds to the argument or not . Those talking points need not be consistent with one another and when proven wrong can be introduced by her at a later time.
Her ideology is totally fixed so truth and lies can be mixed as long as they don’t touch her ideology.
And if Barr mis-characterized Muler’s findings/conclusions in Barr letter, then Muler would have surely spoken up as was the case with the recent BuzzCrap “bombshell”. Late4Yoga really does need to give this a rest. She does not realize that bombing this board with dozens of voluminous posts = almost nobody reads any of them and they cancel each other out. It is going to be tough for lefty loons to keep this conspiracy theory alive beyond this weekend. Right now lefties are encouraged with a dead cat bounce by trying to stir this up again in last 48 hours or so. But at the end of the day, the cat is dead R.I.P.
Barr cherry-picking Mueller’s conclusions is more likely than Barr mischaracterizing Mueller’s findings. The most likely explanation for no further indictments having been brought is that evidence demonstrating criminal intent on the part of the Trump campaign was lacking due to Manafort’s breach of his plea agreement and Trump’s assertions of executive privilege over everything that happened after the polls closed on Tuesday November 8th, 2016, including, especially, Trump’s abuse of the pardon power to tamper with witnesses and suborn perjury.
Thank you, Diane. I can’t believe Trump and his defenders have been able to dominate this discussion with claims they are cleared. They aren’t!! Russia really interfered in the 2016 Election and Trump kept calling that ‘Fake News’.
As per my post above, and NPR/Marist poll from Mar 25-27, only 1/3 of Americans think the report clears Trump. By a much greater margin, Americans of all political leanings want the full report released.
The victory lappers here should slow it down or look foolish.
FALSE TRUMP COLLUSION CLAIM BY DEMOCRATIC POLITICAL OPERATIVES ENDS. NO COLLUSION.
RUSSIA INTERFERED; CLINTON AND HER MINIONS HAVE AIDED RUSSIA’S GOAL.
“And if Barr mis-characterized Muler’s findings/conclusions in Barr letter, then Muler would have surely spoken up as was the case with the recent BuzzCrap “bombshell”.”
Bill what makes you think Diane has the ability to think logically?
Allan, Re Late4Yoga – hope springs eternal. Before issuing the letter Barr indicated that he would be staying in contact/consulting with Muler as needed, so it is quite possible that Muler reviewed/signed off on Barr letter before Barr released it on Sunday. Redacted report will eventually be released by Barr, and non-redacted report could be leaked in the meantime. So very unlikely that Barr is pulling a fast one on Congress/American public.
It’s pure insanity and some of the leftist bloggers sound as if their insanity preceded Trump.
There was no collusion and no reason for the investigation in the first place. No one was fired from the Mueller investigagion by Trump and the special counsel finished in its own time frame. That means there was no obstruction.
L4D’s caregivers need to be more careful about mistaking the LSD for sedatives when they medicate her.
Excerpted from Ag Barr’s summary letter to Congress:
As the report states: “[T]he investigation did not establish that members of the Trump Campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities.”
(Footnote 1: In assessing potential conspiracy charges, the Special Counsel also considered whether members of the Trump campaign “coordinated” with Russian election interference activities. The Special Counsel defined “coordination” as an “agreement — tacit or express — between the Trump Campaign and the Russian government on election interference.”)
[edit] . . . the Special Counsel brought criminal charges against a number of Russian military officers for conspiring to hack into computers in the United States for the purposes of influencing the election. But as noted above, the Special Counsel did not find that the Trump campaign, or anyone associated with it, conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in these efforts, despite multiple offers from Russian-affiliated individuals to assist the Trump campaign.
[end excerpt]
Those are the critical passages in Barr’s summary that show that Barr, like Turley, presumes that Mueller had to uncover enough evidence to establish an agreement between the Trump campaign and the Russian government “to hack into computers in the United States for the purposes of influencing the election.” That looks like moving the goal posts to me. There’s good reason to believe that Muller was trying to uncover enough evidence to establish that the Trump campaign knowingly, willfully received, accepted or solicited an illegal foreign campaign contribution from Russia in the form of the Russian hack and leak operation–but not specifically that the Trump campaign entered into an agreement with the Russian government to hack into computers for the purpose of influencing the election.
And here’s the tell: Barr says that the Trump campaign did not conspire nor coordinate with THE RUSSIAN GOVERNMENT despite multiple offers from Russian-affiliated individuals to assist the Trump campaign. Russian affiliated individuals??? Russian affiliated individuals who made MULTIPLE OFFERS TO ASSIST THE TRUMP CAMPAIGN??? You’ve got to be kidding me.
Barr knows that Mueller has uncovered evidence of Russian affiliated individuals making multiple offers to assist the Trump campaign because Mueller must have put that in Muller’s report to Barr. And yet, Barr moves the goal posts to conspiring or coordinating with THE RUSSIAN GOVERNMENT IN ITS ELECTION INTERFERENCE ACTIVITIES. So the possibility has not been eliminated–and rather archly alluded to–that the Trump campaign conspired or coordinated with Russian affiliated individuals for the purposes of influencing the election. Oh? But that’s not THE RUSSIAN GOVERNMENT.
So Mueller had a case that the Trump campaign conspired with Russian “individual”, but felt he could only pursue charges if he could tie in the Russian “government”.
Mueller was throwing everything but the kitchen sink at those he indicted, and the wide-ranging authorization from Rosenstein allowed Mueller to go just about anywhere he wanted to go in investigating those associated with the Trump campaign.
Now we get this ludicrous argument that Mueller was hamstrung because he supposedly had to tie in the Russian government itself to a conspiracy with the Trump campaign.
That he could not go after Trump campaign members who conspired with Russian individuals.
Putin, of course, denied any Russian government involvement in, or even knowledge of, the meddling.
He suggested that some “patriotic” Russians, overenthusiastic in their zeal, may have meddle.😉😄😂
The only comparably humerous “theory” is the one L4B is sticking with.
Oleg Deripaska is a close friend and ally of Vladimir Putin. Aras and Emin Agalarov are as well acquainted with Putin as Deripaska is. Konstantin Kilimnik is a trained Russian intelligence operative with longstanding ties to the GRU. The broker required for the Trump Tower Moscow deal is a Colonel in the GRU whose identity cannot be revealed without costing him his life. Dmitri Peskov is a Russian Government official and so is his assistant with whom Cohen negotiated the Trump Tower Moscow deal.
It may very well be the case that Mueller’s evidence is insufficient to charge a conspiracy against the Trump campaign. But Mueller’s evidence is not no evidence at all.
If you’d like, you could adopt the non-incriminating language previously suggested: The Trump campaign played footsie under the table with Russia and Russians while running for president. Playing footsie under the table is NOT a crime. Moreover, Putin obvious gets cast in the Steve McQueen role which leaves Trump with the Julie Christie role.
The key issue under investigation was the alleged conspiracy between the Trump campaign and the Russians who meddled.
That’s what was not established by Mueller, unless Barr and Rosenstein lied about the contents and conclusions of the report.
The Trump campaign and others might be slicker about obtaining foreign opposition research next time around.
Campaign members and candidates need to conceal or obscure their their contact with foreign meddlers and use the Russian Dossier model.
A direct meeting is “notorious”, paying intermediaries to get foreign op. research is noble.
That’s the way the game is played, so the “playing footsie” is done at a distance.
Mueller’s legal theory of the conspiracy statute might not be the same as Barr’s legal theory of the conspiracy statute. Barr’s emphasis on establishing a conspiracy with the Russian government coupled with Barr’s dismissive remarks about establishing any conspiracy with Russian affiliated individuals who are known to have close personal ties to Vladimir Putin or to agencies of the Russian government strongly suggests that Barr’s legal theory of the conspiracy statute is exceedingly narrow. It is essentially the same as Turley’s theory of conspiracy to hack by way of soliciting the hack. Mueller may have been building a case alleging a conspiracy to leak by way of soliciting the leak.
The easiest way to settle that particular question would be to let Congress read Mueller’s report in its entirety.
Tweak that last part a bit as follows: Mueller may have been building a case for a quid pro quo solicitation of leak of the hacked emails in exchange for the Ukrainian Peace Plan amounting to sanctions relief for Russia. And that may well be why the timing of Trump’s assertion of deliberative-process executive privilege over decisions Trump made as president-elect during the transition is so critical. Trump became a public official capable of committing at least preliminary official acts in a preliminary official capacity the minute the polls closed on election day, Tuesday November 8th, 2016.
Remember that The Coffee Boy told Mueller that he couldn’t remember whether he told anyone at the Trump campaign about the thousands of emails damaging to Hillary that the Russians had and were willing and able to disseminate and that were the backdrop of Papadopoulos’ efforts to arrange a meeting between Trump and Putin during the campaign for president. Then imagine tossing a a coin that lands on Yes! Maybe he did tell someone at the Trump campaign about the thousands of emails damaging to Hillary that the Russians had and were willing and able to disseminate. Now go back and review the bidding with the original inflection. What would it take from the Trump campaign to get the Russians to disseminate those emails? Do they have to know exactly which emails those were? No. Do they have to know exactly how those emails would be disseminated? No, again.
But is it a crime? I am not a lawyer. I’ll tell you this, though. It’s one hell of a political issue going forward into the 2020 campaign season.
Think of the bidding conventions in the game of Bridge. When the Trump campaign and the Trump organization and other Trump associates and the Russian government and the Russian-affiliated individuals and a certain radical transparency organization were all playing footsie under the table with one another while one of them was running for president, there may have been a bidding process taking place in which a $300 Million real-estate deal could mean either sanctions relief for Russia by way of the Ukrainian Peace plan or Russian government election interference activities in support of Trump or both, but not neither.
Considering that the $300 Million real-estate deal could only be obtained by giving sanctions relief to Russia and that Trump was the only candidate who was even considering the possibility of giving sanctions relief to Russia, the bidding convention described in the previous paragraph could be construed as a tacit agreement between the Trump campaign and the Russian government in its election interference activities.
Because Trump had to get elected president in order to give sanctions relief to the Russians in order to get the $300 Million real-estate deal, therefore the responding bid from Paul Manafort and Rick gates at the Grand Havana Room at 666 Fifth Avenue in New York, New York, during which the Ukrainian Peace Plan was discussed at the same time that Tony Fabrizio’s $767,000 worth of detailed, sophisticated, in-house Trump polling data was given to a Russian intelligence operative with connections in the GRU who was also briefed by Manafort and Gates on how to use that polling data could be construed as a tacit agreement with Russian-government-affiliated individuals to assist the Trump campaign with its strategy for winning the electoral vote in the electoral college.
Tweak that last bit, too, as follows: A tacit agreement with Russian-government-affiliated individuals to assist them with targeting data for their assistance to the Trump campaign’s strategy for winning the electoral vote in the electoral college.
Well, Jonathan, a good number of the comments validate your assessment. In the interest of fomenting more rage – I suggest that Trump refer to Schiff as “Shifty Schiff”.
Robert F., Looks like he’s settled on “pencil-neck” over Shifty Schiff.
https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/436536-trump-campaign-starts-selling-pencil-neck-adam-schiff-t-shirts
Capitalism is still alive and well….didn’t take long to cash in on Trump’s latest dig at Schiff.
TRUMP DEFENDERS IGNORE..
KEY FINDING OF MUELLER REPORT
RUSSIN DID INDEED INTERFERE WITH 2016 ELECTION
Lost in the torrent of post-Mueller report rantings by Donald Trump was its confirmation that the 2016 presidential election was indeed the subject of a wide-ranging attack by Russia, which has given every indication it intends to do it all over again in 2020.
So perhaps when the president and his Republican cheering squad in the Senate finish high-fiving one another, they might get back to work on protecting the US electoral system from another invasion. Ignorance, after all, is no longer an excuse. It may not be “collusion,” but there is a point at which the failure to act would certainly constitute nonfeasance — and incompetence.
“A lot of people out there that have done some very, very evil things, very bad things,” Trump told reporters in the Oval Office this week. “I would say treasonous things against our country.
He was, of course, talking about his political enemies here — not Vladimir Putin, who ought to be the real recipient of his wrath. That was one critical take-away from the Mueller report, or at least Attorney General William Barr’s summary of it.
“The report outlines the Russian effort to influence the election and documents crimes committed by persons associated with the Russian government in connection with those efforts,” Barr wrote in his letter to Congress. Those included “attempts by a Russian organization, the Internet Research Agency (IRA), to conduct disinformation and social media operations. . . designed to sow social discord, eventually with the aim of interfering with the election.”
As a result, in February 2018, the Mueller team secured indictments against 13 Russians and three Russian companies for their role in plotting to disrupt the 2016 election.
The other element in Russian interference “involved the Russian government’s efforts to conduct computer hacking operations designed to gather and disseminate information to influence the election,” Barr wrote.
That resulted in the July indictment of 12 Russian intelligence officers.
It would, of course, be helpful in preventing another round of electoral interference to learn from the details of the Mueller report itself — another reason its contents should be provided to Congress in short order.
Edited from: “Mueller Report Key To Halting Theft Of 2020 Election”
Today’s BOSTON GLOBE
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
Neither Trump nor any of his defenders have acknowledged that Russia interfered in the election. To the contrary Trump kept calling Russian interference ‘fake news’ for two years. Yet said finding is right there, in The Mueller Report, and A.G. William Barr acknowledged it.
If only we could see this report!
“TRUMP DEFENDERS IGNORE. KEY FINDING OF MUELLER REPORT RUSSIN DID INDEED INTERFERE WITH 2016 ELECTION”
Again Peter lies and spins. Everyone recognizes Russian interference and many believe that some of Hillary Clinton’s dealings with the Russians were illegal. That makes Peter full of cr-p. It was Obama who said the Russians weren’t interfering. The articles below Peter’s headlines generally aren’t related to Peter’s headlines. He is just trying to convince the few dunces on the list that he is smart.
TRUMP DEFENDERS CORRECT, NO COLLUSION, NO OBSTRUCTION
Peter is having a nervous breakdown.
A nervous breakdown would be the most optimistic view of his condition.
The guy is bat**** friggin crazy.
“A nervous breakdown would be the most optimistic view of his condition. The guy is bat**** friggin crazy.”
Tom, what can I say? I’m too nice
Tom, Trump could hardly contain himself; gloating about his presumed exoneration. But does any video exist of Trump expressing sincere concern regarding Russian interference in the 2016 Election?
There might be clips of Trump reluctantly acknowledging foreign hackers. Or mumbling to the effect that something might have happened; but quickly moving on to petty grievances.
On his first Monday in office Trump demanded a commission to investigate ‘voting by illegal aliens’. This was the first issue he brought up in a meeting with Schumer-Pelosi, Ryan-McConnell.
Trump assumed everyone agreed that Hillary’s Popular vote lead was ‘only illegals’. Therefore he needed a commission to investigate.
Never mind that Trump’s commission went nowhere in no time. No court has proved ‘illegals’ threatened elections anywhere in the U.S. To the contrary Blacks and Latino districts have low ratios of voter turnout. They could use more voters!
Trump’s false claim of illegal voters were heard many times. But how often has Trump expressed sincere concern over Russian meddling; ‘sincere’ being the operative term? I’ve never seen that tape.
Trump maintained, for the most part, that Russian interference was only ‘fake news’. There’s extensive coverage of Trump repeating that claim.
Trump never cared about Russian meddling. And that aspect of The Mueller Report has been completely lost. But Republicans should love to forget Trump was so dismissive.
It doesn’t matter now, of course. Now that Trump is cleared. He didn’t care about Russian meddling but that’s beside the point. We can trust that Barr’s summary clears Trump of any wrong.
Obama did not say the Russians weren’t interfering in the election.
“Obama did not say the Russians weren’t interfering
in the election.”
I’ll play your game, prove it. Why should I spend time when you haven’t to the other proof just a bit earlier on the blog. The issue involved employment and I provided the U 6 numbers like I have on several occasions.
—–
Anon, you are a waste of time as you repeat the same things over and over again never stepping forward when additional information is added. We can take unemployment and the U 6. Traditionally as unemployment gets closer to full employment the reduction in unemployment falls dramatically.
Obama .4
Trump 1.2
More than 3 times as fast under Trump even thought unemployement should fall slower not faster.
We can go through more of the metrics but you have no knowledge of economics even though you do your own taxes. Most everything you say is wrong or a distorted talking point from the left. I will take one item at a time only after you respond with fact and logic.
2016 9.9 9.7 9.8 9.7 9.7 9.6 9.7 9.7 9.7 9.5 2016 Obama
2017 9.4 9.2 8.9 8.6 8.4 8.6 8.6 8.6 8.3 7.9 2017 Trump
Obama did not say the Russians were not interfering in our election. I spent the night reading the entire internet and it’s not there. Here’s the link to the internet
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kCDMQqDUtv4
More jobs were created in Obama’s last 2 years than in Trump’s 1st 2.
Everything else Allan said in that post was wrong, including how he spells his name.
Nice Jazz, but didn’t answer the question about Russians interfering in the election and how that didn’t seem to concern Obama. Apparently this is the way you handling your reading comprehension classes. You haven’t proved your case.
Once again you repeat what you said before without proof. That is where you and I differ. I provide the actual U 6 numbers along with an explanation of what happens as we reach full employment. Your response is Duh Duh and then you repeat a leftwing talking point. How come unemployment fell so fast in comparison to Obama when Trump got into office?
I repeat so you don’t have additional troubles:
Anon, you are a waste of time as you repeat the same things over and over again never stepping forward when additional information is added. We can take unemployment and the U 6. Traditionally as unemployment gets closer to full employment the reduction in unemployment falls dramatically.
Obama .4
Trump 1.5
More than 3 times as fast under Trump even thought unemployement should fall slower not faster.
We can go through more of the metrics but you have no knowledge of economics even though you do your own taxes. Most everything you say is wrong or a distorted talking point from the left. I will take one item at a time only after you respond with fact and logic.
2016 9.9 9.7 9.8 9.7 9.7 9.6 9.7 9.7 9.7 9.5 2016 Obama
2017 9.4 9.2 8.9 8.6 8.4 8.6 8.6 8.6 8.3 7.9 2017 Trump
Obviously someone claiming someone else said something should produce the quote. No doubt Allan has looked up the facts by now and knows Obama never said what Trump alleged he said and pretends he expects me to prove an infinite negative. Show the quote, I’ll destroy your point and you know it.
” he expects me to prove an infinite negative.”
I said I would play your game and now you are getting the point. There are subtle variations in what one says and what they actually said. That is where you often go wrong in your statements. You change context and expect others to prove a negative.
Then you make statements that are meaningless like “Obama never said what Trump alleged he said” You don’t define what you are talking about. That is a sign of an uneducated individual.
Obama either knew of Russian meddling and didn’t find the need to stop it or he didn’t know or he felt it minor until Trump entered the picture, what do you say?
However, after you provide vague generalizations without proof and another provides you with exact numbers you run away. Another sign of an uneducated person. I will provide you with the same numbers.
Obama .4
Trump 1.5
More than 3 times as fast under Trump even thought unemployement should fall slower not faster.
2016 9.9 9.7 9.8 9.7 9.7 9.6 9.7 9.7 9.7 9.5 2016 Obama
2017 9.4 9.2 8.9 8.6 8.4 8.6 8.6 8.6 8.3 7.9 2017 Trump
No, Allan, “everyone” DOES NOT recognize Russian interference. The Dotard has never acknowledged this. He never will. He never can because he is a malignant narcissist, and admitting this proves that his Electoral College “victory” was not valid, that he didn’t earn it. Since his pathetic existence on earth is all about his astonishingly wonderful greatness, anything discrediting this will never happen.
Natacha, you haven’t said anything new in months and everything you have said up to now has been proven wrong.
Hail to the Chief.
Hail to Donald J. Trump
I hope Trump provides at least 6 more years of pathetic existence for you.
Keeping solely with the contents of the prior thread, wherein you claim that “everyone” acknowledges Russian interference, just when and where did the Dotard ever admit that Russians interfered with the 2016 election? I follow politics closely. Commentators are amazed that not only does he refuse to acknowledge it, he defended Russia, claiming that Putin told him it wasn’t so. Therefore, since there’s nothing to see here, there’s no reason to do anything to prevent it in the future. So, when has this comment of mine “been proven wrong”?
They bought $100,000 worth of Facebook ads.
http://weeklyworldnews.com/politics/68866/putin-to-campaign-with-trump/
Absurd,
They did a lot more than that, as I’ve pointed out here before.
Here we have strong evidence of conspiracy from The World’s Only Reliable News Source, and The OSC either misses or ignored it.
Therefore, since there’s nothing to see here, there’s no reason to do anything to prevent it in the future.
What strategic advantage would it provide the United States for President Trump to publicly denounce Russia, and Putin specifically, for their actions during our 2016 election? Do you believe you would be the first or last to know if our intel agencies are working an aggressive plan to prevent foreign interference in our elections?
Democrats dont want Americans to know the truth about abortions.
Now they have no choice
In Short – The Red’s bought a bunch of facebook ads. I’m quite sure that changed millions of minds.
“Neither Trump nor any of his defenders have acknowledged that Russia interfered in the election.” Really? My constant harping that Hillary Clinton paid a British spy to pay a Russian spy in order to get fake information about her political opponent, to be used to defraud voters just before the election doesn’t qualify? Then the document was used to defraud the FISA court and use government agencies to try to unseat a legally elected President, as another way to defraud voters. Then the media collaborated with the Clintons to perpetuate the myth that her victim was actually the perpetrator of the ploy, in an effort to impeach the President and defraud voters.
This was after Russia paid Bill Clinton $500,000 for a short speech, far in excess of his usual fee, and pumped in $145 million to their Foundation, during the Uranium One deal, in order for Putin to take control of Uranium One, under threat that he would have Kazakstahn reclaim their mining rights. The parent company, Rosatom, was under investigation at the time, which the FBI kept from Congress in order to defraud THEM.
Granted, we interfere in elections all the time. I wonder what Afghanistan and Iraq think about our outrage at a foreign power interfereing in our election. Heck, Obama tried to undermine Netanyahu in his election, and Israel is one of our closest allies.
We all spy on each other. The key is to strengthen cyber security. In fact, it’s China who is the biggest threat to cyber security. One day, they may very well try to interfere in our voting software, which is actually shockingly easy for White Hats to compromise.
Trump did not collude with Russia to steal any election. He won and Hillary lost because she was even more unlikable than Trump.
Also, Putin did not commit treason. He is not American. As I’ve stated before, however, Russia HAS infested academia with pro Socialist professors. There are Russian think tanks whose goal is to undermine capitalism. Every time you hear “capitalist” or “capitalism” used as a curse word, you can thank Russia. That influence goes back way farther than 2016. Russia’s hand is firmly on AOC’s shoulder. Who would do Russia’s bidding? The Capitalist who wants to strengthen our borders and make America powerful again, or the Socialist trying to undermine our economy and our democracy, eroding the Electoral College and individual rights? This is not a tough question.
Karen is back with the same nonsense she posts every other day about Hillary and U-1, Bill’s speaking fees etc. I’ve thoroughly rebuked her before on this but don’t have the time to do this everytime. I suggest she and others read reliable sources and educate themselces on the facts, not the chosen right wing alternative reality echo chambers she obviously prefers.
They don’t call it Whack-A-Mole for nothing.
Keep your Nerf mallet strong. You’ve got the knack.
“Who would do Russia’s bidding? The Capitalist who wants to strengthen our borders and make America powerful again, or the Socialist trying to undermine our economy and our democracy, eroding the Electoral College and individual rights? This is not a tough question.”
Peter will not be able to answer that question, but he will be able to post another phony headline. Anon below will not even understand the question well enough to respond.They are both stuck waiting for talking points to be provided to them. Thinking is not an option.
It’s been nearly a week and we haven’t seen the report. How can some people be expected to bear up under this extended suppression of the report?!?
The issue of Russian meddling is distinct from the issue of conspiracy with the Russians in that meddling.
Mueller’s indictment of the Russians shows that he believes there’s a case to be made there; I don’t know if prosecutors will proceed with an absentia trial.
And the Russian Prosector’s General, who seems to be their version of an Attorney General, has not been at all cooperative in the investigation of Russian Nationals.
The ostensible purpose, primary purpose, of establishing the OSC was to determine if there was a conspiracy between the Trump campaign and the Russians in 2016.
That distinction…..between the issue of Russsian meddling and the issue of criminal conspiracy on the part of the Trump campaign in that meddling…..should not be hard to grasp.
The fact that the Mueller report indicates no charges of that nature are to be brought indicates that didn’t to have a strong case on the conspiracy/ “collusion” issue.
Of course, if the DOJ lied in their summary of the Mueller report, that’s a different ballgame.
So keep a good thought and maybe there’s something in the Mueller report that the DOJ lied about. Cling to that hope.
If the goal was to protect the U.S. electoral system, there would have been a comprehensive review of the 2016 presidential campaigns…..not a targeting of one campaign.
I posted a reply to Peter’s Russian wedding comment that did not post….I’m not going to bother retyping it.
To summarize, the issue of Russian meddling in the 2016 election is different from the issue of whether the Trump campaign conspired in that meddling.
That distinction should be obvious…..there is at least a very general consensus that the Russians favored Trump and via social media, etc. tried to support him.
Criminal conspiracy on the part of the Trump campaign with the Russians is a different issue.
That is, according to the summary of the Mueller report, not supported by the evidence.
Russian MEDDLING…this new mobile device has an idiotic spell/word checker that I’ve been unable to neutralize.
I will find it, and I WILL destroy it.😡
Another Justice Department Story..
TRUMP PICKS WOMAN FOR # 3 JOB AT JUSTICE DEPARTMENT
BUT SHE MUST WITHDRAW FOR SUPPORT OF ABORTION RIGHTS
Jessie K. Liu, the U.S. attorney for the District of Columbia who had been tapped to take the Justice Department’s No. 3 job, has withdrawn from consideration after Republican senators raised concerns about her past membership in a lawyers group that supported abortion rights and opposed the nomination of Samuel A. Alito Jr. to the Supreme Court.
The Trump administration signaled weeks ago that it would nominate Liu for the position of associate attorney general, in which she would oversee the department’s extensive civil litigation work. That nomination will not happen, because of her past role with the lawyers group, officials said Thursday.
The key Justice Department position has been difficult for the Trump administration to fill. The previous Senate-confirmed associate attorney general, Rachel Brand, left the post more than a year ago after just months on the job to take an executive position with Walmart.
A spokesman for Liu did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Attorney General William P. Barr, in a statement Thursday, called Liu “one of the finest, most impressive people serving in the Department of Justice. She has been an outstanding United States Attorney and would have made an outstanding Associate Attorney General. I have zero doubt she would have faithfully executed my priorities and advanced my rule-of-law agenda.”
Barr said he was appointing her instead to lead the Attorney General’s Advisory Committee.
The reasons for the reversal stretch back more than a decade, when Liu was a member, and served as vice president, of the National Association of Women Lawyers.
“Unfortunately, a women’s lawyers professional organization that Jessie was affiliated with over a dozen years ago took certain controversial positions at the time which have now generated opposition to her nomination at the Senate Judiciary Committee,” said Justice Department spokeswoman Kerri Kupec.
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….
Can you believe this?? A bright female lawyer who went to Yale actually thought women should have reproductive options. No way can she work for Trump’s Justice Department! She might encourage other women to disrespect the wishes of male evangelicals.
CREDIT FOR ABOVE:
Edited from: “D.C.’s US Attorney, Jesse Lieu, Withdraws From Consideration Of No 3 Job At Justice Department”
This evening’s WASHINGTON POST
“BUT SHE MUST WITHDRAW FOR SUPPORT OF ABORTION RIGHTS”
Peter again lies. Can’t trust the guy.
Jessie K. Liu was appointed by Trump but Senator Mike Lee who clerked for Justice Alito opposed her nomination which blocked her appointment. One should recognize that Jessie K. Liu opposed Alito’s appointment to the Supreme Court.
P Hill – the Democrats took a huge risk coming out fully in favor of 9th month abortions, and discussing, on camera, infanticide of abortion survivors. They are on record voting against a law that would provide abortion survivors with the same emergency medical care as any other infant.
Every time Democrats say the “A” word, that’s exactly where my mind goes. I’m not the only one. I usually don’t weigh in on the abortion issue. It is extremely fraught with emotion. I have been openly outraged at this moral turpitude of their position. Only 13% of the country supports full term abortion, and that’s the hill the Democrats are going to die on? It’s a woman’s right to choose whether a full term infant gets to die, inside or outside her womb? The process takes up to two days longer than an emergency C-section, which negates the “medical emergency” argument.
There is indeed a medical reason to end a pregnancy – it’s called an emergency delivery, such as with pre-eclampsia, fetal distress, placenta previa, etc. A team can deliver the baby within minutes of the establishment of the spinal. Medical conditions such as an ectopic pregnancy would require the removal of the fetus before viability. There is no medical reason to deliberately kill a human fetus. Early delivery, yes. Heck, I’ve known women who scheduled early C-sections to coincide with visits from in-laws.
The fact that the Left continues to insist that it’s men forcing women not to kill their full term healthy children, indicates that they have absolutely no idea about women. Every woman amongs my acquaintance, Democrat, Republican, Libertarian, and Agnostic, are sickened by the depravity of 9th month abortions. One would also think that fathers would have some concern over their full term, healthy children having their spinal chords severed in the very act of being born. If the Left thinks that’s immoral then the Left’s polarity is reversed. The Left couldn’t find “moral” at this point with both hands and a map. You can be a Democrat and favor liberty. You can be a Republican and favor liberty. But you cannot do so as a Leftist. They have become too extreme, and appear to be running the Democrat show for now.
Considering the high amplitude of national distress over killing healthy babies in the birth canal, just like Dr Gosnell’s house of horrors, I suggest that Democrats keep brining up the A word, repeatedly, all the way up until 2020. Those running the party are depraved Socialist totalitarians bent on infanticide. Their actions have caused opposition to abortion to skyrocket among their own Democrat base.
#WalkAway.
First, I mistyped “amongst”.
Second, Democrats just created an incentive for spousal abuse of pregnant women. NY removed the murder of unborn children from the statue. That means that if a man punched his girlfriend in the stomach to make her miscarry, he can no longer be charged with murder. I suppose it would be assault. Those men who are the oppose of those with intense protective fatherly instincts could kill any inconvenient children they chose, and all the mother could do was have him charged with punching her in the stomach. If a man killed a pregnant woman, he’d only be charged with the mother’s murder. If a drunk driver hit a pregnant woman and caused her to miscarry, he can no longer be charged with vehicular manslaughter.
It’s open season on pregnant women in bad relationships.
This move was either so ill thought out as to be inconceivable, or it was indeed sprung from a total disregard for life and the safety of vulnerable women.
“NY removed the murder of unborn children from the statue. That means that if a man punched his girlfriend in the stomach to make her miscarry, he can no longer be charged with murder.” … “It’s open season on pregnant women in bad relationships.”
Interesting way to look at things, but it seems too many Democrats look at pregnancy as a disease like cancer. Now they have a new technique to fight it.
Karen, you don’t know enough women educated on the facts. Meet my wife who is an Ob PA for 40 years, including 10 as a genetic counselor to women in their 30’s and up who sometimes face problem pregnancy and nightmare outcomes.
Women do not carry into their 9th month and decide to abort because they don’t like how they look in a bathing suit. They do so because they are faced with a fetus with severe brain damage or other non-viable conditions which might be prolonged by medical intervention lasting months or longer while draining the family’s spirit and funds – and then die. You want that forced on you by law? Get the hell out of other family’s tragedies. Anyone who kills a viable fetus after birth will be arrested in every state in the union.
The above post by “Anonymous” addressing Karen is from me. This web site is screwy.
You know, this thread needs some good music!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XoXsxccZi3M
Squeeky Fromm
Girl Reporter
Squeeky…….loved that!
Here’s some NOLA music:
That was sweet. Here’s something cookin’. Les McCann, Compared to What!
NOLA – great food. Great music. Haven’t been back since before Katrina. Pretty hard on a city below sea level. Wonder if it’s recovered.
Why the Left will never care for Americans
—-
MSNBC’s Refusal to Air Medal of Honor Ceremony Shows How Petty Disdain For Trump Clouds News Judgment
https://www.mediaite.com/opinion/msnbcs-refusal-to-air-medal-of-honor-ceremony-shows-how-petty-disdain-for-trump-clouds-news-judgment/
As flagged by the Washington Free Beacon, MSNBC was the only one of the three big cable networks to not carry live the Medal of Honor ceremony for the late Staff Sgt. Travis W. Atkins.
Atkins was killed in Iraq on June 1, 2007 after he fought a suicide bomber in hand-to-hand combat and shielded his troops from the blast. Atkins and his team were searching suspected insurgents when one of them began to fight back:
As the hand-to-hand battle continued, the insurgent was able to reach the suicide vest under his clothing. At that point, Atkins wrapped the insurgent up and threw him to the ground, away from his Soldiers who were standing a few feet away.
Aware of the imminent danger, Atkins threw himself on top of the suicide bomber, pinning him to the ground and shielding his Soldiers from the imminent explosion while bearing the brunt of the blast as the bomb detonated.
In this critical and selfless act of valor, which mortally wounded him, Atkins saved the lives of three other Soldiers who were with him.
At no point did Deadline: White House, hosted by Nicolle Wallace, cut away to air the ceremony. It speaks volumes when even an event to honor a true American hero can’t break through the mindset of “orange man bad” at the network.
I’ll bite on the challenge to a “fact” of anon’s post; how many “decent people” people have thrown Trump out of their houses?
Can you cite the instances where that’s happened?
If not, that somehow seems like a conjecture, an opinion, rather than a “fact”.
Jonathan-I respect you immensely . That’s why I am surprised at your suggestion that the Democrats primarily ran in 2018 on impeachment. That’s just not the case. There were a few left-wing flakes who could not stop babbling on about it, but the Democrats pretty clearly ran on substantive issues like healthcare. I need you to remain a voice of reason, with a perspective that is different from mine. Please don’t go hyper partisan on me. Thanks.
on health care my azzzzzz. What a piece of crud
——
Fox News dominates CNN, MSNBC in Wednesday primetime ratings, topping both networks’ combined viewership
Fox News Channel was the big winner in cable news on Wednesday night, beating CNN’s and MSNBC’s combined average primetime viewership on a night when CNN hosted a Town Hall special with Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Cory Booker, D-N.J., and Fox News’ Sean Hannity interviewed President Donald Trump.
According to Nielsen’s early ratings, across the 8 pm-11 pm primetime slots, Fox News Channel averaged 3,685,000 viewers, including 653,000 in the prized 25-54 age-group demographic. MSNBC delivered an average of 2,141,000 viewers and 333,000 in the 24-54 demo, while CNN came in last with 904,000 average prime-time viewers, with 235,000 in the demo.
Additionally, every primetime program from 8-11 pm was up double-digits versus the same day last week and year-to-date average, while CNN and MSNBC suffered double-digit losses.
continuing the great news that no body believes the MSM
—-
In the 8 pm hour, “Tucker Carlson Tonight” drew 3,485,000 total viewers and 584,000 viewers age 25-54. MSNBC’s “All In With Chris Hayes” delivered 1,674,000 and 259,000 age 25-54. CNN’s “Anderson Cooper 660” limped into third with 865,000 watchers and 221,000 age 25-54.
At 9 pm, “Hannity” delivered 4,303,000 viewers and 778,000 in the age 25-54 demographic with his interview of President Trump. MSNBC’s “The Rachel Maddow Show” delivered 2,678,000 total viewers with 432,000 in the 25-54 demo. CNN’s “Cuomo Prime Time” drew 900,000 total viewers – less than one-quarter of the viewership of “Hannity” — with 210,000 watchers age 25-54.
“The Ingraham Angle” dominated the 10 pm hour, despite airing against CNN’s Town Hall special hosted by Don Lemon. “The Ingraham Angle” delivered 3,268,000 total viewers with 596,000 age 25-54, versus 947,000 and 275,000 for the Lemon/Booker sit-down. MSNBC’s “The Last Word With Lawrence O’Donnell” drew 2,069,000 viewers and 308,000 in the demo.
https://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/fox-news-dominates-cnn-msnbc-in-wednesday-ratings-topping-both-networks-combined-viewership
Estovir, why can’t you use your name???? We know it’s you. The same irrelevant crap you always posted.
Remember for every one of three Trump voters, they are just as ignorant as the other two.
Nellie Ohr, a former Fusion GPS contractor and wife to Justice Department official Bruce Ohr, told Congress that she “favored” Hillary Clinton during the 2016 presidential campaign, and would not have researched the Democrat as she did Donald Trump.
“I would probably have been less comfortable doing opposition research that would have gone against Hillary Clinton,” Nellie Ohr told a congressional task force on Oct. 19, according to a transcript released Thursday.
“And why is that?” a congressional staffer asked Nellie Ohr.
“Because I favored Hillary Clinton as a presidential candidate,” said Nellie Ohr.
She gave research she did on Trump and his associates to her husband, Bruce Ohr, in hopes that he would provide it to the FBI.
Bruce Ohr did exactly that. He testified during his own congressional hearing that he provided a flash drive containing his wife’s research to the FBI. What the bureau did with the information remains a mystery, but it is another example of potentially biased information being provided to investigators working on a probe of the Trump campaign. (RELATED: Nellie Ohr: Ukrainian Lawmaker Was A Fusion GPS Source)
Republican lawmakers interviewed the Ohrs and several Justice Department and FBI officials as part of an investigation into the FBI’s handling of its Trump-Russia probe. Republicans have accused the FBI of misrepresenting the infamous Steele dossier in applications for surveillance warrants against Carter Page, the former Trump campaign adviser.
Former associate deputy U.S. attorney general Bruce Ohr, right, prepares to meet with Republican lawmakers Tuesday on Capitol Hill. (Chris Wattie/ Reuters)
The FBI’s warrant applications did not reveal that Fusion GPS, the firm that commissioned the dossier, was working against Trump on behalf of the Clinton campaign and DNC. The applications also did not contain information provided by Bruce Ohr that Steele had said he was “desperate” to see Trump lose the election.
Bruce Ohr, who served as deputy assistant attorney general at the time, served as a back channel of sorts between the FBI and Steele, a former MI6 officer.
The Ohrs met with Steele on July 30, 2016, to discuss Steele’s investigation of Trump’s possible ties to the Russian government.
As part of their investigation of the FBI, Republican lawmakers have tried to understand the labyrinthian relationship between the Ohrs, Fusion GPS, Steele and the FBI.
Steele and Fusion GPS founder Glenn Simpson attempted to push information from the dossier through the FBI, Justice Department, State Department and the media.
In her interview, Nellie Ohr discussed the nature of her work for Fusion. She said that she did not recognize any of her work in the Steele dossier.
One of the more startling revelations in Nellie Ohr’s testimony is that a Ukrainian politician was a source for Fusion GPS.
As TheDCNF first reported, Nellie Ohr testified that Serhiy Leshchenko, a former investigative journalist turned lawmaker, provided information to Fusion GPS.
Leshchenko revealed in August 2016 a so-called “black ledger” that listed alleged kickback payments from the Ukrainian government to Paul Manafort. The veracity of the ledger has come under scrutiny, and Leshchenko has faced charges in Ukraine for meddling in the 2016 U.S. election.
There is no indication that Leshchenko’s work ended up in the dossier.
Nellie Ohr said that she worked for Fusion GPS from October 2015 through September 2016, earning $55 per hour for an average of 30 hours of work a week.
She said that she conducted open source research of various Russian businessmen. She also researched Trump associates, including Manafort, Page, Michael Flynn, and Donald Trump’s children.
Nellie Ohr was pressed about her discussions with her husband regarding her work for Fusion GPS, but she largely escaped those questions by invoking marital privilege.
Asked about her and Bruce Ohr’s meeting with Steele, Nellie Ohr said that the ex-spy told of his investigation of Trump, and said that he hoped his information would be passed to the FBI.
She worked on one other project for Fusion GPS, and was aware of the firm’s work with Natalia Veselnitskaya, the Russian attorney who attended the now-infamous meeting at Trump Tower in June 2016.
Veselnitskaya worked with Fusion GPS at the time of that meeting on behalf of Prevezon Holdings, a Russian company whose owner opposes U.S. sanctions against Russia. Nellie Ohr said that she did not work on the Veselnitskaya project. (RELATED: EXCLUSIVE: Oppo Researcher Behind Anti-Trump Dossier Worked On Pro-Kremlin Lobbying Effort)
Nellie Ohr testified that while her research for Fusion did not appear to have made its way into the dossier, she recognized some of her work in the media.
Although Vincent Van Gogh’s “At Eternity’s Gate” reflects Van Gogh’s state of mind only months before his death, writer Kathleen Erickson wrote that the painting and Van Gogh’s title for it “demonstrates that even in his deepest moments of sorrow and pain, Van Gogh clung to a faith in God and eternity, which he tried to express in his work.”
For a slightly more appropriate take on the subject of this article, the stages of death scene with Cliff Gorman’s performance in Bob Fosse’s great movie “All That Jazz” (1972) covers things nicely. Here’s the clip:
Here are some thoughts.
The shills on this website today are all pretty much singing a chorus of “We have to wait until the Mueller Report comes out before we can say whether or not Trump is guilty of collusion.”
Now, who here believes for one second that on the day the Report is released these shills are going to read thru it, and then agree that Trump innocent if that is what the report says? Probably nobody. No, on the day the report is released, the shills will get their talking points from the DNC and show up here to tell us all how guilty Trump is, how the report does not clear him, and in fact, how the Report really means, if properly read, that Trump is as guilty as sin. Sooo, does anybody here NOT think that is going to happen?
So the question becomes, why do the shills like Peter Shill, Late4D, the Bad Anon, and others even bother to pretend that they are objective persons who make their decisions based on the evidence? Because it is necessary for their own self-esteem, and necessary for them to be effective shills. I mean nobody, even lowlife shills like Late4D and Peter Shill, want to just admit that they are willing to tell any lie and engage in any deceptive act for money. Plus, if they admit the truth, that they are shills, then their ability to change anybody’s mind is kaput.
That is why you see the pathetic charade of “Wait Til The Report Comes Out, Nellie!” The best thing anybody can do is to simply call the shills what they are, tell them how pathetic their lies are, and laugh at them.
Wait and see if on the day the Report is released, what I am telling you doesn’t come true.
Squeeky Fromm
Girl Reporter
When people lie too much and then clear evidence comes in proving the lies as lies I think the general public starts to distance itself from them. I think every step of the way they are making a Trump victory in 2020 more likely as well as both Houses becoming Republican with a stronger majority in the Senate. What I worry about are the RINO’s that I would like to see be replaced.
Allan:
I can actually understand why Democrats refuse to accept the summary and instead are waiting for the report to say, “just kidding, he was guilty.”
After all, that’s what the FBI did, in reverse with Hillary Clinton. After laying out the case for multiple felonies, the head of the FBI lied and claimed that intent was required to charge, and that no prosecutor would charge someone for keeping top secret information on a bootleg server and then uploading it to the Cloud, and then wiping it with Bleach Bit in violation of the records act.
They benefited from this dirty trick, and so of course they must suspect that conservatives would do the same.
No. It won’t say Trump is a foreign agent or Manchurian candidate. Then the story will shift to, what is it, the 26th false accusation and everyone will promptly get amnesia about Russia and stop mentioning it. Like they no longer mention how absolutely sure they all were that he was an anti-Semite.
Honestly, if they would stop compulsively making stuff up, we could all just legitimately praise or criticize Trump as called for by logic and reasoning. Right now, we’re too busy defending Trump against irrational and unjust coup attacks by major power players that no one has time to rationally discuss pros and cons of Trump’s policy and actions.
They do not believe in America. To them America is evil.
Actually, it is entirely possible that Mueller came of short of the mark on evidence or testimony demonstrating criminal intent on the part of the Trump campaign. If so, then that would be essentially the same thing that Comey said about Clinton’s use of a private email server.
P. S. Trump doesn’t believe in Americans. To Trump Americans are evil.
Trump certainly is fighting hard for Americans and that is why taxes are down, the economy is up, black unemployment is down etc.
You guys are just trying to destroy America and the rule of law.
Kill a baby outside of the mother. That is just peachy with you.
Break the law and get no penalty if one knows the likes of Hillary. That is wonderful
Don’t protect America from existential threats. You guys are about as anti-American as they come.
Calling Americans by the name of Socialist Baby-Killers In Black-Face Underneath Their Ku Klux Klan Robes does not bolster your case that Trump believes in Americans. Believe it or not, but it bolsters my case that to Trump Americans are evil.
“Underneath Their Ku Klux Klan Robes ”
Underneath the KKK robes almost always one found a Democrat. Today when one wants to pass a law to simply say that killing a newborn baby is illegal there is a Democrat blocking such a law. When one saw a slave owner whipping a slave it was invariably a Democrat.
Apparently Diane cannot live under the same roof as her own morality so she lies to herself and everyone else.
I wonder if Diane still wears her red diapers.
https://www.13moons.com/shop-by-category/altar-supplies/ritual-wear/pentacle-cloak-gray
I don’t think the KKK robes have been big sellers in the recent past, but covens like L4B’s have kept the robe sector of the apperal industry thriving.
Karen, you’re making stuff up … or probably just parroting people who make stuff up. Drop the obvious confirmation bias you seek in your news sources or at least look for verification before posting this constant stream of right wing BS. If I see something incendiary on anything from the Daily Caller to the Democratic Underground – don’t read either actually – I google it and look for corroborating or refuting information from the NYTs, WaPo, WSJ, The Economist, etc.
Since 1941 the SC has held that intent to do harm to the US is necessary for aconviction under the Espionage Act.
Karen is an incorrigible recidivist. She’s also under the protection of the blog moderator, Mr. Smith.
Your preferred Stalin is not available.
” least look for verification before posting this constant stream of right wing BS.”
Despite what you say you do not cross check and if you do it is inadequate. Some of us provide numbers. How do you handle those numbers? With left wing talking points. I pose the same numbers waiting for you to tell me where the government statistics are wrong.
More than 3 times as fast under Trump even thought unemployement should fall slower not faster.
2016 9.9 9.7 9.8 9.7 9.7 9.6 9.7 9.7 9.7 9.5 2016 Obama
2017 9.4 9.2 8.9 8.6 8.4 8.6 8.6 8.6 8.3 7.9 2017 Trump
they dont care about facts
Peter Shill is often denigrating Americans on these forums for the crime of disagreeing with him. Ditto the rest
They are not interested in debate. They are interested in divide and conquer
Just say no to hate…Peter Shill, Bad Anon, Fishbreath, et al
Oh I get it, Estovir, and you’re the ‘good American’ sticking up for patriotic values. No wonder the word ‘patriotic’ gets a bad rap. It’s always nerds like you claiming to represent them.
“No wonder the word ‘patriotic’ gets a bad rap. ”
Peter, being patriotic gets a bad rap because of people like you.
Squeeky,
I counldn’t post the other day when I seen you posting here.
I’m still very busy but I wanted to just say HI!!!!!!
And I hope everything is going well enough for you.
For now, I’m back to being a slave to fixing everything put off that has to be dealt with After Winter. 🙂
My Tommy Tom Cat & his German Shepherd aids, ( He Owns Them) says hi also. lol
Hi Oky1! I just needed some time off from all the shilling and stupid rumor-driven Russiagate posts. Like Van Jones said a few years ago, “It’s a nothing-burger.”
Squeeky Fromm
Girl Reporter
Squeeky,
Some of these “Obama/Hillary Commie/Nizis/Dems/Rino people” here have went crazy here the last couple of years.
They’re slow recognizing they’ve be defeated completely.
Hopefully Late4Dinner & others find the help “it” & others needs.
“Let us pray that peace be now restored to the world and that God will preserve it always. These proceedings are closed.”
– General Douglas MacArthur, September 2, 1945
Mueller himself became a polarizing figure because of the way these investigations were handled.
A lot of people who were initially supportive of Mueller lost patience with the shotgun approach of a project that I indicted and convicted on issues unrelated to the primary purpose of the investigation.
Some of those who continued supporting Mueller advised “patience” with the approach and length of the investion.
And defended the lack of disclosure along the way regarding where the investigation was at, and where it was headed.
Now, some of those same people are screaming bloody murder less than a week after the Mueller report was officially submitted to the DOJ because they need to see the full report ….yesterday.
So the “patience” thing they advised is out the window….. The potential lack of full, immediate disclosure now has the “patience” and the “need for secrecy” crowd doing a180 when they find it expedient to speak out of the other side of their mouth.