I recently wrote a column discussing how Democratic leaders, including Vice President Joe Biden, have argued against continuing the investigation by U.S. Attorney John Durham despite growing evidence of misconduct by Justice Department officials and now the first guilty plea by former FBI lawyer Kevin Clinesmith. Now, Andrew Weissmann, one of the top prosecutors with Special Counsel Robert Mueller, has derided the Clinesmith plea while actually calling on Justice Department attorneys to refuse to help on ongoing investigations that could implicate aspects of his own prior work. [Update: I have include a longer quote from the column by the two authors and I have written another posting to address objections raised by Professor Goodman.]
I was among those who expressed concern when Mueller selected Weissmann due to his history of controversial prosecutorial decisions, including a pattern of prosecutorial overreach in the Enron litigation.
Weissmann’s recent statements (made before the release of his new book on the Russian investigation) have only served to reaffirm those concerns.
Recently, Weissmann wrote an extraordinary and disturbing New York Times op-ed (with former Defense Department special counsel Ryan Goodman). In the column, he appeared to call on Justice Department lawyers to undermine the Durham investigation as well as the investigation by U.S. Attorney John Bash’s investigation into the “unmasking” requests by Obama administration officials. They wrote “Justice Department employees in meeting their ethical and legal obligations, should be well advised not to participate in any such effort.” The two authors appear to dismiss not just the timing but the underlying investigations as political.
“Today, Wednesday, marks 90 days before the presidential election, a date in the calendar that is supposed to be of special note to the Justice Department. That’s because of two department guidelines, one a written policy that no action be influenced in any way by politics. Another, unwritten norm urges officials to defer publicly charging or taking any other overt investigative steps or disclosures that could affect a coming election.”
Consider that line for a moment. Weissmann is openly calling on attorneys to refuse to help on investigations that could raise questions about his own decisions. Durham is looking at a pattern errors, false statements, bias, and now criminal conduct in the Russian investigation. There is obviously overlap with the Mueller investigation which discussed many of the same underlying documents and relied on work by some of the same individuals. The failure to address misconduct, bias, or criminal conduct by such individuals would be embarrassing to both Weissmann and Mueller. Despite that obvious conflict of interest, Weissmann is calling on attorneys to stand down.
It is the same troubling position that was once taken by Sally Yates, who told an entire federal agency not to assist the President in his travel ban.
After Weissmann called on Justice Department attorneys not to assist investigations by the Justice Department, Durham disclosed that the first guilty plea would be entered by Clinesmith. That would ordinarily cause embarrassment for someone who was calling for DOJ lawyers to effectively hinder the investigation. Not Weissmann. He has now attacked the criminal plea.
Weissmann mocked Attorney General Bill Barr to explain the difference between the Flynn plea and the Clinesmith plea.
Weissmann tweeted:
“Question for Barr: how are Flynn’s confessed lies to the FBI (repeated to the VP) not a crime, but Clinesmith changing an email (the full version of which he also sent to DOJ) is?
Clinesmith is charged with adding the words ‘not a source’ to an email about Carter Page, but no where does the charge say that is false, i.e. that Page was a source for the CIA. Without that, how is the addition ‘materially’ false?”
Here is Durham theory: even though Clinesmith gave the complete and accurate email to DOJ to use in the Page FISA, when asked by an FBI agent if the CIA had represented IN WRITING that Page was not a source, Clinesmith said yes, when CIA had not said so explicitly in writing. no where is it alleged that Page was in fact a CIA source or, if so, that Clinesmith knew that. How is any of this false or material to the Page FISA, using Barr’s new Flynn materiality standard. It’s not. Two systems of justice at play.”
“Clear from Durham charge that the FBI supervisor wanted to know if CIA confirmed “in writing” that Page was not a source because of distrust of CIA — but whether in writing or not, no allegation that Clinesmith lied about the fact Page was not a source. That’s a federal crime?”
The tweets reveal more about Weissmann than Clinesmith or this guilty plea.
First, Weissmann is completely distorting both the law and the facts to disregard the significance of this guilty plea. The fact that Page was a source for the CIA is not disputed. The Horowitz investigation and various congressional investigations have confirmed that the CIA made clear to Clinesmith that Page was working for United States intelligence, a fact that critically undermined the basis for the original application for secret surveillance. The statement that “no where does the charge say that is false, i.e. that Page was a source for the CIA” is bizarre. The charge is that Clinesmith made this false statement to the court and there is a wealth of evidence to support that charge. It was clearly enough to prompt Clinesmith to take a plea and enter into what appears a cooperative agreement with prosecutors.
Second, the claim that “Clinesmith gave the complete and accurate email to DOJ” would not negate the charge. It was the false information that he gave to the court that mattered. Prosecutorial misconduct often involves telling courts something different from what is known or discussed by prosecutors. Moreover, the implications of such a contrast adds to the need for the investigation that Weissmann has sought to hinder. If other DOJ attorneys and investigators knew that the court was being given false material information, the concerns are magnified not reduced for the Durham investigation. Indeed, it means that this investigation dragged on for many months despite other attorneys knowing that the original claims of Page being a Russian assets were directly contradicted by American intelligence and never disclosed to the Court.
What is astonishing is that the FISA court itself as well as Horowitz have flagged this as a serious matter of false or misleading information. Weissmann however is actively seeking to convince Justice Department lawyers to refuse to help on the investigation.
Weissmann also misrepresents the law and the position of the Justice Department in Flynn. I have been one of the most vocal critics of the plea. It is true that Flynn gave false answers to the investigators. However, he fought the allegations until the Mueller team drained him of his savings and threatened to prosecute his son.
Keep in mind that Flynn was the incoming National Security Adviser and held entirely lawful discussions with Russian diplomats. Even James Comey told President Obama that the discussions were “legit.” Moreover, in December 2016, investigators had found no evidence of any crime by Flynn. They wanted to shut down the investigation; they were overruled by superiors, including FBI special agent Peter Strzok, Deputy Director Andrew McCabe and Director James Comey. Strzok told the investigators to keep the case alive, and McCabe is described as “cutting off” another high-ranking official who questioned the basis for continuing to investigate Flynn. All three officials were later fired, and all three were later found by career officials to have engaged in serious misconduct as part of the Russia investigation. Recently disclosed material indicate that Obama, Biden, and other discussed the use of the Logan Act as a pretense for a criminal charge. The Logan Act criminalizes private negotiations with foreign governments. The Logan Act is widely viewed as unconstitutional and has never been used successfully against any U.S. citizen since the earliest days of the Republic.
Then, in February 2017, Comey circumvented long-standing protocols and ordered an interview with Flynn. Comey later bragged that he “probably wouldn’t have … gotten away with it” in other administrations, but he sent “a couple guys over” to question Flynn, who was settling into his new office as national security adviser. Indeed, Yates recently agreed that Comey “went rogue” on the Flynn matter.
This history is what was detailed to the court in the Flynn motion to dismiss the charge. The materiality point reflected the governing law that indictments require more than mere “relevance” or relatedness but rather a statement that is “reasonably likely to influence the tribunal in making a determination required to be made.” United States v. Weinstock, 231 F.2d 699, 701 (D.C. Cir. 1956) (emphasis added). The distinction with Clinesmith is obvious. Clinesmith lied to the Court in an investigation to influence a “determination required to be made” by the court.
Imagine if this were not the rule. It would mean that any prosecutor could intentionally lie to a court to secure warrants or other actions without the risk of a criminal charge. Yet, Weissmann is mocking the very notion that Clinesmith could be charged while insisting that his office was correct in prosecuting Flynn despite the absence of an ongoing federal case and the fact that the agents themselves did not believe Flynn intentionally lied. There is no question the Clinesmith lied and that the lie was critical to the court’s consideration of the FISA application.
Weissmann’s public effort to derail the Durham investigation and his distortion of the Clinesmith guilty plea only reinforces the view of many of us that the Durham investigation must be completed and made public. Despite saying that I did not believe that Mueller would find crimes of collusion or conspiracy with the Russians, I supported the Special Counsel investigation. I also supported the Horowitz investigation and the Durham investigation. The reason is the same. I believe that the public needs to have a full and transparent account of what happened in the Russian investigation on both sides. Like many, Weissmann would like transparency on only one side and to shutdown the Durham investigation despite Horowitz referring matters for criminal investigation and finding a host of false statements, errs, and professional misconduct. Even the addition of a criminal plea has not stopped Weissmann from denouncing this investigation.
For years, I have criticized Weissmann’s record of dubious prosecutorial judgment, bias, and overreach. However, that case against Weissmann is not nearly as powerful as the case he is making against himself.
You have to speak to the legal standpoint of Weissman’s (stupid but devious) arguments and influence. People need to realize that they are all a bunch of corrupt individuals, all the usual suspects. As Clinesmith said “Viva the resistance” the resistance has never ended. Yet, there is a new sheriff in town. That never stopped criminal organizations from doing all they can to hinder investigations and prosecutions in the past. How Weissman is keeping the resistance, albeit now from the legal justice system, alive is leading from the shadows (again) to encourage as many of his DOJ friends (especially the corrupt ones) to just stymie the justice system long enough to get to the election. If things go their way, this will all be swept under the rug because Biden and Obama are already indicted in the public forum for their roles. Biden has stated as such that the Durham investigation should be halted. This is why truthful information should be released in criminal indictments before the election to show how so many Democrats have assisted in the resistance these past four years. Politics is being exposed for what it truly will allow. Corrupt/criminal acts by individuals for ideological personal and financial goals. The President stated four years ago that it is a swamp. He just didn’t fully understand how bad it truly was. Or, maybe he really did, but still suffered the “resistance” (insurance plan of the resistance) because he attempted and won the Office of the President and exposed the resistance for what it was. To suffer the slings and arrows…
Years ago, I met Robert Mueller when he headed the FBI and asked a simple but honest question. He provided an answer that was self-serving and then followed up by attempting to undermine me because he didn’t like being wrong. I think Mr. Mueller tries hard to do the right thing, though he surrounds himself with people who can “get the job done” and turns a blind eye to achieve his mostly honorable objectives. That is why he approved his final report to be so vague and contemptuous. That is why he disliked the actions of Attorney General Barr in counteracting his (Weissman’s) report. He does not like to admit that he can be wrong. That is the essence of why the resistance put a figurehead forward to “lead” the false narrative. It didn’t work and now Weissman is scurrying to suppress his role in the corruption of the last four years.
Why would Mueller Weissmann & Co spend over 40 million $$$ with a Canadian Intelligence Agency to “Shread Govt Govt documents” in the fake Russia Gate investigation against us Trump- supporters/Trump unless Mueller/Weissmann & Co knew they were actively engaged in covering up of crimes of themselves. leading politicians, (Sen Lindsey Graham, Commie Demos etc…) & govt intel contractors that all, the above names & many more, & that are still engaged in an ongoing Coup against the Citizen’s US Prez Trump, that they are engaging in Obstruction of Justice, Treason/Treasonous Sedition, Espionage, etc.., against the govt of the USA?
Because most likely they were & still are. Prez Trump has to arrest the 2-3000 coup ring leaders & hold them indefinitely under a National Security Threat Order to the US using the NDAA & the US Patriot Act. And he needs to do it now/today!
https://banned.video/watch?id=5f37fcc2df77c4044ee2eb03
“Why would Mueller Weissmann & Co spend over 40 million $$$ with a Canadian Intelligence Agency to “Shread Govt Govt documents” in the fake Russia Gate investigation ”
I would point out that I think M/W wasted the 40 mil because as whistle blowers continue to point out the US govt’s IT systems seem to have more holes in them then a semi truck load of colanders.
Weissmann, I think you’ll have to nuke the planet to every think you can hide all the IT copies of your crimes. How many copies of them are out in the wild today?
And you/your people just phk’d up and arrested most American’s best loved lil sweetheart Millie in front of her 2 young kids you Azzhole.
I looked up the word “Weiss” on Google translate, German to English and it means “white” in English. So he is Whiteman.
And
Guilty pleas, yet Weissman who created guilt out of sand suddenly wants guilt to evaporate. This man should never have been permitted to be a member of the Bar much less an official in the US government but somehow such power hungry people seem to be sought out by government especially governments on the left..
When the left uses the justice system for political shenanigans, it’s for ‘national security, so just shut up.
When the right uses the justice system to investigate those abuses, the left clams they are being unfairly targeted for political reasons.
Can’t make this stuff up.
“The statement that “no where does the charge say that is false, i.e. that Page was a source for the CIA” is bizarre.”
No, it isn’t. If you read the charging document (https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.dcd.221058/gov.uscourts.dcd.221058.1.0_1.pdf), it doesn’t ever state that Page was a “source,” in the CIA’s meaning of “source,” as contrasted with “[digraph].”
Moreover, the charging doc. doesn’t explain why it’s materially false, given that Clinesmith also passed along a copy of the original email unaltered. Nor does the charging document provide evidence that Clinesmith knowingly and willfully made a false statement.
In fact, as Marcy Wheeler notes here –https://www.emptywheel.net/2020/08/15/the-clinesmith-information-includes-evidence-that-john-durham-misunderstands-his-investigation/ — Clinesmith is being charged with the wrong crime. He’s being charged with a count of false statements instead of being charged with the crime of altering a document.
“Recently disclosed material indicate that Obama, Biden, and other discussed the use of the Logan Act as a pretense for a criminal charge.”
That’s a lie or astounding ignorance. The “recently disclosed material” were Stzok notes from his conversation with an unknown person at an unknown date, sometime after the meeting. Strzok wasn’t even at the 1/5 meeting and so cannot himself know who said what, much less did the simple phrase “Logan Act” in those notes indicate anything about using it “as a pretense for a criminal charge.”
If you say your a lawyer I’ll believe you but to a layman your arguments don’t hold up..
I’m not a lawyer.
You say “your arguments don’t hold up” but you don’t say what you think is faulty. It’s a pretty empty claim on your end.
Ramon Z Needs to be Committed is micro-parsing ( a great word used by John Say to describe her actions). Clinesmith is guilty of altering a FISA document which is absolutely forbidden. That alteration likely impacted history greatly. I’ll leave it up to the persons involved, the lawyers and the courts to define the details which we are lacking. All that doesn’t alter what Clinesmith did.
This is no big deal for Needs to be Committed because her values, morals and ethics, are all screwed up.
Ramon Z, I’m sorry if you took a double take at what I said because the lack of a comma might cause some confusion. The opening sentence should read: “Ramon Z , Needs to be Committed is micro-parsing”
Needs to be Committed, referred to CommitToDisHonestDiscussion, not you.
Ramon Z,
Needs To Be Committed is a radical, extremist activist and slavering, rabid, Feminazi White Shirt operative. During her period…of eccentricity, of rationalizing the acute, hyperactive self defense by Weissmann, Obama and all the Obama Coup D’etat co-conspirators, she gets an E for effort for her delirious, hysterical and incoherent frothings. She slings mud and bovine compost because you never know what’s gonna stick, as was the case with Johnny Cochran in the OJ Simpsom jurisprudential debacle, which communists (liberals, progressives, socialists, democrats, RINOs) are very proud of to this day.
____
“Move along, folks, nothing to see here.”
– Frank Drebin
Not an attorney here, but could this conduct be considered witness tampering, among other things?
Not an attorney here, either, but less contumacious conduct has been prosescuted successfully as witness tampering (look at Roger Stone’s trial). I’m pretty sure subornation of perjury could be among the charges, too.
Loup, what about Roger Stone’s trial?? No one outside the rightwing bubble cares about Roger Stone. He’s just an old dirt trickster from the Nixon era and Stone himself ‘proudly’ admits to being just that.
I think the Roger Stone comment was not about Roger Stone about whom everyone will agree with your comment. It is about the principle Loup makes !!.
Durham Is Just A Stooge For Barr
And Barr Is Just A Stooge For Trump
With each passing day Donald Trump drops yet another hint that he may ‘not’ leave office peacefully if he should lose this election. And it would seem that Durham is maneuvering to come through with an ‘October Surprise’ in a Hail Mary attempt to disrupt this election. Yet Turley would have us think we should all keep an open mind towards accepting the inevitable October surprise Durham intends to spring.
One can only conclude that Turley has been in the rightwing bubble so long he no longer has any grasp of how non-Trumpers view this presidency.
Sorry, dude. Your boys got caught and are going to jail. All your spin and lies ain’t gonna save ya’.
Right about now, Paint Chips, aka. Seth, is drafting a response to you about you being new and mysteriously popping in to comment against him.
Olly, have we ever seen ‘Podein Cork’ before?? ..Of course not..! He’s just our usual troll. I wouldn’t think for a moment that he’s a ‘fresh voice’ who just came forward. And I doubt if you believe it.
Seth Warner. I guess you have been trapped in your own bubble for some time because it sound like your running out of oxygen.
Ramon, A Turnip turns CO2 into oxygen so mabe the Turnip is running out of CO2.
I always enjoy when beings like Seth prove yet again how brilliant Albert Einstein was with his axiom of the two infinites.
Don you’re the same troll again and you seem to be all over this thread. Like you’re absolutely determined to shout down the liberals today.
Seems that (unfortunately) Turley blog might be forced to start moderating to limiting junk commenting like this.
Danley, you’re the same troll again. How monotonous!
How about postings on Snowden and Assange, Jonathan? How about revising the following? I assure you: Things are much worse than they were back in 2012
“10 reasons the U.S. is no longer the land of the free”
By Jonathan Turley
2012
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/is-the-united-states-still-the-land-of-the-free/2012/01/04/gIQAvcD1wP_story.html
Stop playing it safe and take a stand, again. Please. Do it for your kids.
Greenwald on Susan Rice, Edward Snowden…
https://twitter.com/ggreenwald/status/1294820156280102913
“National Security apparatchiks like @AmbassadorRice (no longer an Ambassador) have wanted Snowden in prison for years because he exposed how they secretly and illegally converted the internet into their spying playground.
As for her claim that pardoning Snowden is a GOP view:…” [refer to tweet]
The ACLU may not get everything right, but it’s right about this:
Anthony Romero on Snowden:
“Edward Snowden is a Patriot”
https://www.aclu.org/blog/edward-snowden-patriot
Part of Greenwald’s aforementioned tweet about Snowden:
https://twitter.com/ggreenwald/status/1294820156280102913/photo/2
So says ‘Anonymous’. He never has a name but Turley should consider the heartfelt pleas of this ever-mysterious poster.
Not cooperating with an investigation, why that’s almost as bad as not releasing tax returns, lying 20,000 times, blaming just about anyone and everyone for everything, lying-did I mention lying?
lying-did I mention lying?
You commented, thus you didn’t need to be redundant.
I’ve noticed that Trump’s lying really bothers you. Does his lying bother you more than other politicians lying? If not, why focus on Trump? And if Trump’s lying is a bigger problem for you, why is that?
Trump lies much more than the average politician. As a simple example, he’s said at least 150 times that he signed the Veterans Choice Act and that people had been trying to pass it for decades but hadn’t been able to. But the fact is that it was signed by Obama in 2014, and Trump only signed the VA Mission Act that extended it for a year and then replaced it: https://www.cnn.com/2020/08/08/politics/trump-veterans-choice-paula-reid/index.html
150 times!
Just a few examples of Trump lying about it:
* “We passed VA Choice and VA Accountability to give our veterans the care that they deserve, and they have been trying to pass these things for 45 years.”(5/20/19)
* “McCain didn’t get the job done for our great vets and the VA, and they knew it … The vets were on my side because I got the job done. I got Choice and I got accountability. … And Choice — for years and years, decades, they wanted to get Choice. … For many decades, they couldn’t get it done. It was never done. I got it five months ago.” (3/21/19)
* “I disagree with John McCain on the way he handled the vets, because I said you got get to Choice. He was never able to get Choice. I got Choice.” (5/30/19)
* “You know, I got the Veterans Choice. First time in 44 years, the veterans have choice.” (5/14/19)
* “And, by the way, for the veterans, 45 years they’ve been trying to get it. As you know, just recently, I signed Veterans Choice” (4/24/19)
* “We passed Veterans Choice, giving our veterans the right to see a private doctor, rather than waiting on line for weeks and weeks and weeks. Forty-four years they’ve been trying to pass that. I got it passed, it’s signed as of two months ago.” (10/27/18)
Not only was the Veterans Choice Act signed by Obama (not Trump), McCain was a co-sponsor of the bill, so he’s lying about that too.
And that’s just 1 example. Some of Trump’s lies have been more serious, like his lies about COVID-19 (e.g., claiming in March that “Anybody that wants a test (for the coronavirus) can get a test,” or in February that “You have 15 people, and the 15 within a couple of days is going to be down to close to zero,” and all of his lies about what a great job he’s done, rating his response a 10 out of 10).
” But th.e fact is that it was signed by Obama in 2014, and Trump only signed the VA Mission Act that extended it for a year and then replaced it:”
Obama was big on words and style but failed on actions. Trump substantially handled the problem.
One has to carefully fact check Needs to be Committed, because her quotes are not always accurate in substance or are out of context. She will make a claim about what Trump said even though Trump clarified the statement so that there could be no excuse for misinterpreting it.
Lorenzo
All politicians, absolutely all politicians lie. Their statements of what they want to do, are going to do, must do, etc when revisited later after they failed, through no fault of their own or directly due to incompetence, become lies in the eyes of their opponents. This is factual and given the nature of politics, unavoidable. Most politicians realize this and as so many are lawyers and are well practiced in speaking out of both sides of their mouths, they are careful to say their intentions carefully. However, intentions come back to bite.
The difference between most politicians, on the left or right, and their ‘good intentions’ that become lies and Trump is that Trump lies almost exclusively. He lied when he created the chaos that only he could fix. He lied when it served no purpose. Trump even admitted that he lies, one of the rare times he told the truth. “I just make stuff up.” Whether it is fabricating ‘facts’ and ‘figures’ or conspiracy theories and accomplishments, Trump would be heading for a resounding win in November if he lied half as much. One could say that Trump believes his own lies and therein lies the real danger but the danger that is Trump is far worse. Trump doesn’t even care to pay attention to his own lies. How else could one explain him pondering out loud about the possibilities of injecting Lysol, explaining that it was just a few guys that came in with the virus from Europe-but that’s all fixed now, etc.
There is the politician that lies to get elected unintentionally, simply stating what he knows he probably can’t deliver and then there is Trump, in a world apart. There has yet to be anyone whose second nature is lies like Trump. On top of all this he is incompetent and comes off like a blithering idiot.
That’s why, focus on Trump.
“I just make stuff up.”
Issac, you have not been a credible poster on this blog so one needs proof **in context** that Trump said those words and if he did whether those words meant the same as you say or were taken completely out of context.
I believe those words had to do with a the question of a trade deficit between Canada and the US. Reviewing several articles from the WP on this subject I found no matching words despite a large amount of Trump quotes on the subject. I don’t see the audio-video which you can provide if you have it. It’s funny how these videos have transcripts copied from video’s but the actual video is not made public and the offending words are generally divorced from the entire transcript produced.
On the subject of the trade deficit when adding timber and energy the trade deficit ends up in Cananda’s favor so what Trump was saying wasn’t a lie. It was the truth unless my understanding is wrong. If you feel it is demonstrate it.
It is apparent that without additional infomation Issac is promoting another lie. This is par for the course. One has to assume that anything posted by Issac negative of Trump is a lie unless the statement quoted is surrounded by proof or a complete video. Trying to disprove something that doesn’t exist is too difficult.
Stop the lying Issac.
Trump was at an encounter with the press and Trudeau. Trump adamantly stated that Canada, along with much of the world, was taking advantage of the US by selling more stuff to the US than what they bought. Trump stated that the US bought over $6billion US from Canada more than Canada bought from the US. Trudeau corrected him, politely, that it was the other way around, that Canada imported $6billion more from the US than it sold to the US in manufactured goods, or that which was the point, American jobs. Trump stood his ground and argued. One of Trump’s aides backed up Trudeau and Trump just laughed and said, “I just make stuff up.” It was in the news, papers, and is a fact. Trump has often laughed off his imbecilities or lied pathetically about them. When he stated that injecting bleach products was something that should be ‘looked into’, he then backtracked and stated that he was being sarcastic.
I’ve listened to Trump speak. There is no filter between his mind and his mouth. Trump often says exactly what he is thinking and sometimes this reveals that he is several bricks short a load. Trump throws stuff out there to see what will stick. He rarely if ever actually thinks about ‘stuff’ whether he makes it up or it is the issue at hand.
One thing is verifiable, Trump is based on lies. As he has stated, in print, ‘You sell the sizzle not the steak.’ Couple that with the realization that if a lie is repeated often enough, enough people will believe it. Revisit his campaign and revisit the lies. Trump, as was his campaign, is built almost on lies, or sizzle.
Did you read what I wrote? Provide your proof not your rhetoric.
There are differentl ways of calculating trade imbalances. According to one account I think at the WP Trump said when one adds in timber and energy the US has a large deficit not seen in the other figure.
“I’ve listened to Trump speak. There is no filter between his mind and his mouth. ”
That is somewhat true which is both good and bad. Trump tells you what he is thinking, but his actions tell you what Trump actually did. Obama told you what you wanted to hear and his actions were not related to his self- promotion.
So far despite all the meaningless rhetoric what you said is a lie until you can prove it to be true. I am waiting.
First of all, I participate in this blog’s ‘back and forths’ for purely cathartic purposes. I don’t chronicle everything. I don’t hold myself responsible for archiving or retrieving proofs of everything. I read what Trump said. It was reported on the BBC and Wapo. That’s enough for me. The purpose of the quote is that Trump lies so often and has built a fan base primarily based on lies, that it fits. He laughs it off. Like shooting someone on 5th Avenue, etc. Trump is a salesman. He reminds me of a friend who sold insurance to farmers who had nothing else to do with their money. He told me that more often than not half way through his routine, he and the farmer would break down laughing at it all. He got the sale. I suppose that’s one way to take Trump, except it’s a little more serious than that.
Trump’s entire campaign was based on lies. There was no economic problem. The economy was on a six year upward incline after being tanked by Bush. Just as with the correction to Trump’s juicing during his first two years there was a slowing and speeding up during Obama’s terms. The primary reason for the less than one percent drop in the unemployment rate under Trump was the six percent drop during Obama’s terms. Unemployment was high for two reasons. Firstly the economy was in a recession and people were laid off. Secondly millions of baby boomers that would have retired either stayed on or went back to work as they lost their nest egg. These are chronicled facts. When the economy recovered under Obama, after six years, more and more baby boomers retired resulting in job openings. Trump’s lies and grandstanding had next to nothing to do with it. Only dupes would believe that it was all chaos and only he could fix it. Statistics, graphs, and facts don’t lie. Trump lies. There has never been a bigger disgrace in the White House.
That Trump can’t simply go about his job without grandstanding and lying is the pathetic picture that he presents to the world. America is strong and the world knows that this idiot is temporary. However, American hubris and momentum have their limitations. Trump’s main accomplishments will have been to further polarize Americans and isolate it from the world.
Trump’s jewel in his crown has been how he has handled the Covid-19 pandemic. His six weeks of lies and BS are more than responsible for today’s nightmare. Potentially America should have been at the levels of Canada. Yet it’s more than twice as bad. When America needed a leader it had a grandstanding, narcissistic, megalomaniac. “I am not responsible.” direct quote from your champion.
“First of all, I participate in this blog’s ‘back and forths’ for purely cathartic purposes.”
Issac if you need lies for cathartic purposes and want to dump your load on this list expect some blowback.
You keep calling Trump a liar, for cathartic purposes of course, but since it is so frequent you should be able to prove the lies exist. Instead you sh.t all over yourself and the blog. Have you no dignity?
I read what I read from sources that have yet to be sued for slander. As far as proof goes, there is nothing other than this available. As far as dignity goes, the Trump dupes, wannabe lawyers that day in and day out dump on the left, the entire left but leave unscathed the scum that is McConnell, Inhofe, Trump, etc.; you need to get a better dictionary and get rid of your thesaurus.
“I read what I read from sources that have yet to be sued for slander. ”
Read the cartoon Donald Duck. You will learn a lot more.
Issac, is this what you were referring to?
https://apnews.com/c5227bc9ad384fa99795fdd4a00af1fd/Trump-owns-up-to-making-things-up
If so, Trump didn’t say the words you put in quotation marks, but did imply what you wrote, which is that he’s totally willing to make claims when he has no idea: “I said ‘wrong, Justin, you do [have a trade deficit with the U.S.].’ I didn’t even know. Josh, I had no idea. I just said, ‘you’re wrong.'”
“Key Takeaways
The United States runs a trade deficit with all its five major trading partners: China, Mexico, Japan, Germany, and Canada”
https://www.thebalance.com/trade-deficit-by-county-3306264
—–
From the US Census dealing with 2020
https://www.census.gov/foreign-trade/balance/c1220.html#2020
—–
You guys are not to be trusted.
I recall that reporting. I also recall another where Trump laughs it off, saying, ‘I just make stuff up.’ When you put this in with the raft of other statements Trump has made that illustrate what he thinks of himself and unfortunately of the rest of America and the world, you get one narcissistic, megalomaniac that is also incompetent. Trump is all sizzle but no steak. He boasts about borrowing a ‘couple million’ from his dad to start out in business and that he is a self made man. In reality his dad underwrote a 75 mil skyscraper rehab that was Trump’s first project. The administration fees on that would have been anywhere from ten to twenty mil. Trump went bankrupt six times, stiffing thousands out of millions in wages and fees, not to mention defaulted loans. Trump failed at eleven businesses and has been sued consistently for fraud and other crimes. A large part of the money he has p*ssed away has gone to fight off going to jail. Trump is the quintessential oligarch that represents the division of the elite privileged and the worker.
Trump’s lies are all that keep his base placated. The tariff wars have cost the American worker, consumer and fattened the coffers from which the US pays subsidies to farmers for losses caused by those tariffs. People too unenlightened to understand that it’s not China and the rest of the countries that are paying but the American consumer and the tariffs are revenue for Trump’s failures. Idiocy costs. Americans are paying, and will continue to pay.
In November the US must return to a level of sanity. Dump Trump.
Issac, it seems you are one big never ending cathartic. Hook up to a sewer line rather than overflow onto the blog.
Well, Issac, if you recall anything about the context, I can search for it. Simply mentioning Trudeau was enough for me to find the other quote. In the meantime, it’s amusing that Allan pretends that 2020 data are relevant to a Trump statement made in March 2018. And even funnier that he thinks it’s relevant to Trump’s own claim that “I didn’t even know. Josh, I had no idea. I just said [it],” despite not knowing.
As far as I am concerned, my memory is what I usually use and it is still pretty dependable. That’s where it ends for me. Those that dug up the other quotes, I appreciate as they serve to support my allegations; Trump is a self admitted liar. When Trump said that he could shoot someone on 5th Avenue-I hope you don’t need ‘proof’ of that-this is what he meant; that he could do or say anything and the dupes would still support him. Trump has spent the past four years proving this. Hopefully the herd has thinned out a little. Instead of getting 3 million fewer votes he gets, say 20 million fewer and loses the electoral college. For America to redeem itself it can’t just give this lying poltroon his walking papers, the people have to scream him out of the White House.
“it’s amusing that Allan pretends that 2020 data are relevant to a Trump statement made in March 2018. ”
If you recall I provided an 18 Billion dollar deficit to Issac (2018) when the discussion first started. In the recent post I provided two sites and one was a government site from the census. If you actually clicked on the site you would see it started with 2020 and went backwards well past 2018 but that is not in your nature.
You are a natural born liar so you stop looking the second you see a phrase that you can use as part of a lie.
https://www.census.gov/foreign-trade/balance/c1220.html#2020
Once again it is proven that your name doesn’t befit you and instead it should be Needs to be Committed. Keep laughing they will be coming around with the Thorazine soon.
Lorenzo, you are obviously either a martian, something is wrong with you, or you’re kidding. Any normal human can tell Trump doesn’t care whether anything he says is true or false and what he says reflects that fact. If you want examples, you can easily find the 20k examples tracked by Glenn Kessler or just watch a press conference. If you seriously cannot tell this, you are not worth my time.
The nutcase is accusing another of not knowing the facts but at the same time insists there was nothing to the Horowitz investigation and states again and again that Horowitz found nothing. This is despite the fact that what Horowitz found and did mean quite alot. I’ll copy what the Professor said and let btb argue with him
“Horowitz referring matters for criminal investigation and finding a host of false statements, errs, and professional misconduct.”
Turley– “If other DOJ attorneys and investigators knew that the court was being given false material information, the concerns are magnified not reduced for the Durham investigation”
***
Yes, instead of only a dishonest and corrupt official we have a dishonest and corrupt agency and possibly a dishonest and corrupt government.
Weissmann needs to receive justice, Old Testament style. Doesn’t it violate the code of ethics for an attorney to encourage obstruction of justice?
Judges need to grow a backbone and start moving to disbar some of these idiots like Weissmann. He should be adjunct faculty at some community college teaching History of Bad Decisions I Have Made.
“The fact that Page was a source for the CIA is not disputed.”
Actually, it is. The charging document states that the text of the email was “My recollection is that [Individual #1] was or is “[digraph]” and not a “source” …,” where the words in italics are what Clinesmith added. Individual #1 is Page. “[digraph]” is a reference Page having been an “operational contact” (per Horowitz’s IG report, which explains that the CIA “uses a specific two-letter designation, or digraph, to describe a U.S. person who has been approved … for operational contact”).
Horowitz’s report further states “According to the other U.S. government agency [i.e., the CIA], ‘operational contact,’ as that term is used in the memorandum about Page, provides ‘Contact Approval,’ which allows the other agency to contact and discuss sensitive information with a U.S. person and to collect information from that person via ‘passive debriefing,’ or debriefing a person of information that is within the knowledge of an individual and has been acquired through the normal course of that individual’s activities,” and “As noted earlier in this chapter, according to the U.S. government agency that approved Page as an operational contact, the approval did not allow for the operational use or tasking of Page.”
But I’ve since learned that for the CIA, a source is someone who CAN be tasked with gathering info. So the CIA didn’t consider Page a “source,” only an “operational contact.”
And there’s a straightforward way to resolve this: Clinesmith’s lawyer should raise this issue in front of the judge the case is assigned to.
I knew you wouldn’t be able to resist coming out and declaring what you’re truly committed to. Hint: it has nothing to do with honesty, integrity or justice. You’re an effing fraud and don’t even think about playing your whiny-a$$ “prove it” game. GFY and prove you’re not.
LOL that you make that particular accusation while not providing a shred of evidence that I said anything false.
I have no burden of proof to prove you wrong. You do have a burden of proof to prove your own claims correct.
Take your own advice OLLY.
“The fact that Page was a source for the CIA is not disputed.”
—-
Turley would have been more accurate to say “The fact that Page was a source for the CIA is not disputed by any reasonable person.”
RME at your No True Scotsman fallacy, Lorenzo.
I am so glad the DoJ is now taking their own misconduct seriously and I look forward to many other defendants cleared who were victims. Oh wait…this will only happen to the politically connected? Nvm then.
Free Millie Weaver, arrest Mueller/Weissman, obama’s Ret. Gen Jones, etc/. etc…..
Watch the Millie’s video contained in Pete’s show.
(music)
We don’t need no Andrew Weissman!
We don’t need no thought control!
All in all it’s just..
Another dip in the road!
I how after J.Edgar Hoover’s death the cry for honest, accountable US Department of Justice leadership. Hoover’s abuse of power, however, pales against the naked Machiavellian power exerted by today’s DOJ and FBI executives. Sadly, our nation has not seen a responsible FBI official since Efram Zimbalist Jr. Jim Comey’s lies caused Hillary to blush, and Louis Freeh sold his soul to Penn State, the ‘Sanctuary City for Paedophiles’ 50 shekels of silver in exchange for the whitewash of JoePerv Paterno’s decades of boy grooming and raping, with Ped State financing and supporting.
I would offer my life to see Andrew Weissman will rot in jail for the rest of his life!
The article is vast and contorted. Sometimes the words like “he” get bandied about so I don’t know who is being referred to.
The media used to defame pigs by using the term “hogwash”. I won’t say that the article or topic is that. I will refer to piglatin phrases so that the words are not seen as nasty. This is itShay on the ouYay. And like the article, I am not sure what ouYay refers to.
Liberty:
All your obfuscating won’t change the facts: Weissmann is a corrupt and unethical prosecutor who subverted justice in his partisan efforts to attack Trump.
Your post is just another denial of developing facts.
I don’t know if you are delusional or dishonest, but the results are the same.
Liberty2nd’s attempts to get profanity into this page <i?via pig Latin and other circumlocutions may safely be ignored. Screen out the “Look at me, Look at me!” in his posts and there’s othingnay eftnay.
I am just confused about who Flung foo and also where the three spots are on the wall.
To grasp the evil that is Weissman you need to read Sidney Powell’s great book about the ENRON nightmare.