Director of National Intelligence John Ratcliffe on Tuesday declassified notes of former CIA Director John Brennan showing that he briefed former President Obama on Hillary Clinton’s alleged “plan” to tie then-candidate Donald Trump to Russia as “a means of distracting the public from her use of a private email server.” My interest in this story is not simply the serious underlying allegation but the lack of coverage by major networks or media outlets. This was clearly released at this time for political purposes, but that does not make it a non-story. We have often discussed concerns over the active effort by many in the media to downplay stories that would either help President Donald Trump or hurt the Democrats in the upcoming elections. This would seem such a case. Whether this is true or a complete fabrication, it should be major news. In the meantime, the responses from Clinton allies have not addressed the substance of the document and have simply dismissed the entire story as groundless.
Brennan’s handwritten notes would seem extremely serious on their face. It certainly indicates that Brennan considered the issue sufficiently serious to brief the President of the United States on July 28th. The notes state
“We’re getting additional insight into Russian activities from [REDACTED]. . . CITE [summarizing] alleged approved by Hillary Clinton a proposal from one of her foreign policy advisers to vilify Donald Trump by stirring up a scandal claiming interference by the Russian security service.”
There is also a notation reading “Any evidence of collaboration between Trump campaign + Russia” and margin references to “JC,” “Denis,” and “Susan.” If Brennan thought this was serious enough to brief the President, shouldn’t the media consider this sufficiently serious to investigate and report?
While it would be dangerous to release documents without redactions, there is an obvious value to understanding the truth about these briefings and the underlying allegations.
This release further supports a newly-declassified document with the Senate Judiciary Committee revealing that, in September 2016, U.S. intelligence officials forwarded an investigative referral on Hillary Clinton purportedly approving “a plan concerning U.S. presidential candidate Donald Trump and Russian hackers hampering U.S. elections” in order to distract the public from her email scandal.
When asked about this referral involving a candidate for the presidency, then-FBI Director James Comey insisted that it “didn’t ring a bell.”
Once again, my initial interest is in the utter blackout on the story. This would seem a major story regardless of the ultimate findings. If these notes have been fabricated or misrepresented, it would show a breathtaking effort to lie to the voters before the election. If these notes are genuine, it would indicate that the FBI was aware of an effort by the Democratic presidential candidate to tag Trump with a Russian collusion scandal. We know that Clinton’s campaign funded the Steele dossier and that Steele shopped the dossier with the media to try to generate coverage to influence the election.
Throughout the campaign, and for many weeks after, the Clinton campaign denied any involvement in the creation of the dossier that was later used to secure a secret surveillance warrant against Trump associates during the Obama administration. Journalists later discovered that the Clinton campaign hid the payments to Fusion as a “legal fees” among the $5.6 million paid to the law firm. New York Times reporter Ken Vogel at the time said that Clinton lawyer Marc Elias had “vigorously” denied involvement in the anti-Trump dossier. When Vogel tried to report the story, he said, Elias “pushed back vigorously, saying ‘You (or your sources) are wrong.’” Times reporter Maggie Haberman likewise wrote: “Folks involved in funding this lied about it, and with sanctimony, for a year.” Even when Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta was questioned by Congress on the matter, he denied any contractual agreement with Fusion GPS. Sitting beside him was Elias, who reportedly said nothing to correct the false information given to Congress.
Later, confronted with the evidence, Clinton and her campaign finally admitted that the dossier was a campaign-funded document that was pushed by Steele and others to the media.
Making things worse is the fact that we know know American intelligence flagged Steele’s main source as a Russian agent and warned that the dossier was suspected of containing Russian disinformation from Russian intelligence agencies.
Yet, even with this latest disclosure in Brennan’s own writing, we hear the familiar sound of crickets. It seems that journalism is suspended until after the election when reporters might be allowed a modicum of curiosity on such stories.
Pelosis Take a Big Stake in CrowdStrike, Democrat-Connected Linchpin of Russia Probe
Financial disclosure forms show that Nancy and Paul Pelosi have invested between $500,000 to $1 million in Crowdstrike, the firm that first accused Russia of hacking the DNC.
https://www.realclearinvestigations.com/articles/2020/10/09/pelosi_takes_big_stake_in_crowdstrike_democrat-tied_linchpin_of_russiagate_125557.html
Yet the most damaging revelation calling into question CrowdStrike’s Russian hacking allegations came with an admission early in the Russia probe that was only made public this year. Unsealed testimony from the House Intelligence Committee shows that Henry admitted under oath behind closed doors in December 2017 that the firm “did not have concrete evidence” that Russian hackers actually stole any emails or other data from the DNC servers. “There’s circumstantial evidence, but no evidence that they were actually exfiltrated,” Henry said. “There are times when we can see data exfiltrated, and we can say conclusively. But in this case it appears it was set up to be exfiltrated, but we just don’t have the evidence that says it actually left.”
Mr. Turley, you say this story was released now “for political purposes.” Are you sure the timing isn’t simply because this is how long it’s taken to get the facts from the Swamp? In every post you write there’s an elephant in whatever room you’re writing in and that elephant is the complete corruption of the American left and the collusion with the media and the judiciary. And you’re always there going Golly gee willikers it’s SO WEIRD that this happened. No it’s not weird just like the Durham report is never going to come out. Durham is a Democrat. I knew from the moment I knew he wa a Democrat that he would not do this job. I didn’t know Barr was also in collusion and that makes me sad. The Left, the media and the judiciary are all in cahoots. It’s a miracle these facts came out at all. The big question is, what happens now? Oh I know. Nothing.
Of course it is political. But for the witch hunt and collusion delusion nonsense it never would have been released at all.
That said you are correct – Trump and the republican house and Senate have been trying to get this out forever. They have been thwarted at every stepp by the deep state and democrats.
If Democrats did not want this emerging during the election they could have stopped blocking everything and it would have been out years ago.
Ir if they had never started the stupid and political investigation of Trump it would have never gotten out at all.
Black Lives MAGA!
https://twitter.com/BuckSexton/status/1314680004584800262?s=20
KEITH OLBERMAN TV GUY DEMOCRAT CHEERLEADER NOT ONLY CALLS TRUMP A TERRORIST BUT WANTS TO THROW HIM, BARR, BARRETT IN JAIL
drum roll
AND YOU AND ME TOO
I been saying it guys– better vote Republican up and down the ballot this time, not just Trump, because the scalp you save MAY BE YOUR OWN
So wait. The most powerful man in the world wants his political opponent in the coming election to be arrested and has directed his AG to do so and you’re upset about a has been TV personality with power equivalent to Dennis Rodman calling for the arrest of that most powerful man in the world?
Oh, you poor thing! Take a pillow with you under the bed tonight,
You missed it Joe. Not Just Trump and Barr, but Amy Coney Barrett and all ‘Trump supporters.”
THAT’S TENS OF MILLIONS OF PEOPLE JOE. YOU READY FOR THAT?
wake up my fellow Democrat voting citizens and call your crazies on the carpet for some of their insanity before we all end up at each other’s throats.
I happily call Olbermann on the carpet for that insane rant, Kurtz.
Will you call Republican crazies like Trump on the carpet for their insane rants?
thats nice but you just cant give that one an unqualified thumbs down, huh. always looking to qualify
this one from Keith was so far out of bounds it should be an easy no way
there’s nothing im aware of from trump that comes close
he may have said “lock hillary up” or even how that the FISA warrant abuses against him have been exposed, lock up mccabe, and the usual cast of players
but here Olberman is saying lock up TRUMP SUPPORTERS
that’s tens of millions of people and basically a call for what besides civil war I dont know
it’s a really insane rant. i have never heard anything crazier from any Democrat of note, ever. this is the high water mark of crazy
Again, Kurtz: will you call Trump on the carpet for his insane rants?
Typical garbage. You make a claim of insane rants but don’t say what they are nor do you say why they are insane. All you do is impugn the reputation of others and then complain when you are called out for your poor behavior.
“will you call Trump on the carpet for his insane rants?”
Sure – I do not like Trump’s insane rants.
I like the Trump economy – better than the Obama economy.
I like peace in the mideast.
I like the fact that Trump is the first president since Carter that has not started a new foreign conflict.
I like that he is ending them.
I like his foreign policy generally.
I like most of the judges he has appointed.
There are other things that I do not like.
But all in all – he is the best president since Clinton.
I do not especially like Clinton as a person -and he was pretty bad at foriegn policy. but he was good at the economy.
Better even than Trump.
But Bush and Obama were worse at both.
I think Bush was an incredibly decent person – just as Clinton was an incredibly bad person.
But Bush was a lousy president.
You seem to thing that Trump’s style is somehow determinative ?
The “Trump economy” John Say likes produced less jobs in it’s 1st 3 years then Obama’s economy did in his last 3, and even with the rich guy stimulus bill Trump signed, and which will cost us all about $2 trillion in added national debt, his first 3 years GDP numbers are only marginally better than Obama’s last 3, and even before the pandemic, heading south. With the pandemic he has f..ed up, he will become the 1st president in recent history to have a net loss of jobs, and we are currently flirting with an economic depression.
“The “Trump economy” John Say likes produced less jobs in it’s 1st 3 years then Obama’s economy did in his last 3,”
A both dubious – please provide a source, and irrelevant claim.
When Trump took Office Unemployment was 4%. That acccording to economists is the natural rate of unemployment. It is supposed to be extremely difficult to get below that.
I would further note – an error all politicans and all left wing nuts make – the goal is NOT to employment – it is standard of living
“and even with the rich guy stimulus bill Trump signed, and which will cost us all about $2 trillion in added national debt”
Revenue continued to rise.
The US government has a spending problem not a revenue problem.
“his first 3 years GDP numbers are only marginally better than Obama’s last 3”
Correct but highly misleading. The rate of Growth was headed DOWN in the last 3 years of Obama – ending at 1.5% in 4Q 2016.
The Growth rate consistently rose through the Trump presidency.
“With the pandemic he has f..ed up”
He has ? Trump did not stupidly lock down the economy – you idiots terifying people did that – Democratic governors did that.
I would note that the Economy is red states had 1/3 the downturn of Blue states and red states are recovering faster.
“he will become the 1st president in recent history to have a net loss of jobs”
Highly unlikely.
“and we are currently flirting with an economic depression.”
False, we have had a single quarter of negative growth. We will not even meet the technical definition of a recession – 3 qtrs of negative growth in a row. That one quarter was extremely bad – 8% decline on an anualized basis – but 2020 Will still match 2018 in GDP and will still be better than any year during Obamas presidency. The Fed expects the end of year contraction to be about 3.7% that is not good, but we have seen far worse. The 2008 recession was much worse.
John, I accept your retraction.
Elsewhere and many times you have claimed that the Russians tried to aid Hillary in 2016 and that there is no evidence of between collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia. Unfortunately for you, and as I posted here yesterday and which you have managed to avoid, the GOP led Senate IC found the following in their recently released report (PS and this is consistent with the Mueller Report and the views of our Intelligence agencies and FBI, reaffirmed even with Trump appointed heads):
“(U) The Committee found that Russian President Vladimir Putin ordered the Russian
effort to hack computer networks and accounts affiliated with the Democratic Party and leak
information damaging to Hillary Clinton and her campaign for president. Moscow’s intent was
to harm the Clinton Campaign, tarnish an expected Clinton presidential administration, help the
Trump Campaign after Trump became the presumptive Republican nominee, and undermine the
U.S. democratic process.”
Here are instances of collusion noted in the report:
“(U) The Committee found that the Russian government engaged in an aggressive, multifaceted effort to influence, or attempt to influence, the outcome of the 2016 presidential election.
….(U) Manafort hired and worked increasingly closely with a Russian national, Konstantin
Kilimnik. Kilimnik is a Russian intelligence officer. Kilimnik became an integral part of
Manafort’s operations in Ukraine and Russia, serving as Manafort’s primary liaison to Deripaska
and eventually managing Manafort’s office in Kyiv. Kilimnik and Manafort formed a close and
lasting relationship that endured to the 2016 U.S. elections. and beyond.
(U) Prior to joining the Trump Campaign in March 2016 and continuing throughout his
time 6n the Campaign, Manafort directly and indirectly communicated with Kilimnik, Deripaska,
and the pro-Russian oligarchs in Ukraine.
Beginning while he was Campaign chairman and continuing until at least 2018, Manafort discussed with Kilimnik a peace plan for eastern Ukraine that
benefited the Kremlin.
After the election, Manafort continued to coordinate with
Russian persons, particularly Kilimnik and other individuals close to Deripaska, in an effort to
undertake activities on their behalf. Manafort worked with Kilimnik starting in 2016 on
narratives that sou ht to undermine evidence that Russia interfered in .the 2016 U.S.
election.
(U) The Committee found that Manafort’s presence on the Campaign at;td proximity to
Trump created opportunities for Russian intelligence services to exert influence over, and
acquire confidential information on, the Trump Campaign. Taken as a whole, Manafort’s highlevel access and willingness to share information with individuals closely affiliated with the
Russian intelligence services, particularly Kilimnik and associates of Oleg Deripaska,
represented a grave counterintelligence threat.
(U) The Committee found that Russian President Vladimir Putin ordered the Russian
effort to hack computer networks and accounts affiliated with the Democratic Party and leak
information damaging to Hillary Clinton and her campaign for president. Moscow’s intent was
to harm the Clinton Campaign, tarnish an expected Clinton presidential administration, help the
Trump Campaign after Trump became the presumptive Republican nominee, and undermine the
U.S. democratic process.
(U) While the GRU and WikiLeaks were releasing hacked documents, the Trump
Campaign sought to maximize the impact of those leaks to aid Trump’s electoral
prospects. Staff on the Trump Campaign sought advance notice about WikiLeaks releases,
created messaging strategies to promote and share the materials in anticipation of and following
thdr release, and encouraged further leaks. The Trump Campaign publicly undermined the
attribution of the hack-and-leak campaign to Russia and was indifferent to whether it and
WikiLeaks were furthering a Russian election interference effort.
(U) Trump and senior Campaign offici.als sought to obtain advance information about
WikiLeaks’s planned releases through Roger Stone. At their direction, Stone took action to gain
inside knowledge for the Campaign and shared his purported knowledge directly with Trump
and senior Campaign offictals on multiple occasions. Trump and the Campaign believed that
Stone had inside information and expressed satisfaction that Stone’s information suggested more
releases would be forthcoming.
(U) The Committee found that the connection between Trump and the Agalarovs began
in 2013
(U) The Committee found that Aras Agalarov was personally involved in pushing for
both the June 9, 2016 meeting between NataliaVeselnitskaya and senior m~mbers of the
Campaign and for a second meeting following the election, also with Veselnitskaya, that did not
take plac·e. Agalarov likely did this on behalf of individuals affiliated with the Russian
government,
(U) The Committe~ found evidence suggesting that it was the ‘i~tent of the Campaign
· participants in the June 9, 2016 meeting, particularly Dortald Trump Jr., to receive derogatory
information that would be of benefit to the Campaign from a soui:ce known, at least by Trump
Jr.,. to have connections to the Russian government.
(U) The information that Natalia. Veselnitskaya, the Russian lawyer, offered during the
June 9, 2016 meeting and planned to offer again at the follow up meeting requested by Aras .
Agalarov was part of a broader influence operation targeting the United States that was
coordinated, at least in part, with elements of the Russian government. That Russian effort was
focused on U.S. sanctions against Russia under the Magnitsky Act. The Committee assesses that
some of the same information used by Veselnitskaya at the June 9, 2016 meeting was also used
in an influence operation earlier in 2016 by individuals in Moscow who have ties to Russian
intelligence and to Putin.
(U) The Committee assesses that at least two participants in the June 9, 2016 meeting,
Veselnitskaya and Rinat Akhmetshin, have significant connections to the Russian government,
including the Russian intelligence services. The connections the Committee uncovered,
particularly regarding Veselnitskaya, were far more extensive and concerning than what had
been publicly known
(U) During the 2016 U.S. presidential election cycle, Donald °Trump and the Trump
Organization pursued a business deal in Russia. Michael Cohen, then an executive vice
president at the Trump Organization and personal attorney to Trump, primarily handled and
advanced these efforts
(U) Cohen kept Trump updated on the progress of the deal. While these negotiations
were ongoing, Trump made positive public comments about Putin in connection with his
presidential campaign. Cohen and Sater sought to leverage Trump’s comments, and subsequent
comments about Trump by Putin, to advance the deal.
(U) George Papadopoulos joined the Trump Campaign as part of a foreign policy
advisory team …The Committee found George. Papadopoulos used multiple avenues to pursue a faceto-face meeting between Trump and President Putin. Papadopoulos believed that he was operating with the approval-or at least not the explicit disapproval-of Campaign leadership,
who he kept apprised of his efforts.
https://www.intelligence.senate.gov/sites/default/files/documents/report_volume
“John, I accept your retraction.”
What do you claim I have retracted ?
“Elsewhere and many times you have claimed that the Russians tried to aid Hillary in 2016 and that there is no evidence of between collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia. Unfortunately for you, and as I posted here yesterday and which you have managed to avoid, the GOP led Senate IC found the following in their recently released report (PS and this is consistent with the Mueller Report and the views of our Intelligence agencies and FBI, reaffirmed even with Trump appointed heads):”
Again you are substituting opinion for evidence. Worse you are misrepresenting the opinion you are citing.
Provide FACTS not opinions.
I do not care what you think someone else “found”.
The house and Zenate investigated Benghazi 4 times before they were able to actually get to the truth.
When people lie to committes and courts, those often produce incorrect findings.
That is why we rely on facts not oppinions.
Addressing your specifics:
“(U) The Committee found that the Russian government engaged in an aggressive, multifaceted effort to influence, or attempt to influence, the outcome of the 2016 presidential election.”
This is actually incorrect. the Russian efforts were indistinguishable from prior elections. There efforts were focused on disruption and chaos not outcome.
“….(U) Manafort hired and worked increasingly closely with a Russian national, Konstantin
Kilimnik. Kilimnik is a Russian intelligence officer. Kilimnik became an integral part of
Manafort’s operations in Ukraine and Russia, serving as Manafort’s primary liaison to Deripaska
and eventually managing Manafort’s office in Kyiv. Kilimnik and Manafort formed a close and
lasting relationship that endured to the 2016 U.S. elections. and beyond.”
This one is wonderful – Kilimnik is a US State department agent.
https://thehill.com/opinion/white-house/447394-key-figure-that-mueller-report-linked-to-russia-was-a-state-department
Derispaska is strongly tied to Clinton and Biden as well. Kyiv is in the Ukraine, not Russia.
“(U) Prior to joining the Trump Campaign in March 2016 and continuing throughout his
time 6n the Campaign, Manafort directly and indirectly communicated with Kilimnik, Deripaska,
and the pro-Russian oligarchs in Ukraine.”
So ? And Bill Clinton received money from Russia, and the Clinton Foundation received money from Russian Oligarks.
Derispask is linked to pretty much everyone – and much more closely to Biden and Clinton.
“Beginning while he was Campaign chairman and continuing until at least 2018, Manafort discussed with Kilimnik a peace plan for eastern Ukraine that
benefited the Kremlin.”
What a Crime – Manafort sought peace in the Ukraine. Jail him again!!!
“After the election, Manafort continued to coordinate with
Russian persons, particularly Kilimnik and other individuals close to Deripaska, in an effort to
undertake activities on their behalf.”
Wow !! Ignoring the fact that you have not actually proven the claim. You also have not claimed anything meaningful.
Do you read the stuff you cut and paste ?
“Manafort worked with Kilimnik starting in 2016 on
narratives that sou ht to undermine evidence that Russia interfered in .the 2016 U.S.
election.”
Again – do you read the stuff you cut and past. While the underlying claim is dubious, MANY people have legitimagtely worked to expose the “collusion delusion”.
Your allegation here is vaugue and unspecific. But I am guessing that it is really a spun version of Manafort worked to expose the DNC collusion with Ukraine during the 2016 election – and that is true, though Manafort was a bit player. But Manafort was an actual target of Ukrainian interferance in the US election. Forged records were leaked to the press from the Ukrainian PG’s office with the “collusion” of the DNC to smear manafort.
Further you would not be wise to pursue this mess – everything related to Ukraine leads to the DNC, The Biden’s and many people who testified against Trump in the impeachment. There you have an ACTUAL Conspiracy to interfere in the election – and then to cover it up.
But it is well documented – remember FACTS. There are several places that you can get the source documentation – but the most convienient is John Solomon’s repository of source documents – many optained from the State Department via FOIA requests related to both DNC collusion with Ukraine and the while Biden Ukraine mess.
“(U) The Committee found that Manafort’s presence on the Campaign at;td proximity to
Trump created opportunities for Russian intelligence services to exert influence over, and
acquire confidential information on, the Trump Campaign. Taken as a whole, Manafort’s highlevel access and willingness to share information with individuals closely affiliated with the
Russian intelligence services, particularly Kilimnik and associates of Oleg Deripaska,
represented a grave counterintelligence threat.”
Is there an allegation of substance in this ?
If you are going to pretend that the slightest connection to any Russian constitutes the nonsense you are claiming above – then you have a HUGE Clinon/Biden problem. Not only is Deripaska Tied directly to Clinton and Biden – but so are a large number of other Russian Oligarks.
If Ties to Derispaka are problematic for you – we are going to have to jail the entire DNC
You conflate innuendo with evidence. Worse you do so only one way.
“(U) The Committee found that Russian President Vladimir Putin ordered the Russian
effort to hack computer networks and accounts affiliated with the Democratic Party and leak
information damaging to Hillary Clinton and her campaign for president. Moscow’s intent was
to harm the Clinton Campaign, tarnish an expected Clinton presidential administration, help the
Trump Campaign after Trump became the presumptive Republican nominee, and undermine the
U.S. democratic process.”
So your claim is that the Senate found something that No one else has actually been able to do.
Let me remind you that the only evidence regarding the extraction of the DNC emails came from CrowdStrike.
No one else has been allowed access to the DNC servers or networks.
Crowdstrike testified – to the Senate. And their testimony was that it was not possible to determine who hacked the DNC.
Nor was it possible to determine if the DNC emails were exfiltrated fromt he DNC servers by hacking.
The FACTS are that the DNC was hacked TWICE Using hacking tools that were developed by Russians but are readily available to most every hacker in the world and are used by myriads of other hackers including most of those int he Mideast.
The DNC Server logs provide evidence of that hacking and the exfiltration of small amounts of data.
But they do not provide evidence that the DNC emails were removed vie those hacks.
The only source that might know – Julian Assange has repeatedly asserted that the DNC Emails were not hacked but leaked.
He has offered to testify and provide evidence in US courts in return for “free passage” – i.e. being able to travel to the US, testify and return without being prosecuted on the other idiotic charges the US has filed against him.
Further, while the hacking of the DNC was illegal. Leaking DNC emails would not have been.
Regardless, you seem to entirely miss the fact that regardless of HOW the DNC emails were released, it was NOT the means by which they were made public that damaged the Clinton campaign. But what the members of the DNC said in those emails.
The emails demonstrated that Clinton and the purportedly neutral DNC “colluded” with each other and reporters to harm Sanders Candidacy. Clinton was not damaged by the Russians. She was damaged by her own misconduct.
The emails exposed Clinton, the DNC and reporters for the biased ends justifies the means political shills that they are.
If you do not want to be exposed for your misconduct – do not engage in misconduct.
This is like saying that we should disregard the damning evidence in the pentagon papers because Elsberg stole them.
“(U) While the GRU and WikiLeaks were releasing hacked documents,”
Still not a fact.
“the Trump Campaign sought to maximize the impact of those leaks to aid Trump’s electoral
prospects. Staff on the Trump Campaign sought advance notice about WikiLeaks releases,
created messaging strategies to promote and share the materials in anticipation of and following
thdr release, and encouraged further leaks.”
Absolutely – perfectly legal. BTW – while the Trump campaign SOUGHT some of this. They did not get it – there were no actual contacts between TFA and Wikileaks – even Mueller established that. Stone Beleived he had access to Wikileaks, but in fact he did not.
Not Stone nor any of those associated with him were in actual communication with Wikileaks.
“The Trump Campaign publicly undermined the attribution of the hack-and-leak campaign to Russia and was indifferent to whether it and
WikiLeaks were furthering a Russian election interference effort.”
Correct – and it remains true to this day that there is no proof that Russia Hacked the DNC, that the Emails were released Via Hack.
“(U) Trump and senior Campaign offici.als sought to obtain advance information about
WikiLeaks’s planned releases through Roger Stone. At their direction, Stone took action to gain
inside knowledge for the Campaign and shared his purported knowledge directly with Trump
and senior Campaign offictals on multiple occasions. Trump and the Campaign believed that
Stone had inside information and expressed satisfaction that Stone’s information suggested more
releases would be forthcoming.”
All true, all legal, and oddly bogus at the same time. It is WELL DOCUMENTED that Neither Stone nor anyone else associated with Trump had actual contact with Wikileaks or advance knowledge of anything.
It they actually had, if they had coordinated with Wikileaks – that would still have been perfectly legal – but it never happened.
Had what you claimed ocurred with would be exactly the same as Hillary and the DNC coordinating with reporters to the detriment of the Sanders campaign.
You are unable to distinguish between actions that are harmful to your ideology and actions that are actually wrong.
There is one and only one illegal Act that the Trump campaign could have done regarding the DNC emails, That is they could have conspired to Hack the DNC. That not only did not happen it was impossible.
You are actually trying to make it a crime to try to defeat your political opponent. To wish bad political fortune on them. To revel that their dirty laundry is aired in public.
Except that in your world that is only wrong when others do it to you. Not when you do it.
The forged Manafort ledgers were released by the Ukraine PG’s office. The DNC conspired with Ukraine to arrange that. Even the US state department was invovled.
You have managed to take an actual political crime by democrats and mispaint it as a crime by manafort.
The ledgers were forgeries, they were made public by DNC efforts and Manafort acted to expose that.
I have no problem with that. No one should.
“(U) The Committee found that the connection between Trump and the Agalarovs began
in 2013”
Agalarov is Azerbizani, And the Trump’s worled with them on the Moskow Beauty pagent.
“(U) The Committee found that Aras Agalarov was personally involved in pushing for
both the June 9, 2016 meeting between NataliaVeselnitskaya and senior m~mbers of the
Campaign and for a second meeting following the election, also with Veselnitskaya, that did not
take plac·e. Agalarov likely did this on behalf of individuals affiliated with the Russian
government,”
This is false – it was Emin Agalarov that worked to arrange the meeting.
Natalia is a private lawyer from Russia, claiming to have dirt on Clinton.
Getting Dirt on Clinton is legal. But Natialia failed to provide any.
Regardless, she met with Glenn Simpson of Fusion GPS both before and after the meeting.
The Natlaia Meeting was likely a setup by the Clinton campaign.
Regardless it was legal.
“(U) The Committe~ found evidence suggesting that it was the ‘i~tent of the Campaign
· participants in the June 9, 2016 meeting, particularly Dortald Trump Jr., to receive derogatory
information that would be of benefit to the Campaign from a soui:ce known, at least by Trump
Jr.,. to have connections to the Russian government.”
Yup, and perfectly legal. Clinton received derogatory information from a source tied to Russia and sold it to the FBI.
“(U) The information that Natalia. Veselnitskaya, the Russian lawyer, offered during the
June 9, 2016 meeting and planned to offer again at the follow up meeting requested by Aras .
Agalarov was part of a broader influence operation targeting the United States that was
coordinated, at least in part, with elements of the Russian government. That Russian effort was
focused on U.S. sanctions against Russia under the Magnitsky Act. The Committee assesses that
some of the same information used by Veselnitskaya at the June 9, 2016 meeting was also used
in an influence operation earlier in 2016 by individuals in Moscow who have ties to Russian
intelligence and to Putin.”
Yup, Natalia made alot of noise at the meeting about the harm that the Magnisky act was doing to international adopt of russian orpans.
“(U) The Committee assesses that at least two participants in the June 9, 2016 meeting,
Veselnitskaya and Rinat Akhmetshin, have significant connections to the Russian government,
including the Russian intelligence services. The connections the Committee uncovered,
particularly regarding Veselnitskaya, were far more extensive and concerning than what had
been publicly known”
Lots of innuendo – no evidence. And no consequence regardless.
You are doing this constantly – Wow, they met with people you do not like.
So did Glenn Simpson. The Clintons have received lots of money from even more dubious people.
Your “finding” is not a Finding – it is just gossip and it would be meaningless if true.
Hillary Clinton met repeatedly with Vladimir Putin as Sec State, and has attended many events with him as a private person.
What does that mean ?
“(U) During the 2016 U.S. presidential election cycle, Donald °Trump and the Trump
Organization pursued a business deal in Russia. Michael Cohen, then an executive vice
president at the Trump Organization and personal attorney to Trump, primarily handled and
advanced these efforts”
Only partly true. The Trump Organization dropped the efforts in Feb 2016. Cohen continued on his own and lied about it until June.
Regardless, nothing ever came of it.
Had TO managed to negotiate a Trump tower Moscow – that would be legal.
But what you totally fail to grasp is that they FAILED. If as you claim Putin favored Trump – why did they Fail ?
“(U) Cohen kept Trump updated on the progress of the deal. While these negotiations
were ongoing, Trump made positive public comments about Putin in connection with his
presidential campaign. Cohen and Sater sought to leverage Trump’s comments, and subsequent
comments about Trump by Putin, to advance the deal.”
Lots of blurring here. I am aware of no actual evidence that Cohen updated anyone.
Trump did make positive public comments about Putin. And voters were free to decide what that meant to them.
As to what Cohen and Sater did – who cares ? And it failed, pretty much proving that Putin wanted nothing to do with Trump.
“(U) George Papadopoulos joined the Trump Campaign as part of a foreign policy
advisory team …The Committee found George. Papadopoulos used multiple avenues to pursue a faceto-face meeting between Trump and President Putin. Papadopoulos believed that he was operating with the approval-or at least not the explicit disapproval-of Campaign leadership,
who he kept apprised of his efforts.”
So ?
Trump met with the Mexican president during the campaign.
Are you saying US political candidates can not meet with foreign leaders ?
I have gone through the entirety of what you consider evidence.
There is no “there there”.
There are no illegal acts. There is no collusion.
You have successfully proven that Trump knows some Russians as a result of sponsoring a beauthy pagent in Russia in 2013.
Whoopie !!!
You have gone to massive effort to make the fact that Trump was happy with the DNC emails into something of substance – it is not.
If TFA had actual prior knowledge of the emails release – that would still be nothing.
If TFA had meaningful contact with Wikileaks – which they did not – that would still be nothing.
If the DNC hack was actually by Russia – that would still be Nothing – BTW efforts were made to hack the RNC too – probably successfully.
But dumping a bunch of emails that the RNC did not want Trump would have been meaningless.
If the DNC hack was the actual source of the emails – that would still be nothing.
But you have nothing except a collection of facts that does not take you where you want and a bunch of innuendo and spin.
There is also almost nothing in this that was not known at the time of the election.
You claim that Putin favored Trump.
If so then why didn’t the Trump Tower Moscow go through ?
You can not both claim this is proof of a connection between Trump and Putin and that Putin favored Trump when Russia refused to go forward.
FACTS, Logic.
You are not good at either.
You seem to think that wrapping a few meaningless facts with lots of innuendo transforms them into evidence
John,
You do realize Joe Friday here is By The Book, right? And all he is doing hoping you won’t notice and get you to take time rehashing old arguments that have been made for nearly 4 years. This way he can shift the argument away from where the facts and evidence really point.
So just tell him to apologize to President Trump and the American people for supporting this attack on our democracy. Or he can just GFH. 👍
Kurtz, if Olberman shows up on this board or on my door step , I may waste my time countering his opinion. Until then I’m wasting my time questioning your rificulous premise that he has Joe Biden’s ear and will be calling the shots in his administration. This is doubly ridiculous given the your hero, the most powerful man in the world, is asking his AG to arrest his political opposition.
Are you this dense or are you an exciteable teen age girl?
Are you this dense or are you an exciteable teen age girl?
That would be (takes a deep breath) Seth Warner, Svelaz, powder puff blue / angry red / Pasty Pink / Screaming Violet / Petulant Purple Anonymous / Peter Hill / John Burgoyne / Captain Janeway ….help me out here, Anon / Bythebook / CTHD, what were her other names?
😉
Re Olberman – never heard anything crazier from any Democrat of note…
***
Maybe Maxine Waters. She sounds genuinely crazy and genuinely stupid and is hard to beat in either category.
It’s really remarkable. I am no saint, a bad person in the eyes of God I am sure. Im not sure He cares however, I’ll take my chances with him but not Keith!
But here i am a citizen who pays a fair share of taxes, more than I like. Year on year for decades, never evaded a dollar, though I could have and by Golly I wanted to!
Nope I just keep on paying every paycheck and every quarter, estimated taxes, wheee! Congress owns me.
I have never been arrested and never convicted of anything beyond a speeding ticket and not even that in nearly 2 decades.
I never had a single beef on my license. I have done pro bono cases for all kinds, and I have done good work for pay for all kinds.
Well, I’ll leave off with my other modest professional contributions to society, to evade the whackos like Keith
I have been a lifelong Republican but I have voted for Democrats and given more than one campaign contributions. I sat out several elections because the Republicans disgusted me with all the war stuff and eagerness to violate civil liberties. Not good enough! I used to think like John Say all this liberterian stuff but now i see a reasonable role for government in all kinds of ways. Not enough. Wow! I am really a horrible person.
I’ve paid my dues to society by bringing forth new citizens into the world, paid to educate them and they’re clean and productive law abiding people too. For shame!
I say things that make some people call me racist but lst time I checked socalled racist speech was legal. And what do these people know anyhow. I can say, my Chinese friends don’t call me racist and I have quite a few of them. Hey, maybe that is tell, too! Excuse me I openly admit I like some groups of people more than others! Is that a crime per Keith? Im sure it is!
Of course it doesn’t matter what i did or not, right? because systemic racism, I wear the white skin, and systemic sexism, I got a pair so Im per se a bad guy!
But I cast vote for Trump once and done it again already. I typed a thousand messages of support for him here. So Keith wants to lock me up! I confess, Im a Trump supporter! I confess! With guys like Keith out there, Im redoubling my efforts to sign up more Trump voters, too! I guess we better hang together, or we hang separately!
Trust me, I don’t want a dime from Olberman nor do I crave his approval nor sanction of any kind. I just can’t believe, wow, Here’s a big Democrat booster, on tv, & wants to make war on the entire population of Trump voters!
well in this statement i have been wrong about one thing. Keith is not insane– come to think, prolly he is just EVIL.
Poor you! You mean there are powerless idiots advocating bad things, and even retribution against perceived opponents? Gee, you would never see that on this board and especially among Trump supporting right wingers.
Who here is advocating the use of force as retribution against political enemies ?
Who is ACTUALLY using FORCE against political enemies.
Who is rioting looting and burning ?
The 13 guys arrested yesterday in the plot against Gov. Whitmer were all advocating the use of force as retribution against political enemies.
Haven’t you been paying attention to the news?
Yes, sure, pay attention to “the news” if you want “the truth” and “the facts”….what a joke ——>>>
“Interviewer: “Sir don’t the voters deserve to know” your position on court packing?
Joe Biden: “No, they don’t deserve” to know.”
‘In what sane world would the media enable these evasions? Total media silence about Biden’s willingness to pack the Court, ban fracking, pursue the Green New Deal and the rest. And a mentally incompetent presidential candidate whose incompetence & agenda is shielded by the media.
Why aren’t Never Trumpers writing about the coverup of Biden’s incompetence & his Marxist agenda? Hating Trump is one thing but knowingly abetting a mentally incompetent man to become leader of the free world — with a wildly radical VP waiting in the wings — is mind-blowing.
Contrast: Media badgers DonaldTrump and Kayleigh Mcenany to re-answer questions they’ve answered umpteen times and pursue it to the point of belligerence….
versus Biden (Joe & Jill) flat out refusing to answer important questions & the media passively accept it. It’s stunning.
Fair people know the strong leftward bias of the MSM but they can arguably deny it — as absurd as that is. But they can’t plausibly deny their overt coverup of Biden’s mental incapacity & leftist agenda.
With this abominable scandal they’ve forever forfeited all moral credibility.’ @DavidLimbaugh
I have . I expect the story to be front page everywhere. Instead it was burried, why ?
These where anarchists, not right wingers. They sought to kill lots of police – again not right wingers.
They were barely distinguishable from Antifa.
There are also questions about how actually serious they were.
Antifa is burning things down.
If the FBI had recordings of what my dormmates and discussed while in college over drinks I would have spent the rest of my life in jail.
There is a world of difference between talking and acting.
We have the same problem with many of the purportedly thwarted Islamic fundimentalist attacks.
The FBI is very good at finding people who say stupid things to friends and not very good at finding the people who act.
One suspects they manufacture crimes to solve for public relations. I used to think they were great. Now I wonder if they were ever any good at all. I suspect not knowing how many things they have botched. It is a remarkable record of malfeasance and corruption.
They’re right-wing extremists linked to the Boogaloo Boys, and they did act. Didn’t you read the criminal complaint?
“They’re right-wing extremists linked to the Boogaloo Boys, and they did act. Didn’t you read the criminal complaint?”
BLM sympathizing anarchists who want to kill cops are right wingers ? Since when ?
You have a very odd definition of right wing.
Is Antifa Right Wing ?
What distingishes these people from Antifa ?
You say they acted ?
Whitmer is alive.
If a right wing group went after her she would not be.
Looks like a bunch of crazies and one based on news reports had a hate Trump web site. Do you know what an anarchist is? It doesn’t sound like you do.
“wants his political opponent in the coming election to be arrested and has directed his AG to do so”
Did YOUR pillow tell you that while you were under your bed wearing a mask?
If Biden is elected, your chosen political Party will have him Article 25’d ASAP anyway.
Kurtz,
Olbermann is nuts to suggests that any law abiding Trump supporters “must be prosecuted and convicted and removed from our society.” But no one should base their votes on a hyperbolic rant from Keith Olbermann.
The only people who should be prosecuted are those where there’s significant evidence of them committing crimes, and they should only be prosecuted because of that evidence, not because they support Trump. Just like people shouldn’t be prosecuted because they oppose Trump or because of any other political beliefs (as opposed to actions). They should be convicted if a jury is convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that they committed the crime they were charged with. If by “removed from our society,” he means “jailed,” people should only be jailed if the crime was sufficiently serious.
There’s evidence of Trump and some of his supporters having committed serious crimes. Some were already tried, convicted and jailed, like Manafort; others like Broidy have just been indicted. There is no evidence that I know of for most Trump supporters, including Coney Barrett.
Right. What is Amy Coney Barrett guilty of that crazy Keith wants to lock her up. Wow, really nuts that guy
Im not blaming Biden for nutjobs like that but I would like to hear Biden disavow this open call for civil war
it’s very disturbing
Gosh at least with the crazy ANTIFA they want to abolish jails, here crazy Keith wants to fill them with tens of millions! wow
Kurtz, Biden and Harris want to take both sides of the playing field and leave to population in the dark. It is well known that when Biden took a side it was generally the wrong one and poorly researched. Even his strongest supporters do not know what he will do, but to the powerful he looks controllable and that is what these powers want. For the most part those that will run the government should Biden win do not agree with what most Americans on the left and right want for themselves and their families.
I tell you what Allan, you right, lots of politicians are just tools.
Now these blm’ers and antifa, they been out there doing crime, but they’re not powerful without backers
Nor is biden without all his hundreds of millions in donations
I am gonna turn to Mao now and say who is the problem. “comprador bourgeoisie” — these are the natives who do big money trade with foreign capital.
https://books.google.com/books?id=ftv7ks-Ehq0C&pg=PA136#v=onepage&q&f=false
Forget the particulars, forget the marxist dialectic, but zero in on one thing. Comprador bourgeoisie in America are the “free traders.” Those are the big enemy of Trump and they are behind all this jive from a to z. Soros is the precise type, but there are others. Look to those who depend on international financial speculation and free trade deals that let them exploit the third world labor and you can see. The businesses too– why would Walmart give to BLM someone asked me? Free trade, they want the PRC imports, the cheap junk to sell to Americans; so they hate Trump and think they can use BLM to destabilize and get rid of him. It has NOTHING to do with “Racism” for the ones who hold the purse strings!
It’s ironic i had to delve into Mao to see the reality unfolding as it has. The key insight is that economics matters, and politics set the rules of the road for money. For the big money to get bigger, they HAVE to try and control politics. They can’t afford a “populist” like Trump– he must be destroyed!
Understand this voters. You vote for America as a sovereign nation for time to come, then vote Red
You want to vote for the globalist billionaires that want nation states to fade away, and have everything decided by distant bureaucratic tyrants– hey, vote Blue! vote for the “comprador bourgeoisie” extraordinaire, such like as Biden, whose totally unqualified son Hunter, when he was Vp, was raking in the millions from foreigners from Moscow to Kyiv to Beijing!
Yup, it’s disturbing that Olbermann said that.
It’s also disturbing that Trump has accused many people of treason, including Obama, Biden, Pelosi, Adam Schiff, attorney Mark Zaid, Lisa Page, Andrew McCabe, and Democrats who disagree with his border policy.
I don’t have a problem calling Olbermann out. Why do you have a problem calling Trump out?
I said why. Trump’s lockem up list is about ten people long.
Olbermans is TENS OF MILLIONS long.
Size matters!
You claim that “Trump’s lockem up list is about ten people long.” It’s a lot longer. For example, he accused the Democrats who disagree with his border policy of treason (probably meaning the Democrats in Congress, which is ~275 people, rather than Democrats in the country, which is tens of millions), and treason carries a prison sentence or death penalty.
The size of the list isn’t all that matters. Trump is President and he has power that Olbermann doesn’t have. Trump named a specific crime, treason, that has a potential death penalty. And Trump’s rants aren’t limited to just this issue. He rants about all sorts of things. Your unwillingness to call Trump out is too bad.
ah, it’s ever thus. reminds me of the conversation about a handful of supposed right wingers ( who in my book are anarchists of a different hue) maybe doing something a few places….
versus tens of thousands of forcible felonies caught on tape and going on for months. riot, arson, aggravated assault and battery on police, attacking federal courthouse, attacking city and county property, to say nothing of countless acts of vandalism against regular peoples’ homes and businesses.
this kind of on the one hand and on the other hand is sad, you are smarter than that, it does not convince people, it only makes them feel more disenfranchised and uncared for
the “Get Trump” mentality has distorted the kind of basic decency that I saw from my liberal teachers in high school, my liberal professors in college and law school. i never felt like these were hateful vindictive people out for my scalp. they helped me, they cared for me, they tolerated my annoying youthful bad habits and opinions. I am not sure I ever even had a conservative professor except one old priest I had for a couple theology classes and one or two philosophy professors and maybe my calculus prof. in law school basically none. if there were any Republicans they sure didn’t tell anybody. but I had a great education with caring liberal professors.
I have been mentored by Democrat lawyers, more than one, I have had beneficence and favor shown to me by Democrat judges, if anybody was a known Republican who enjoyed the favor of my Democrat elders, it was me! I had so many friends in organized labor I lost count.
now it’s different, it’s all different. I don’t understand what’s happened to so many Democrat activists. Even some of the people I have known for most of my life have become distant, hateful, angry, and can barely contain their loathing about Trump voters. I never said one word to some of these people about Trump, but word gets around somehow.
A few of my friends who have dared to be vocal about liking Trump– oh, they have been shunned! one would think now the country club mentality has entirely gripped Democrats: do you know how many times I have heard that people who like Trump are “low class?” Ha, ha, I have been scolded by people about this who must have thought that scared me! If I was brought up to think like that, ha, I would be working in a silkstocking firm but no I went a different path. Wow, really, its truly amazing how things have changed. I never heard Democrats talk that way 20 years ago.
There is a big “class” dimension to this. I tell you, I have only met a few genuinely rich people in my life, who were at the 50 M+ asset level. Prolly could count them all on both hands. I can think of about one of ten who I know to be a Republican, and she’s about 90 years old. The others, all Democrats! 90% of the richest people I have ever met were Democrats and made it clear one way or another. I think some people smarter than me have noticed the same thing too
https://www.firstthings.com/web-exclusives/2019/11/the-new-party-of-the-rich
I have never in my life seen the kind of anger, hate, vitriol and resentment as I see from Democrats now. I have heard shockingly nasty things from Democrats when I point out how white working class wages had gone down for decades before Trump, still only recovered a little, but suicides and ODs are still up. I think of all my friends who went out that way too. Nearly every one of them had poor economic prospects. But they were white men, see so they dont matter. More than once I have read or heard somebody say, “MUST BE THEM LOSING THEIR WHITE PRIVILEGE!” Really? Hateful, dehumanizing stuff. And aimed at the working poor, too, some of it. College brats a lot of them too.
I have been saying on this blog for years, that America needs a healthy bipartisan system … That takes two to tango.
Trump lobs phrases like Treason arround gratuitously – he learned that from the left who has been calling everyone who disagrees a Nazi, Racist, hateful, hating hater.
Has Trump actually locked anyone up for Treason ? Has he Tried ? You claim he has this long “lock-em up list” – did he do anything after the inauguration to lock up Clinton ?
You have spent the past 4 years trying to lock him up for a crime Hillary committed – and your worried about Trump’s lockem up list ?
Wasn’t it democrats who tried this Faux impeachment nonsense ?
“Trump is President and he has power that Olbermann doesn’t have.”
Correct – has Trump used that power against anyone ?
Your still investigating him for Faux crimes. Seems to me that the only people engaged in the misuse of political power – both before Trump and during have been on the left.
“And Trump’s rants aren’t limited to just this issue. He rants about all sorts of things. Your unwillingness to call Trump out is too bad.”
Yup Trump rants alot – and you rant back at him. One Trump and 64 million angry democrats – seems like a fair fight to me.
Regardless, you think you are about to get political power – Trump has it. Trump has not abused it.
You did before and we all know you will again.
Before we were aware of the collusion delusion – Obama was spying on journalists and senators – even democrats.
Has Trump done that ?
Obama’s IRS was weilding its power against its political enemies – did Trump do that ?
I am not worried about Trump’s rants. You I am very worried about.
The blood shed by left wingnuts run amuck just in the 20th century dwarfs all other killing in history.
When some of your ilk talk about lining people up – the rest of us have excellent reason to take it seriously.
Trump is all sound and fury signifying nothing.
This is why I draw a distinction here between Democratic party voters, the good fellow citizens of this nation, and the corrupt elite national leadership like Pelosi.
I don’t lump in my friends relative and neighbors in with all her mischief! They have no control over her, in general
But Olberman is for COLLECTIVE PUNISHMENT. A nobody like me gets his ire, he wants to lock me up for my opinion and my votes! You call Trump a fascist? What’s that>?
Based on the recent revelations of an attempted soft coup by the prior administration the word treason is acceptable though it might not follow the legal definition.
So far we have heard how you wish to destroy General Flynn’s life when his charges were fabricated. One can look at the transcripts and papers being released but you are so fixated on the destruction of another human being who so happens to be a good loyal American that you have lost all sense of reason and morality.
Kurtz, are you similarly concerned that your hero – our president – has yet to denounce the guys who actually and actively plotted the kidnapping and potential murder of one of our governors? And you want Biden to not only be aware of, but denounce a guy who used to be Keith Olberman and now is ….. WTF is he now? Where do you find this nonsense?
Trump has denounced this groups. They are anarchists. They not merely targeted whitmer but all law enforcement. They are more closely afillitated to Antfia than anything on the right. The reason you are not seeing this hyped on the news is that they are not right wingers they are anarchists – like Antifa.
The Boogaloo Boys are right-wing anarchists. They are not affiliated with Antifa.
Whitmer looks like somone who drinks blood, doesn’t she?
Remember Podesta and Spirit Cooking weirdness? Yeah. It’s all connected. Left wing connected.
“One of alleged plotters, 23-year-old Daniel Harris, attended a Black Lives Matter protest in June, telling the Oakland County Times he was upset about the killing of George Floyd and police violence.”
Affiliated – no.
sharing values and methods – yes.
It is neither clear that this was something real or that those involved were more than nominally associated with Bugalloo – which is NOT anarchist.
Regardless, why do you presume they are on the right ?
These are people who sought anarchy,. wanted to overthrow government, sought to kill law enforcement.
What part of that makes them on the right ?
What part of that distinguished them from Antifa ?
Read up on their social media.
“Several of the Wolverine Watchmen maintained social media accounts where they posted far-right conspiracy theories. The Daily Beast reported that Eric Molitor also praised Kyle Rittenhouse on his Facebook page, posted about QAnon-adjacent conspiracy theories, and shared images in support of the III Percenters, a right-wing militia group. Musico had a profile on Gab, a “free speech” alternative social media site that has been home to white supremacists and anti-Semites. On it, Musico posted about the unfounded far-right conspiracy that in “South Africa they are killing White people.” … Brandon Caserta, one of the six described in an FBI affidavit, posted several memes endorsing the deadly shootings by Rittenhouse. One shows Rittenhouse laughing underneath the text: “when you’ve smoked 3 commies before you can legally smoke cigarettes.” … Caserta praised Jordan Peterson, a reactionary Canadian psychology professor who in recent years has become an icon among young political right-wingers. … He subscribed to Project Veritas, an outlet known for pushing right-wing disinformation, and the channel run by Ben Shapiro”
” He subscribed to Project Veritas, an outlet known for pushing right-wing disinformation”
Anonymous, This tells us that nothing said above can be considered True. Project Veritas isn’t pushing disinformation. In fact some that have said something like that were sued and lost and had to pay big money.
Is it right wing when someone reveals the teachers union protecting teachers that committed a batter or rape on a student? Is that what you consider right wing? That the teachers union was willing to engage in illegal practices such as knowingly backdating reports to make a teacher look innocent. What type of person are you to agree with such things?
What Drek.
Do you know what a FACT is ?
BTW From the evidence – and there is a massive amount of it. Kyle Rittenhouse acted legitimately in self defense.
Nor is Rittenhouse a member of some ‘right wing militia” – not that it would matter.
I do not give a $hi!t is Rittenhouse was a KKK member (which he is not), you do not lose your rights because you belong to disturbing groups.
If you have actual evidence to the contrary – provide it.
Oh My “QAnon adjacent” – would that be those who grasp that the collusion delussion was a fraud ?
I have profiles on social media platforms like Gab and Parlor. I expect that eventually Facebook and Twitter will become too censorious to tolerate. I wish there would be a ssignificant departure of people from Twitter and FB to Free Speech platforms.
BTW Gab fully accepts democrats, left wing nuts. antifa. You are perfectly free to post on Gab. And but for a few very simple evenly applied rules you can say whatever you please without being censored. What Facebook and Twitter should have been.
As to the “unfounded” claims about violence in South Africa
https://www.news.com.au/world/africa/farmer-killings-farmers-tortured-and-killed-in-horrific-south-africa-raids/news-story/1aae3fe47328ada3b6a3d369675877df
And you are actually attacking Jordan Peterson and Project Veritas ?
Really, Peterson is the MOST CITED clinical psychologist in the world. He has published thousands of papers and is cited by many thousands more.
Project Veritas does undercover videoes to expose government and political corruption.
PV has been sued for defamation – many times. They have won EVERY SINGLE LAWSUIT – they are very careful. They have been awared legal fees in all lawsuits and damages in many. They have asked for and received numerous retractions. When they do not get the retraction they sue, and they win, and they win legal fees. The courts are constantly finding that PV is accurate.
PV is the perfect demonstration that you confuse oppinions with FACTS. PV deals in FACTS – ones you do not like.
How is this evidence of anything ?
You provide a belicose claim of guilt by association with people and groups many of who deserve your respect.
I am very happy that places like Parlor and Gab exist to provide actual free speech – you too might find that important in the future.
Kyle Rittenhouse appears to be wrongfully accused and several lawyers have noted he has an excellent defamation lawsuit against the Biden Campaign for his remarks in the debate and one of his campaign adds and a weaker lawsuit against Chriss Wallace.
But I guess in left wing nut world it is OK to defame people.
Jordan Peterson is one of the most respected clinical psychologists in the world – not my oppinion, He is one of the most published and cited clinical psychologists. There are many on the left who have been helped by him.
I would strongly suggest that you might read one of his books – you need help.
I praise Kyle Rittenhouse. At 17 he stepped up for law and order, was engaged by felons with lethal force, and capably used the same to defend himself lawfully
He has seen the white elephant and lived to tell
He will be exonerated
https://fightback.law/
John Say, please quote or link Trump’s denounciation of this group, which by the way was part of the armed protest in the Michigan capitol which Trump encouraged..
Come on Book, prove his numerous statements denouncing anarchists would not include this group?
You do not understand the left.
It is a requirement that you must denounce each individal group – specifically, every day. But ONLY those that offend left politics.
John, your hypocrisy is on display again. You tell others “I am not obligated to prove your allegation false. You are obligated to prove it true,” but when Joe asks you to prove your claim “Trump has denounced this group,” you don’t admit that you can’t, and when Olly tells Joe to prove your claim false, you don’t tell Olly that Joe isn’t obligated to prove it false.
“John, your hypocrisy is on display again.”
You aparently do not know what hypocracy is.
You tell others “I am not obligated to prove your allegation false. You are obligated to prove it true,”
“but when Joe asks you to prove your claim “Trump has denounced this group,””
This is a misrepresentation. Joe Claimed Trump had not denounced. The burden was on him.
Further unless you live under a rock you know that Trump has repeatedly denounced white supremacy, violence, crime and terrorism.
Additionally – I did provde Trump’s tweet.
“you don’t admit that you can’t”
Bizzare claim, What was I wrong about ? Trump has denounced all the things you left wingnuts have demanded – not that you are entitled, dozens and dozens of times – including this particular incident.
Here is Trump in 2016 and 2020 with Chris Wallace asking the same question Joe asked.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w7bUR0Sc8Os
“and when Olly tells Joe to prove your claim false”
What claim of mine is false ?
This is about Joes False claim.
I would further note that Joes claim is not merely factually false it is also a moral accusation and therefore required prove.
If Joe claims a moral failure and fails to prove it – as he did – that is self proving.
Joe made a claim of moral failure and did not even try to prove it.
“you don’t tell Olly that Joe isn’t obligated to prove it false.”
What does this even mean ?
You neither know what hypocracy is – but you do not know what logic is.
None of us are REQUIRED to call out every moral failure that occurs.
Trump is not REQUIRED to denounce every hate group by name.
He has tried to make that point both in the 2016 debate and in 2020.
In 2016 he asked wallace to identify the groups he expected Trump to condemn – when Wallace did Trump condemned those and then added all hate groups.
In 2020 Wallace asked Trump to condemn them and ask them to stand down. Trump asked Wallace who he should condemn.
Wallace listed a couple and Trump responded sure to each and than as Wallace asked a two part question Trump ALSO asked them to stand down. Watch the video.
Frankly this “you have not condemned” stuff regarding Trump is nonsense. Trump has condemned more groups than any president ever.
Pres. Sec. McEnany listed 47 times Trump has made general and specific denunciations of white supremecy and hate groups.
So how many times is enough for you ?
Biden has YET to condem Antifa.
Regardless, Joe made a moral accusation – the burden was on him to provide proof, he did not. Further, the failure was obvious to anyone not under a rock – and I have subsequently provided LOTS of PROOF.
Do you need a dozen links to Trump condemning various groups ?
You do not understand the left.
😉 Really? Wow! I’m not the one writing essays in an attempt to reason with the unreasonable, to argue against their repetitive and unsubstantiated allegations. How’s that working for you?
Do you disagree that the left requires daily condemnations of each individual groups – but only those politically unacceptable to the left ?
Whatever you believe they require today is not necessarily what they will require tomorrow. They’re 21st century Bolsheviks. That’s what we’re dealing with.
agreed
John, now you say “Joe Claimed Trump had not denounced. The burden was on him”.
But you’re not quoting Joe.
A reminder that you said “Do not tell me what I have said – quote it or do not bother”. Why do you make demands of others that you’re not willing to abide by yourself? QUOTE Joe or do not bother.
If you’d bothered to quote Joe, you’d know that he said “John Say, please quote or link Trump’s denounciation of this group.” The burden was on YOU, because YOU are the one who said “Trump has denounced this group”. THIS group, the Wolverine Watchmen, is comprised of 13 people: Adam Fox, Ty Garbin, Barry Croft, Kaleb Franks, Daniel Harris, Brandon Caserta, Pete Musico, Joseph Morrison, Shawn Fix, Eric Molitor, Michael Null, William Null, and Paul Bellar. You try to move the goalposts, arguing that Trump had denounced other groups, but Joe Friday didn’t ask you about other groups. He said “John Say, please quote or link Trump’s denounciation of this group.” Can quote or link Trump’s denunciation of the 13 Wolverine Watchmen?
Now you move into purely imaginary territory when you say “I would further note that Joes claim is not merely factually false it is also a moral accusation and therefore required prove.” You’re not talking about Joe’s claim, which was “John Say, please quote or link Trump’s denounciation of this group”. You’re pretending “Joe Claimed Trump had not denounced.” Will you apologize to Joe for so badly misrepresenting what he said and pretending that his request was “factually false it is also a moral accusation and therefore required prove”?
No I am not quoting Joe.
That standard is unique and applies to those with low credibility and a representation for misrepresentation.
“John Say, please quote or link Trump’s denounciation of this group.” The burden was on YOU, because YOU are the one who said “Trump has denounced this group”. ”
Anonymous, as usual you are wrong. Joe made a remark with the intention hurting Trump’s character. It is up to him to prove it. It is not up to John to prove Joe wrong. Trump was very clear denouncing violence in general and specifically many many times. That means Joe hasn’t lived up to the obligation of checking his facts before impugning another’s integrity. That makes Joe a liar. Extra attention should be taken when dealing with potentially libelous facts. Based on that alone Joe deserves nothing from anyone else. His credibility disappears from that one comment and he ends up owning liar status.
I think when Trump demands that you thank him for having a group arrested – that constitutes denunciation.
Regardless, Neither Trump nor anyone else is required to denounce each individual malfeasant group in the world.
You provided the Friday quote. Sounds like a claim that Trump has not done so.
Sounds like a claim of moral failure that was not proven, by someone with a history of making false moral accusations.
John, given the multiple times now that you’ve misrepresented what people said, you identified YOURSELF as someone “with low credibility and a representation for misrepresentation”. It was bad enough to have to wade through your word-puke as you bloviated away. You can’t be trusted. Word-puke in someone else’s direction, or better yet, find treat your word-puke malady by finding an English teacher who can help you write more concisely.
Anonymous, what you fail to understand is that a very large percentage of what John writes is fact. You are unable to handle facts so you call it word-puke which tells us the level of education you have obtained.
In Allan’s world a “very large percentage” is 1%. Probably because he can only count to 1.
If you defame someone – you are morally obligated to prove it – with FACTS
You have not only failed to do so, you have not even tried.
The only possible conclusion is that you lie about others.
To be clear – it is not my words condeming you but your own.
If I have misstated a fact – you could prove it. You lost your claim that expects had not predicted millions of Deaths in the US.
You complain about bloviation, word salad and tripe while floating ludicrous arguments about “likely”
Absent drastic action is UNLIKELY.
Regardless, it is self evident from FACTS that there is no positive difference between little action and drastic action.
The experts were wrong. Nor is this all they were wrong about. Nor were their errors rare or small.
This from someone with insufficient credibility to even use a pseudonym ?
“It is bad enough …”
You are under no obligation – no one has imposed a burden on you, you are not being forced to.
All I ask is what you are morally OBLIGATED to do anyway – to refrain from imposing your will on others by FORCE without justification.
You do not like my arguments – refute them or ignore them.
Defaming them just makes you look bad.
Why am I obligated to provide what you demand.
Go to youtube. You can find myriads of clips of Trump denouncing violence, white supremecy, ….
As to some specific group:
A few people have been arrested and charged. They are presumed innocent.
They are also individuals NOT some group.
There are charges regarding the individuals.
There is inuendo that they are a group or part of some group.
Should we denounce the democratic party – because all the actual violence today is on the left ?
I have yet to hear Biden condemn Antifa which openly endorses Violence.
So far I do not know that all we have is some rednicks in the woods drinking beer smoking pot calling whitmer names and blowing things up on private property.
While this are not likely good people. Thus far I have no evidence they have ACTED with violence – or that they are actually on the right – they PURPORTEDLY are anarchists – that is pretty much left wing.
John, when you want someone else to give you facts, you say things like “Allegations are cheap. What are the facts ?” But when someone asks you to provide facts for your claim that “Trump has denounced this group,” you respond with “Why am I obligated to provide what you demand”. No wonder people call you a hypocrite.
You seem to be under the delusion that facts only exist when you speak them.
You are not obligated to provide me facts merely because I ask for them.
But facts are the means to make valid arguments.
Separately YOU demand proof that something that has happened actually happened.
Am I obligated to prove the sun rose today ?
You are an adult purportedly capable of using google or youtube.
You are claiming that something most of us know has been done – and you have likely heard with your own ears many times requires others to prove it to you.
You are also making a claim that Trump has not done something he is not obligated to do – denounce some specific group in a manner acceptable to you.
Trump has denounced terroists, white supremecits, anarchists and violence repeatedly.
If you do not know that – you are living under a rock and that is your problem.
You keep making this ludicrously stupid equity argument.
You seem to think that everyone is equally credible, that all claims have the same burden of proof and that all claimants are equal.
They are not
When you allege a crime or moral failure – YOU are required to prove your case – with facts.
When you demand to be able to use force against others – YOU are required to prove that use of force is justified – with FACTS.
When you have a track record of misrepresentation and error – YOU are required to prove your assertions.
When you have a record of credibility and integrity – you are not required to prove every assertion. Of course if you make false assertions you lose that privilege.
Credit, credibility, integrity are not rights they are things you must earn and things you can lose by misconduct.
Even left wing nut fact check groups choke on the claim that Trump has not denounced hate groups.
https://www.factcheck.org/2020/02/trump-has-condemned-white-supremacists/
From Twitter:
“My Justice Department and Federal Law Enforcement announced… today that they foiled a dangerous plot against the Governor of Michigan. Rather than say thank you, she calls me a White Supremacist—while Biden and Democrats refuse to condemn Antifa, Anarchists, Looters and Mobs that burn down Democrat run cities… I do not tolerate ANY extreme violence. Defending ALL Americans, even those who oppose and attack me, is what I will always do as your President! Governor Whitmer—open up your state, open up your schools, and open up your churches!”
I have zero problems with protests – armed or otherwise.
None of the armed protests in Michigan have been violent.
While those by the left have constantly turned violent.
If there was an actual consequential plot here to kill Whitmer – I condemn that.
But thus far all we have is allegations. Further no one ACTED.
There was no ACTUAL violence. There was no ATTEMPTED Violence.
Absent evidence I have not yet heard this is less consequential than ACTUALLY burning a single store or car.
he did denounce them already. but in fact they have a right to the presumption of innocence and a fair trial
the charges are allegations, as always. the government must prove them.
they must also prove it was more than mere talk. we will see about that. they will have their day in court.
they seem like anarchistic types to me, just of another variety. I am no fan of anarchists
at the same time, Whitmer overstepped her bounds and took away work, socializing, church, funerals, etc., and the Michgian Supreme Court has proclaimed that her edicts were overly broad. She should also be held to account for her crimes. Because what do you call it when a tyrant takes away nearly everything in people’s lives for a time based on a disease that however contagious to many, is only deadly to a small number? Life is not safe and it’s hard enough already. Over reacting with diktats that ruin lives is not help.
https://www.npr.org/sections/coronavirus-live-updates/2020/10/03/919891538/michigan-supreme-court-rules-against-governors-emergency-powers
Many many people are unhappy with Whitmer, and for good reason.
I would further note that mudering Whitmer or anyone is out of bounds.
And we are not yet to the point where it is legitimate to take up arms against government.
But we grow slowly closer to that point.
Whitmer is quilty of egregious abuse of power. Nor is she alone.
No emergency should ever give the executive power beyond what is needed in the short term – before the lefislature can act to deal with problems that are immediate.
In state after state, badly crafted temporary measures turned permanent and legislatures when they were available to act were circumvented.
The emergency powers of a governor last only until the legislature can act, and only with respect to issues that must be addressed before that.
Kurtz, your opinion of Whitmer is irrelevant to the problem of armed rebellion and planned terrorism, except as it indicates your sympathy for a group you at the same time pretend is leftist.
The issue is NOT one of armed rebellion.
The critical issue here is that the allegedly plotted to kidnap and kill whitmer.
I do not beleive this country is coming to consequential civil war or armed rebellion.
But it is actually the right of people to prepare for that possibility.
“That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, ”
Declaration of independence.
Whether those on the left like it or not – when government fails at its purpose – securing liberty, it is our right to rebel and overthrow it.
We are not there yet. But it is always the right of people to prepare for something that it is their right to do.
“But it is always the right of people to prepare for something that it is their right to do.”
***
Even in California anti-gun leftists are lining up to buy their first gun. Apparently releasing hundreds of criminals and chaining the police is engaging primal instincts. They are afraid.
Sure, Book, ok. Whitmer’s a tyrant as proved by her overbroad orders being overturned by high court, but it’s not relevant, that’s what you are saying?
Nor was it relevant the tyranny that Jefferson wrote about King George in the Declaration of Independence?
I don’t have sympathy for the bozos who got pinched. but they have the presumption of innocence and a right to a fair trial
those guys are incompetent nobodies. We gonna find out if they did anything besides swill beer and talk big and drive around while they swill beer and talked big.
but WHITMER is dangerous.
I do have empathy for people in Michigan harmed by Gretchen’s illegal orders of confinement
https://www.detroitnews.com/story/news/local/michigan/2020/10/12/michigan-high-court-whitmer-orders-have-no-continuing-legal-effect/5970809002/
If we are talking about illegal acts, then we have to talk about HERS too
We have no kings.
No one in the US has the right or power to dictate unilaterally to others how they must live.
All government “emergency powers” most be of short duration, as narrow as possible, and constrained to the emergency.
Further they are only legitimate so long as the normal process of legislating is not possible.
In the case of Whitmer that is weeks at most.
BTW this is similarly true of every govenors response to Covid.
Until it was possible for legislatures to act it was within the power of govenors to take the narrowest and most immediate responses.
Once it was possible to pass laws the emergency authority of the govenor is gone.
It is irrelevant whether you like or dislike that govenor, It is irrelevant whether their choices are good or bad.
There is no long term override for representative government. Nor is there wide powers even in the short run.
Absent the state legislature acting every single governors actions that were not limited to a few weeks, and limited to immediate necescities are all illegitimate.
As an example most every states mail in balloting is illegal and unconstitutional.
Changes to elections must be made by the normal legislative process.
Kurtz, I knew Keith back when he worked for CNN Sports.
He’s just a very insecure guy (especially when it comes to women) who should stick to reporting on sports. Never once do I remember him ever saying anything about politics. I truly think he decided to become political as a way of venting his anger that is a result of his insecurities which he exacerbated by running his mouth to the wrong people on occasion.
Anyway, I don’t know why you’re paying any attention to him unless you’re interested in his take on who’s going to win the World Series. Trust me, he’s all talk and no walk.
I only follow fighting sports so based on what you say I should not be concerned about this dweeb Olbermann at all. except that he must have a following or else he would not have a show
Hillary, Obama & Brennan Created The Russia Scandal…Totally Phony
https://jonathanturley.org/2020/10/07/a-means-of-distracting-the-public-brennan-briefed-obama-on-clinton-plan-to-lie-trump-to-russia/
Alpha, another anonymous creature says: “Anonymous already pointed out on October 8, 2020 at 10:39 AM ”
I actually responded but anonymous trolls have difficulty with fact and comprehension. Here is the prior response.
—
You don’t listen to what others say. Your sole purpose on this blog is to disagree and be disagreeable.
Aside from the gross mismanagement by Cuomo and a few other democrat leaders there are other factors that determine the death rate and that has much less to do with the color of the state than it does with factors governments cannot control. I never would have dreamed of attributing the higher death rates to politics. I might have mentioned the errors or what I thought could be corrected but attributing politics to the spread of a virus doesn’t make sense unless people like you and people like Cuomo include politics in their decision making.
“You only look at good things Trump did. You ignore the bad things he did ”
If you were listening with an open mind instead of one that was shut tight you would have seen that I was not in total agreement with Trump but I understood the political circumstances that littered the entire discussion We have to remember that when the Covid problem started to develop the democrats were trying to impeach Trump while saying and doing the opposite of anything Trump was attempting to do.
At the same time instead of noticing things occurring in China that should have been a warning to us the IC was more busy leaking lies about Trump to Congress. Most Democrats couldn’t show open agreement with Trump. Since Trump was being attacked by all sides he didn’t have the ability to look at this type of potential situation from day 1.
I blame the democrats in control and those working with them to invalidate the 2016 election for inhibiting our ability to respond to Covid in the best fashion possible. In that fashion I place the greatest blame on the democrats, not necessarily people that vote democrat.
—
Alpha anonymous, if you wish to comment why don’t you respond to this. I don’t remember an intelligent response when first posted. All this proves is the pure ignorance of the anonymous line. Imagine how many other trolls anonymous has to create to defend himself. A poster who cannot maintain an identifiable alias can never have any credibility what so ever.
Minnesota: Ballot harvesting and other ballot irregularities including payment for votes was previously disclosed in a video by Project Veritas catching the crimes while they happened. Now Fox 9 is lying about the law and what was in the video. This tape shows how the leftist media lies. Additionally the NYT will be sued again.
Let them all testify about it under oath, where it’s illegal to lie.
The hits just keep on coming:
Nearly 50,000 voters in Franklin County — Ohio’s most populous county — received incorrect absentee ballots in the mail, elections officials said Friday, revealing a major glitch that appeared to affect one in five ballots the county had sent so far.
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/ohios-franklin-county-sees-nearly-50k-voters-getting-wrong-absentee-ballots-elections-officials-say
An absolute must read plus a video
https://justthenews.com/accountability/russia-and-ukraine-scandals/40-key-russia-documents-president-trump-must-still?utm_source=daily-newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=newsletter#article
The 40 key Russia documents President Trump must still declassify
Many unreleased pieces of evidence have been sought by Congress dating back to 2017.
—–
They list the documents needed and the video talks about the release of one document totally redacted. This may become a constitutional crisis. It appears the IC might not be following the President’s directives.
Or if the IC is trying to tipp the election.
They have never tried to do that before.
What is happening isn’t all that different than we happens when dictators, communists and fascists take over. Much of the population is too stupid to recognize the dangers until after they have become slaves.
Also the fake committee Nancy wants to empanel, is designed to be another endless talking exercise about Orang Man Bad
What we really need to talk about is how the Democrats if they get a win in the election, will proceed to:
1. PUT BERNIE IN CHARGE OF NATIONAL HEALTH CARE. get ready for socialism like you never seen before here.
2. TAKE YOUR STUFF WITH HEAVY TAXES
3. TAKE YOUR STUFF BECAUSE SLAVERY. SKIM HALF OFF THE TOP AND HAND OUT THE REST TO BLACK FOLKS FOR A DEBT PAID LONG AGO A CENTURY BEFORE WE WERE BORN
4. CALL YOU A RACIST AND A SEXIST FOR THE NEXT 4 YEARS NONSTOP
5. FLOOD THIS COUNTRY WITH A NEW BUMPER CROP OF SCAB LABOR IN THE FORM OF 10 MILLION NEW ILLEGAL AND QUASI LEGAL MIGRANTS
6. LET THE ANTIFA AND BLM TERRORIZE CITIES AT WILL WITH RIOT AND ARSON
DONT WANT THAT? GET OUT AND VOTE LIKE YOUR LIFE DEPENDS ON IT
cuz it does
The Democrat leadership now wants to convene a fake 25th amendment committee to sit around and insult Trump and pry into his medical records. Great! if Joe wins we can pry into his, and then, maybe get him removed so KAMALA HARRIS can take the reigns as President
see how they prepare us for their obvious plan?
Democrats, you are VOTING FOR KAMALA HARRIS IF YOU VOTE FOR JOE. BECAUSE SHE WILL SOON TAKE OVER IF HE GETS THE NOD.
Biden is better than Trump.
Harris is better than Trump.
Biden has already released more medical records than Trump has. Trump still hasn’t explained why he went to Walter Reed last fall, and he tried to force doctors to sign NDAs, when his records are already covered by HIPAA.
You’re voting for Pence if you vote for Trump.
Gallup: “Most Say They Are Better Off Now Than Four Years Ago”
https://news.gallup.com/opinion/gallup/321650/gallup-election-2020-coverage.aspx
“Poll Which Correctly Called 2016 Election Sees Another “Shocking” Outcome In November”
https://www.zerohedge.com/political/poll-which-correctly-called-2016-election-sees-another-shocking-outcome-november
“Only asks likely voters, and asks about so-called ‘shy votes’.
Trump leads Biden 46%-45%, nationally.
Trump leads in swing states (FL, IA, MI, MN, PA, WI) 47% to 43%.
Trump’s swing state leads would give him 320 electoral votes, and Biden 218.
77% of Trump voters would not admit to friends and family.
Amy Coney Barrett nomination has little impact on approximately 8 in 10 voters.
Law and order is top issue (32%). Economy is second (30%).
Voters trust Trump more on economy than Biden: 60% to 40%, respectively”
—
That’s no problem, Pence is a responsible public servant and would make a great president. he did a good job as governor in his state, before Trump
I tell you what. When Trump’s gone, all the RINOs will fall in line behind Pence. You get rid of Orange Man Bad, it would reunite the Republican party, at least for a while. go for it.
Long term, I don’t like the silkstocking Repubs who failed us for so long, that’s why I like Trump, but if you take him out, well, you just lost your bete noire
I do not think that Pence is likely to be the vangaurd of the Further GOP.
But Trumpism is here to stay. Trump has flipped the blue collar vote and made inroads into minorities.
I do not know if he will win in November. But absent an epidemic that allowed democrats to burn down the economy, and foist a corrupt voting system on us and a press that has lied repeatedly from day one Trump would obliterate Biden.
And Republicans know that. Trump has put together a model for the GOP that will win future elections.
And the press can only help democrats for so long – they have burned their credibiluty
Darren, if you are there can you help me out? I posted several substantive posts to Anonymous to shift the subject to a more productive discussion but it appears they did not post. I tried to repost one of them again and it didn’t make it.
Can you help? Thanking in advance.
Allan
Darren, if you are there can you help me out? I posted several substantive posts to Anonymous to shift the subject to a more productive discussion but it appears they did not post. I tried to repost one of them again and it didn’t make it.
Can you help? Thanking in advance.
Allan
test
This is exactly why we need full declassification of all documents- and for these documents to go viral.
There must be a full reckoning!
this a FABRICATION> A LIE/ don’t believe everything conspiracy that comes down the pie. Wise Up
Talk about distracting the public. The media keep telling us how we need $1200.00 stimulus checks, how bad off we are under this president, how things are going into the crapper. We are going into the recission without a stimulus package of 3 trillion more dollars and Trump is screwing everyone because he will not give ill managed states more money to waste. And now this in September 2020!!. Covid Sept 2020!! Thats 2020 folks and we have this survey. How does that happen?? The media says its not so!1. And we have to beleive them because they never lie. Guess they caught some Martians passing through as ask them the better off question. And its Gallup, not Fox!!
https://content.gallup.com/origin/gallupinc/GallupSpaces/Production/Cms/TGBCMS/hobqwcnhcuohd8gvv29fjq.png
Sorry for the typos, never could type, especially with keyboards designed for small hands.
Ron P, the damage to our economy, and the resultant economic loss we will incur digging back out, will be significantly greater than the regrettable but necessary costs we incur now with stimulus spending. Remember that the tax cut was a short term stimulus bill that will cost us all $2 trillion in debt and that was passed in a period of economic growth when we didn’t need it. Did it juice the economy? Yes, though employment and GDP numbers over Trump’s 1st 3 years were less than or roughly equal to Obama’s last 3, and had already faded before the pandemic hit.
Those in business – I am – know you have to spend money to make money and this legislation is a wise use of that principle.
Joe, I am not the extreme right wing nut that does not support aid. But I do ask questions when it needs to be ask.
Such as why did I need $1200 and why did my wife need $1200 this spring?
Why do we need another $2400?
Nothing changed for us except more isolated living.
My three kids and family did not need stimulus. Why send them $2400 plus child addition?
(We dont mind getting tax money returned, but the children will pay as adults for our incompetent congress)
If one where employed in March, were still in the same job in August and are still in the same job today, why does that person need another $1200?
If the feds give Illinois a few billion, how does the feds gaurantee that money is not used to cover anything but increased unemployment cost and other C-19 expenses and is not used to cover previous debts?
I agree that targeted aid is needed. State unemployment, airline support, travel and leisure, restaurant aid and other targeted needs. But using the typical shotgun distribution hoping something hits its target is just wasteful spending.
The reason that the stimulus checks were sent out to everyone is that a lot of people DID need them, and it’s too time-consuming for the government to have to do individual means checking, so they wouldn’t have been able to get the money to the people who did need it. If you don’t need the money, donate it to people who need it.
Allan said: “Anonymous the Stupid thinks that by posting an error I made twice that would count as doubling the error.”
This is what is known as Allan-spin. He loves to twist the truth. What a schmuck.
When there was a dust-up in Oregon between Antifa and some Proud Boys supporters, Allan railed about Antifa chasing an 8 yr-old girl. He couldn’t repeat it enough.
Finally, it was revealed that this 8 yr-old girl was the ADULT daughter of a known provocateur. Apparently, she attends to him during his “outings” to help keep him in line because he “gets a little crazy.” This was Allan’s 8 yr-old girl — the child being chased and harassed by Antifa.
Allan could have done the research and located the truth, himself, but it was easier to run around like a chicken with its head cut off…crying that an 8 yr-old child had been terrorized by Antifa and accusing other commenters of supporting violence…
Anonymous, after trying to get double credit for one example of a nothing you recognized that as low as your credibility was it fell even further so you quickly had to search the net to find another error that I might have made. What did you find? The same type of error made in the first example.
What I said was being said at the time by news reporters. The situation was fluid and what looked like a young girl was actually the daughter of the man running with her away from the Antifa crowd. It turns out that she looked like a child but was an adult. All the news stories then changed and instead of reporting the girl around 8 years old the news reported her to be an adult.
This fool anonymous thinks the important thing that occurred was that the girl was mistaken for an 8 year old. The important thing was that she and her father were being chased by a large crowd involved in Antifa violence. I seem to remember that at this event or another in close time proximity a similar thing happened to Any Ngo. He was beaten and ended up with a bleed in his brain that he could have died from so watching the man and what looked like a young girl running away certainly seemed very serous. Anonymous is superficial in his thinking. To him the important event was making a mistake as to the age of the young woman without any concern over their safety.
Isn’t Anonymous pathetic?
Allan is pathetic.
Anonymous, you posted about an incident where the news media didn’t have all the facts and the story changed from one paper to the next. It turned out that my information had some minor problems. Yours did as well but who cares, that is is par for the course. My error wasn’t big so you posted it again figuring if you post it twice you could count it as two different errors.
All you did was make yourself look like a fool.
This Is Jonathan Turley’s Blog But..
One Troll Posted Half The Comments On This Thread
Our nerdy loser of a troll wants every discussion to revolve around ‘his’ talking points’. Therefore he comments using an endless parade of stupid names.
On this thread alone our troll posts under: Svelaz, Seth Warner, Calvin & Hobbs, Thnkthrough, Rhodes, Ellen Evans, Joe Friday, and Princess Trohar.
Absurdly said troll demands respect when others note that he’s the troll. “Why can’t you respond to my point??”, he demands. In this regard our troll is like the shoplifter who insists on being referred to as a ‘customer’.
This Is Jonathan Turley’s Blog But..
I’ll be darned if one Troll out Trolls me. This blog aint big enough for 2 Troll Queens and this Troll is far hotter, slinkier and stankier than the Anonymous Troll below who clearly is having a hissy fit for having to share the lime light
Queens are gonna queen.
I can assure you I am not and never have posted any replies to this blog under a different name nor did I ever “demand respect” as you put it. My questions are entirely legitimate and in reality echo Jonathan Turley’s similar questions on this matter.
You sir or ma’am are the troll. You cast baseless aspersions against anyone you disagree with. What shred of intelligent discourse have you shared with those following this thread? I have seen nothing other than accusations that we are somehow one in the same person posting under various pseudonyms.
Calvin, you’ve said that before under different names.
Calvin, anon is using a classic troll technique that accuses multiple posters of being the same person as a feeble attempt to try to deflect from their posts.
The best thing to do is ignore the troll and the trolling.
For someone as “pretty” on the outside as Kamala Harris may be to some, she sure is UGLY on the inside, and it shows. She spews her LIES, her HATE, her VENOM like a mutha. All of this? Makes her one of the most UNATTRACTIVE people/politicians EVER. She is unlikable. Period. Without the media propping her up she would fall on her face as she did in the Dem primaries. Someone as phony and dishonest as Kamala deserves to fall on her phony face. What a disgrace the Dem ticket is. l
In 2017, the RNC announced four national finance committee chairs: Steve Wynn, Elliott Broidy, Michael Cohen & Louis DeJoy.
Wynn was accused of decades of sexual misconduct, including “sexual harassment, coercion, indecent exposure and an alleged sexual assault case that he paid $7.5 million to settle” (NPR).
Michael Cohen pleaded guilty to tax evasion and campaign finance violations (involving Trump) and served time.
Louis DeJoy, who has harmed the USPS, and is facing criminal complaints related to a straw donor scheme he seems to be involved with.
And today, Elliott Broidy (who was also a longtime GOP fundraiser) was charged with acting as an unregistered foreign agent in lobbying the Trump administration to drop 1MDB case.
The RNC clearly has excellent taste and detailed background checks. /s
Commit, meanwhile Brennan briefed Obama on Clinton’s plan to lie about Trump and the Russians. Which is the subject of this thread.
BTW, the case against 13 Russians who were indicted by the Mueller’s Grand Jury was dropped and summarily dismissed.
Which is further evidence of Clinton conspiring with Bennan and other intelligence services (Clapper-NSA) to fabricate Russiagate.
Your repeated and sophomoric attempts at DNC trolling here only serve to make you look like the troll you are.
Rhodes misstates the facts. Brennan briefed Pres Obama on Russian allegations that Hillary was going to try and use Trump’s Russian connections in the campaign.
As Brennan noted in the article below:
1. The allegation was from the Russian and its purpose and veracity are suspect.
2. There is nothing illegal noted in the allegation.
https://www.cnn.com/2020/10/06/politics/brennan-ratcliffe-declassifying-intelligence-clinton-russia/index.html
PS The Trump/Russian collusion is verified by the GOP led Senate Intelligence Committee Report as well as the Mueller Report and our intelligence agencies and the FBI have all repeatedly verified that Russia interfered in the 2016 election and to the benefit of Trump.
Facts are stubborn things.
“PS The Trump/Russian collusion is verified by the GOP led Senate Intelligence Committee Report as well as the Mueller Report ”
LOL
Notice that Allan can’t produce any evidence to contradict joe friday’s statement that “The Trump/Russian collusion is verified by the GOP led Senate Intelligence Committee Report as well as the Mueller Report” Allan probably hasn’t read them.
Notice that Allan can’t produce any evidence to contradict joe friday’s statement that “The Trump/Russian collusion is verified by the GOP led Senate Intelligence Committee Report as well as the Mueller Report”
Allan is likely laughing because Joe posted the same lie yesterday and I responded with the following proving Joe to be a liar. Are you a liar as well?
“We can say, without any hesitation, that the Committee found absolutely no evidence that then-candidate Donald Trump or his campaign colluded with the Russian government to meddle in the 2016 election.
https://www.intelligence.senate.gov/press/rubio-statement-senate-intel-release-volume-5-bipartisan-russia-report
Joe Friday was talking about the GOP led Senate Intelligence Committee Report, not about Rubio. You didn’t prove Joe to be a liar. You’re quoting Rubio’s personal statement, not the Senate Intelligence Committee Report.
Focus on what the Report said.
— “Manafort’s involvement with the GRU hack-and-leak operation is largely unknown. … Kilimnik was in sustained contact with Manafort before, during and after the GRU cyber and influence operations, but the Committee did not obtain reliable, direct evidence that Kilimnik and Manafort discussed the GRU hack-and-leak operation. … Two pieces of information, however, raise the possibility of Manafort’s potential connection to the hack-and-leak operations.”
— “The Committee found that Manafort’s presence on the Campaign and proximity to Trump created opportunities for Russian intelligence services to exert influence over, and acquire confidential information on, the Trump Campaign. Taken as a whole, Manafort’s high-level access and willingness to share information with individuals closely affiliated with the Russian intelligence services … represented a grave counterintelligence threat.”
— “While [Russian military intelligence] and WikiLeaks were releasing hacked documents, the Trump Campaign sought to maximize the impact of those leaks to aid Trump’s electoral prospects. Staff on the Trump Campaign sought advance notice about WikiLeaks releases, created messaging strategies to promote and share the materials in anticipation of and following their release, and encouraged further leaks. The Trump Campaign publicly undermined the attribution of the hack-and-leak campaign to Russia and was indifferent to whether it and WikiLeaks were furthering a Russian election interference effort.”
— “Trump and senior Campaign officials sought to obtain advance information about WikiLeaks’s planned releases through Roger Stone.”
— “The Committee further found that [George] Papadopoulos’s efforts introduced him to several individuals that raise counterintelligence concerns, due to their associations with individuals from hostile foreign governments, as well as actions these individuals undertook. The Committee assesses that Papadopoulos was not a witting cooptee of the Russian intelligence services, but nonetheless presented a prime intelligence target and potential vector for malign Russian influence.”
There are more quotes from the Report along these lines.
Rubio signed that report. Then he lied to you.
Anonymous, I didn’t say he was a liar in the immediate posting. All I did was write LOL was because it is funny. All sorts of reports exist but when the report was written not all the data was released. A lot of data has been released but not enough.I just posted (if it posted) that Trump ordered the release of all Russia documents unreacted. News article and video at.
https://justthenews.com/accountability/russia-and-ukraine-scandals/40-key-russia-documents-president-trump-must-still?utm_source=daily-newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=newsletter#article
That is the Reason for LOL, but I see Anonymous has added yet another anonymous character. That adds confusion and that adds to the disputes which he has caused. Note the hyperbolic language from Anonymous where there was no cause what so ever.
Allan, you’ve said that you use your email to reply to comments, and you don’t read them in context on the page.
If you had read the 11:01 AM comment in context, you’d have known that it was a reply to Olly, not to you. Olly was the one who called Joe a liar, and the 11:01 comment gave evidence that Olly was wrong to call Joe a liar.
Anonymous, I don’t think your paraphrase is entirely accurate, but since accurate or not it has no purpose I don’t really care to explain to you or your pretend friends how I respond.
“it was a reply to Olly”
That is your problem. You didn’t sufficiently delineate who you were responding to. That is a problem you have to solve if the result causes you or any of your friends difficulty.
You make so many mistakes that I cannot even be sure this isn’t one of them but it isn’t worth my time to go back and sort out your mess for you.
Allan, it’s delineated perfectly clearly on Turley’s website that it was a reply to Olly, and it wasn’t an anonymous comment.
Your problem is that you won’t look at the comments on the website and you get confused because you rely on your email. If you want to look like a confused jackass, that’s your problem, not mine.
“Allan, it’s delineated perfectly clearly on Turley’s website that it was a reply to Olly, ”
Likely you didn’t place it in the right place so blame yourself. I believe the email said it was to Allan. How am I to know any differently and why should I struggle when you keep telling everyone it was the other anonymous that made you buy that dress.
I think you screwed up and as usual want to blame someone else.
How are you supposed to know differently? Look at it on the page: https://jonathanturley.org/2020/10/07/a-means-of-distracting-the-public-brennan-briefed-obama-on-clinton-plan-to-lie-trump-to-russia/comment-page-4/#comment-2011433
I’m not posting anonymously, dipsh!t.
“I’m not posting anonymously, dipsh!t.”
Anonymous, changing your name or icon doesn’t change who you are. Are you that stupid that you don’t recognize it? You have no credibility so I guess it doesn’t matter which alias or pretend friend you use. We can expect the same.
What is funny is that you want people to search and figure out who you were responding to when the email said it was to Allan. All you had to do was put 4 letters at the start, Olly. It is that simple. You can’t be bothered because you think you are superior and you can prove it because all your pretend friends tell you so.
You once told George he need a psych. I thought you might need one then, but now I now you absolutely need one.
Anonymous has added more of his anonymous icons and labels.
He isn’t very trustworthy and can’t stand behind his word.
Declassified memos: CIA feared Clinton was ‘stirring up’ false Russia collusion narrative
Suspected goal was to “vilify Donald Trump” and distract from Clinton’s own controversies in 2016 election.
Director of National Intelligence John Ratcliffe on Tuesday declassified two documents showing President Obama’s CIA feared in summer 2016 that Hillary Clinton was “stirring up” a false Russia collusion narrative to “vilify” Donald Trump and distract from her own controversies heading into the election.
cont: with memos at https://justthenews.com/government/us-intel-declassify-more-evidence-showing-why-fbi-russia-probe-was-broken-start?utm_source=breaking-newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=newsletter
That is just a more recent addition I was going to post elsewhere.
YES. EXACTLY JOE
PLUS THE BUSINESS ABOUT HILLARY BEING BEHIND SHOWING THE LYIN’ kING AS THE TRAITOR he is/. This would seem a major story regardless of the ultimate findings. If these notes have been fabricated or misrepresented, it would show a breathtaking effort to lie to the voters before the election.
THIS IS A BREATHTAKING EFFORT TO LIE
Your source is CNN?!
CNN is nothing more than a propaganda outlet.
Extremely weak sauce, Joe.
. This would seem a major story regardless of the ultimate findings. If these notes have been fabricated or misrepresented, it would show a breathtaking effort to lie to the voters before the election.it’s a fabrication, IT’S A LIE
The correct analysis of all these events is that the current DNI is selectively releasing classified documents just prior to an election, while i contrast, the supposed “Deep State” only released information harmful to Hillary before the 2016 election, and as they should have.they protected Trump from potentially harmful information they had on his campaign. The politicization of intelligence and the DOJ is real, but it is being practiced by Trump and some appointees, not their predecessors.
The correct analysis of all these events is that the current DNI is selectively releasing classified documents just prior to an election,
Selectively you say. Yeah, he’s like a dentist that’s finally having an opportunity to pull out your rotten teeth.
I wondered what happened to By the Book and now I know.
“The correct analysis of all these events is that the current DNI is selectively releasing classified documents just prior to an election,”
Irrelevant – the documents say what they say. They are damaging to the CIA, the FBI, the DOJ, Clinton Mueller.
“while i contrast, the supposed “Deep State” only released information harmful to Hillary before the 2016 election, and as they should have.they protected Trump from potentially harmful information they had on his campaign.”
False, information damaging to hillary was released prior to the election because Hillary lied about it and her lie was exposed as a result of FOIA requests that triggered an FBI investigation.
It was not possible to keep the investigation secret – Clinton lied publicly, repeatedly and under oath.
And she lied about her actions as a public servant which are not protected by the 4th amendment.
As to Trump – there never should have been an investigation. The FBI kept secret what they were doing because it was unethical and probably criminal. And not because Trump was a political candidate.
“The politicization of intelligence and the DOJ is real, but it is being practiced by Trump and some appointees, not their predecessors.”
You are correct – this should not just be coming out now. In fact it should not have come out ever.
The FBI knew these things in July 2016 and they should never have started down the collusion delosion path.
Absent that they should have been released as quickly as possibkle after the inauguration.
The DOJ/FBI/CIA/IC has fought this tooth and nail and they are responsible for the delay.
And yes that is corrupt.
But it is not Trump that is corrupt.
This is roughtly the equivalent of failing to provide brady material.
I would note alot of it is being released because Judge Suillivan continues the Flynn hearing – as a result the DOJ has a continuing obligation to provide Sydney Powell with the bradyh material that Van Grack never did.