English novelist Robert Smith Surtees once said, “There are three sorts of lawyers – able, unable, and lamentable.” That view was never truer than this month as the United States Supreme Court hears from a lawyer who may be more controversial than the underlying case. In an election case that will require at least two conservative justices to join their liberal colleagues, the Democratic National Committee (DNC) picked one of the most polarizing and controversial attorneys in the country: Marc Elias.
Elias clearly has supporters and advocates who value his aggressive reputation and past work for Democratic causes. He is viewed as the unblinking, unhesitating advocate of Democratic candidates with a long background on election challenges.
Yet, many view his tactics and record as deeply troubling, including some on the left. (For the record, I have long been a critic of Elias due to his past controversies).
Generally, parties seek to focus courts on the merits rather than the lawyer chosen for an appeal. The DNC appears to have discarded that approach.
Elias is a previously sanctioned attorney who was also a key player in the secret funding of the Steele dossier, leading to the false Russian collusion scandal. Courts have also criticized his group for supporting raw partisan gerrymandering efforts. Making this even more curious is the fact that Elias has attacked the conservative majority, including calling them “increasingly hostile to civil rights.”
The Russian Collusion Hoax and Concealment
It was Elias who was the general counsel to the Clinton presidential campaign when it secretly funded the infamous Steele dossier and pushed the false Alfa Bank conspiracy. (His fellow Perkins Coie partner, Michael Sussmann, was later indicted but acquitted).
Clinton campaign officials denied any involvement in the Steele Dossier. When journalists discovered after the election that the Clinton campaign hid payments for the Steele dossier as “legal fees” among the $5.6 million paid to Perkins Coie, they were reportedly stonewalled.
New York Times reporter Ken Vogel said at the time that Elias 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 later wrote that “Folks involved in funding this lied about it, and with sanctimony, for a year.”
Notably, Elias was allegedly sitting next to John Podesta, Clinton’s campaign chairman, when he was questioned by Congress about the Steele dossier and categorically denied any contractual agreement with Fusion GPS.
Democratic Attack Lawyer
The Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee were ultimately sanctioned by the FEC over the handling of the funding of the dossier through his prior firm.
Nevertheless, other Democratic groups continued to hire Elias. He unsuccessfully led efforts to challenge Democratic electoral losses. Elias was also the subject of intense criticism after a tweet that some have viewed as inherently racist.
While routinely billing himself as a “defender of democracy,” Elias was often accused of working against democratic choice. In Maryland, Elias’s team filed in support of an abusive gerrymandering of the election districts that a court found not only violated Maryland law but the state constitution’s equal protection, free speech and free elections clauses. The court found that the map “subverts the will of those governed.”
One media site accused Elias and his group of “making millions off gerrymandering efforts” while publicly denouncing Republican gerrymandering.
The New York Times reported that “detractors on the left fault him for empowering the ultrarich to exercise disproportionate political influence, and for pushing aggressive initiatives that have backfired at times, playing into the hands of the Republicans he strives to thwart.”
In 2024, Elias’s legal team was also accused of pushing “to bar third-party presidential candidates — including Cornel West — from swing state ballots where they might siphon votes from the Democratic nominee [Kamala Harris].”
Likewise, the New York Times reported that Elias’s firm’s work “on behalf of a Soros-funded PAC in Texas…was opposed by a left-leaning election watchdog as undermining laws intended to limit the influence of major donors.”
His group’s work for New York redistricting was ridiculed as not only ignoring the express will of the voters to end such gerrymandering but also effectively negating the votes of Republican voters.
In 2024, the Chief Judge of the Western District of Wisconsin not only rejected but ridiculed the Elias Law Group for one of its challenges. Judge James Peterson (an Obama appointee) said that the argument “simply does not make any sense.”
Attacks on the Conservative Majority
Making his appearance even more intriguing is Elias’s past criticism of the conservative justices individually and as a group.
Last year, Elias suggested that the conservative justices were fostering the MAGA agenda and observed that the Court is seen by the right “as a force multiplier in [Trump’s] authoritarian quest, rather than an obstacle. Long after this election is over, that may well be the legacy this Supreme Court leaves behind.”
He has also supported the criminal referral of Justice Clarence Thomas to the Justice Department and said that he is benefiting from a “two-tier justice system.”
On Justice Alito, he told former Senator Al Franken that he could not say whether the justice was voting on principle or just “his animus for Democrats.”
He also criticized how the conservative justices “constantly misread in how to act” or conduct themselves so not to harm the Court.
The Elias Factor
Elias’s predictions on the Court’s likely actions are equally sketchy. For example, he chastized other liberal lawyers for raising the “independent state legislature theory” before the Court. Elias dismissed the Court as a majority of virtual political hacks, warning, “given the composition of the Supreme Court, no one who cares about free and fair elections should be rushing to get the Supreme Court to potentially create any doctrine where none exists.”
The Court ultimately rejected the theory in a major victory for the left in Moore v. Harper.
To make this even more baffling, the Democrats will need every vote that they can get. This week, the Supreme Court delivered a blow to Democratic efforts to gain control over the House in the midterm elections. As Democratic states like California are further gerrymandering their districts to add Democratic members, Democratic groups are challenging efforts by Texas and Republican states to engage in the same redistricting. Given past gerrymandering in blue states, red states have more ability to add members in this tit-for-tat effort.
Now, on December 9th, the DNC will have Elias make its case in National Republican Senatorial Committee v. Federal Election Commission, asking the court to strike down the coordinated party expenditure limits in campaigns.
Notably, Elias is not viewed by many, including some on the left, as a force for good on campaign finance issues. The New York Times reported that Elias “played a key role in carving new pathways for big money into the political process.”
Fortunately, for the Democrats, those conservative justices whom Elias has trashed appointed someone to defend the law (since the administration is supporting the challengers). They appointed Roman Martinez, a former clerk to Chief Justice John Roberts and then-Judge Brett Kavanaugh, who will offer an unburdened and likely strong case for preserving the law and prior precedent.
However, as good as Martinez is expected to be, he will then be joined by a counsel viewed as positively radioactive. Arguing for protecting the integrity of elections will be someone viewed by many as having played a critical role in one of the greatest political hoaxes in history, and someone who heads groups sanctioned by both the judiciary and the federal government for legal actions.
Before the normally staid Court, it is a moment not to be missed. I expect that the justices will show far more restraint than Elias has shown in his public attacks. (After all, these justices must decide these appeals on the law: not on the counsel or personal bias). Indeed, some may find the notoriety to be mildly entertaining. Yet, for many, using Elias to defend the integrity of the election process will be more than just “lamentable.” It borders on the laughable.
Jonathan Turley is the Shapiro professor of public interest law at George Washington University and the author of the best-selling book “The Indispensable Right: Free Speech in an Age of Rage.”
I can think of only one Justice whose attempt to be impartial — given insults by Marc Elias to the legal profession in general and the Court in particular — might actually result in a favorable outcome for Marc Elias’ client regardless of the facts and/or the law.
OT (of necessity). I find it somewhat strange that Prof. Turley seems to be abjectly ignoring fresh significant developments regarding issues on which he has spent considerable time in the recent past. I refer to SCOTUS agreeing to hear a birthright citizenship case that may clarify the meaning of “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” in the 14th A, Section 1 (if Roberts can avoid his penchant for seemingly deliberate obfuscation); and the recent developments in the J6 pipe bomb investigation, in which there are some indications (to me at least) that the alleged suspect may have been played for a patsy, either before or after the fact.
Regarding ex-slaves and natives…
“Regarding ex-slaves and natives…”
Ah, yes. The old “limited time offer” implied in the US Constitution. I wonder what other rights will soon be found to have expired like grocery store coupons. And it was added to the Constitution rather than simply by declaration of Congress because they wanted to enshrine that it was a one-time-offer.
The above isn’t satire. It is openly mocking the stupidity to challenge the US Constitution by any other means than a Constitutional Amendment.
(what an interesting word, grocery; Trump invented that word himself . It had never been used before. )
Turley has addressed the BR citizenship case in the past. It is likely he will in the future.
There is nothing to address at the moment – SCOTUS has agree to hear the appeal – that is all.
There have not been oral arguments, there has not been a decision.
SCOTUS did earlier direct that the federal courts could NOT block the Birth Right Citizenship case using a nationwide TRO.
But that was more about nationwide TROs than the merits of the case.
For many reasons – I expect Trump to lose this case – possibly 9-0.
While those on the left that claim the text of the 14th amendment and the Wong Kim Ark case decided this issue – that is FALSE.
WKA established that children born in the US of people in the US legally (and NOT the children of foreign military or Embassy staff) were citizens.
It said nothing at all about illegal immigrants.
The most likely reason that Trump will lose is that the 14th amendment gives the power to set the rules for citizenship to congress – not the executive.
The core to this case is “Can the president through executive orders define the meaning of “Subject to the jurisdiction of the united states”
And the answer to that is no.
If this EO was a law passes by congress this would be a radically different case.
I suspect even that would lose but that would probably be a 5-4 decision.
But right now all we know is that 4 justices agreed to hear the case.
From The Column:
“Elias is a previously sanctioned attorney who was also a key player in the secret funding of the Steele dossier, leading to the false Russian collusion scandal”.
……………………………………..
Last week the administration released its Security Strategy paper outlining Trump’s foreign policy goals. There is actually real speculation that Russia had some input in laying out this strategy. Here’s a few paragraphs from Foreign Affairs magazine critiquing Trump’s strategy.
………………………………….
The strategy advances the search for “strategic stability with Russia” and blames European elites for standing in the way of peace. It assumes Ukraine will survive the war but is silent about Ukrainian security (apart from predicting that Ukraine will not join the NATO alliance) and about Ukraine’s integration into Europe. The document does not acknowledge that Ukraine could lose the war, which is a real possibility, and it skirts a fundamental dilemma for the United States, which is that strategic stability with Russia can be realized only by giving Russia some degree of control over Ukraine. Yet were Russia to acquire such control, it would destabilize NATO and non-NATO European countries. On Ukraine, the new strategy does little more than make assertions, many of them too sanguine about what the country needs to survive and too credulous about Russia’s potential to serve as a constructive regional actor. The strategy document contends that peace might be at hand in Ukraine, if only Europe’s elites can be bypassed. This understates the conflict’s stakes and in particular the risk of rewarding and thereby normalizing Russia’s zeal to control Ukraine.
https://www.foreignaffairs.com/trumps-power-paradox
Trump is giving another $12 billion of taxpayer money to bail out farmers again from his disastrous policies.
Just like he had to bail them out in his first term from his disastrous policies.
But they will continue to vote Republican, as long as they keep getting their welfare checks.
Should we drug test these farmers before they get their welfare?
Shouldn’t we have work requirements for this welfare?
Can’t they get a second job?
How can we be sure they won’t spend this money on drugs and abortions?
And yet these farmers tell us they *hate* socialism…
I didn’t buy a farm. Why should I pay for farmers to own one?
Farmers are the REAL welfare queens
This is tax money being taken from us to provide welfare to another group Trump needs for votes.
He’s basically taken food from children and poor people to pay them off.
So, Trump is paying US farmers with their own money which Trump took through his tariff tax to make up for farmers loss of markets due to the Trump tariffs and after Trump bailed out their foreign competition in Argentina using $40B taken from US farmers via the Trump tariffs.
Makes sense !!!
So Republicans are fine with SOCIALISM. As long as they are the beneficiaries.
Subsidies are a bad idea.
They are not socialism.
Calling a frog a horse does not make them a horse.
Brings down the cost of food and if not identifies bad actors and origin
False. It is constantly claimed that government subsidies decrease costs – this has never been true except in the short run.
In the long run subsidies significantly increase costs.
In the US the largest long term increases in prices are those in education and healthcare which are the most highly subsidized parts of the US economy.
There are good arguments against subsidies including this one.
Not one of your arguments is one of those.
There is not an assertion in your post that is correct.
Trump did not Tarriff US far products.
Even the Chinese did not – they just chose to buy elsewhere.
There is not a commodities market that is more inelastic that farm products – China buying soy elsewhere does not alter the global demand for soy, and it is not possible to significantly increase the global supply in less than several years.
The price of Soy to use Farmers has increased by 30% – proof that these subsidies are not needed and your claims are false.
The US did not give Argentina anything. The US invested in Argentina – and it is likely Treasury will make money off that investment.
I would note that despite past Argentine socialists defaulting on loans TWICE in the past – Argentina has ultimately been FORCED to pay off all of its loans – often with enormous profits to lenders.
Argentina produces less than 1/4 the Soy the US does, and abotu 10% of that goes to China.
They are not a significant factor in the China US Soy issue
Brazil is the worlds largest producer of Soy
Farmers make up about 1% of the population.
That is not a powerful voting block.
There are about 7 times more illegal immigrants who entered the US during the Biden administration than there are farmers in the US.
LAME ANON is back from is afternoon nap. 3 Year olds need naps!
You shouldnt.
We should not subsidize anything – not food, not healthcare, not education.
Subsidies are a bad idea – they are not socialism.
I would separately note that pretty much all big businesses – including farms actually hate Free Markets.
I know it is hard for left wing nuts to grasp this – but big business WANTS regulation – regulations they can control,
That provide barriers to entry for competition.
Regulation and subsidies are not bad for business they are bad for consumers.
They might spend it on fattening food or sugary soft drinks; possibly alcohol. That too would be a tragedy.
“Should we drug test these farmers”
If you wish – vote that into the law.
“before they get their welfare?”
Not Welfare – this is a subsidy.
Government should not subsidize Farmers or anyone else.
But the negative impacts of Subsidies are not the same nor as bad as the negative impacts of Welfare.
“Shouldn’t we have work requirements for this welfare?”
Subsidies are not welfare. Regardless Farmers already work – or they would not be farmers.
Government subsidies are a bad idea, and there is no need for this or any other govenrment subsiides
Like student loans or Obama Care.
But Welfare is even worse.
“Can’t they get a second job?”
I doubt there is a farmer int he country that is not already working 60-80 hour weeks much of the year.
“How can we be sure they won’t spend this money on drugs and abortions?”
If you wish to include such prohibitions in the law – go ahead.
Farmers do not need a bail out – the price of Soy is up 30%.
But even if it was not – No the govenrment should not subsidize farmers – PERIOD.
It should not subsize Schools, or healthcare or pretty much anything else.
From The Column:
“Elias is a previously sanctioned attorney who was also a key player in the secret funding of the Steele dossier, leading to the false Russian collusion scandal”.
…………………………………
Last week the administration released its Security Strategy paper outlining Trump’s foreign policy goals. There is actually real speculation that Russia had some input in laying out this strategy. Here’s a few paragraphs from Foreign Affairs magazine critiquing Trump’s strategy.
…………………………………
The document celebrates American power and is geared in part toward sustaining and amplifying it. At other times, however, the goal seems to be to restrain U.S. ambitions. Although the strategy document is unlikely to explain Trump’s day-to-day decision-making, it describes an aspirational world order. The order would not be American-led. It would not be the function of great-power competition or of civilizational clashes, and it would not be rules-based. It would issue instead from a dense network of personal relationships that supersede any alliances or any division of countries along the lines of democracy or authoritarianism.
This network could provide Russian President Vladimir Putin with an opening to end the war in Ukraine on his terms. It could be conducive to Chinese leader Xi Jinping’s grandiose plans for his country. Most of all, though, it will accommodate the actions of a man who sees the world in viscerally personal terms, who can easily and quickly change his views and his commitments, and who thinks less in terms of negotiation and treaties than in terms of rapid-fire dealmaking. This is more than just the world Trump wants. It is the world that he has.
https://www.foreignaffairs.com/trumps-power-paradox
Rabble:
Russia and America share some interests now. the EU, NATO, and UN are trying to tank the rest of the world so they can still be “on top” of the steaming pile.
The biggest issue, though, is China, India, and the South American/African drug cartels/warlords. the EU ain’t gonna do jack about it, so it’ll be up to an unlikely coalition of us and Russia to deal with it
Thinkthrough, Russia and China are currently allies. Are we going to join them to become an axis?
Rabble:
I have never been one to think it through, I am enlisted. China and Russia may be allies, but by the same metrics we are also allies with China (economic agreements). Russia overall wants to be left alone. If China starts edgine north, Russia would stop it.
And to answer your smarmy rhetorical, if we were to join Russia and China into any form of military compact, no other force on Earth would be able to stop it.
I have never been one to think it through, I am enlisted… Russia overall wants to be left alone.
I never in 30 years ever heard an enlisted man brag to an audience that they were never one to think it true – particularly if there were other troops present that know that the ability of the enlisted men to think things through is critical to military success. No military can afford to have an officer right beside every enlisted man, waiting to order him to do what needs to happen next.
But the claim that Putin merely wants to be left alone????? Well, if you have that belief, what you said in your first sentence was almost certainly true.
Rabble:
I forgot sarcasm and humor are banned in the Year of Our Floyd 2025. I was being self-deferential, joking on how I am enlisted, and therefore, I did not ‘think it through.’
In reality, I have known many, enlisted, officer, civilian, who do need hand holding. The first time. If they need it after that, it’s sink or swim, and brother, you’re drowning.
As for Russia and Putin, I do know you can’t trust anything from any news source nowadays, domestic or international. What I do understand is the scope of our “not-quite-friends” group in the world of countries is shifting, for better or for worse, and we will potentially have a good case for “enemy of my enemy” cooperation with a country who, like us, despises the influence of outside forces (EU, NATO, UN), wants to grow itself, and is being screwed over by the Old World. the only difference is, they are doing it without fanfare and public praise against the USA.
I have nothing but antipathy for the left in general and I find the situation described here symptomatic of what is so thoroughly wrong with them. They are surly in ugly fashion because they have abandoned reason and instead espouse and rely on lies, threats, and sometimes outright violence. They deserve our contempt and perhaps more depending on how much damage they do to freedom and individual rights.
Elias clearly has supporters and advocates who value his aggressive reputation and past work for Democratic causes.
What a kind way to save Democrat Washington DC lawyer Mar Elias with mild criticism: the complete opposite of damning with faint praise. Especially after such a detailed exploration of most of the unethical and fraudulent legal activities of this Washington DC Democrat lawyer – minus details of the various crimes this unindicted felon Democrat lawyer his committed while getting a paycheque from both the DNC and Clinton.
This is the unindicted criminal Marc Elias that illegally funneled Obama/Clinton campaign money to the Russian spy that they illegally hired to write their illegal, fictional and felonious “Trump-Russia Dossier” that they used by perjuring themselves to FISA courts to deprive thousands of Americans of their civil rights by color of law.
Marc Elias, the unidicted felon that committed the additional felony of filing false income tax reports to cover the initial Clinton/Obama/Elias crime of hiring foreign spies to do work for their campaign by claiming the $6 million dollars he paid to their co-conspirators and fellow felons was money paid to him for legal services he supposedly did for Clinton. Being a moneylaunder paying off foreign Russian spies criminally preparing criminal campaign material is not a “legal service”.
The only question remaining is this:
What excuse does Professor Turley have for not complying with the Washington DC Bar Associations Professional Code Of Conduct that requires him as a member of the same Washington DC Bar Association that Marc Elias belongs to, to report the unethical and criminal malfeasance of his fellow Bar Association Democrat lawyer.
Any justifiable reason he won’t share everything he wrote here with their wilfully blind Washington DC Bar Association? Fear of being cut of from the Washington DC Democrat cocktails and canapes party circuit is cowardice – not a justifiable excuse.
What a load of right wing propaganda nonsense.
@Anonymous
I guess, the modern left not being repugnant like raw sewage in every way, shape, or form to the nostrils of sane people, might he a start.
“What a kind way to save Democrat Washington DC lawyer Mar Elias with mild criticism”
You mean to say that you think that Turley has deliberately avoided pointing out that Elias is nothing but a slimy swamp critter with absolutely no integrity, ethics, or moral sensibility?
I mean to say that Turley can write that detailed summary of Elias’s malfeasance as a member of that Bar Association. But Turley as another member of that same Bar Association is also violating its Professional Code Of Conduct that requires him to report to the Bar any knowledge he has of a fellow member engaging in unethical, corrupt, incompetent, or criminal behavior.
Turley is in violation of his Bar’s Code Of Professional Conduct just as Elias is. The only difference is to the degree he is and for what.
And then he will write columns accurately criticizing andcomplaining about another bar assocation’s manner of operation. While he watches his bar association run wild, with no discipline for Elias, Comey, Smith, Loretta Lynch, Sally Yates, etc. He won’t do what he’s professionally obligated to do with the idea of having a credible Bar association – but he’ll criticize another Bar association to the ends of the earth.
I am not sure who is arguing what – but the supreme court should strike down restrictions on campaign donations as violating the first amendment.
Political campaigns are entirely about speech – the most protected form of speech political speech.
The government can not make an end run arround the first amendment by restricting the necessities for speech.
If Alias is arguing against campaign finance laws – then for once he is right.
Strike PACs
This is a great quote, You might look up who said it. Seems true to me…
“In effect, Trump has chosen white supremacy over actual national greatness.”
Huh? That’s just stupid and counterfactual. Whatever faults Trump has, that’s not one of them.
So why is it that Trump has nearly erased the partisan advantage that Democrats had with minority voters.
Not Long ago Democrats were talking about a minority majority country and a permanent majority in congress.
Now the same people who were predicting a Democrat permanent majority are warning Democrats that they are becoming the niche party of White elites.
The economy grew by 3.8% in Q3 2025 and is projected to grow by 4.5% in Q4 for a 3% growth rate for the year after inheriting abysmal growth under Biden.
Most of that Growth is benefiting working class americans – not the elites.
It is benefiting working class whites, and working class blacks, and working class hispanics.
Contra you left wing nuts – Trump is actively working to End racism.
The permanent destruction of DEI and affirmative action in the US has the result of ending claims that minority success is not earned.
All of us – male, female. white black can succeed or fail based on our own abilities and we OWN that success when we achieve it.
End DEI and affirmative action and you will KNOW that the successful minorities that you see EARNED that success.
I would further note as we learned from tthe Clinton Gingrich efforts to end welfare in the US, the consequences of this are greater success among minorities.
Who would have guessed that if you quit paying people to fail they would succeed ?
Unfortunately much of this was reversed by Obama as a temporary measure that has essentially become permanent in response to the 2008 recession. And we are fighting Democrat efforts to make 2020 temporary assistance permanent todate.
Regardless, if you pay people to fial – you get more failure.
The real “White Supremecists” – are those on the left who do not have enough faith in minorities to beleive they can survive and thrive without special preferences.
THAT is white supremecy – THAT is patronizing. That is racist.
This is a great quote, You might look up who said it. Seems true to me…
It’s a great quote straight from Biden – only if you’re a groupie of Biden. One who still admires him for telling Americans that in his 40 years in the Washington DC Senate, “I never once met a single black American who was decent, clean, and well spoken”. That was after before meeting the half black mulatto who abandoned his life of Rich White Supremacist Privilege to run as a po’ black chil’ from the ghetto.. (presumably there were no decent, clean and well spoken acceptable black Americans in the Black Congressional Congress when Biden won you over with that).
Another great quote from Biden, engaging black Americans with what what he considered to be a teachable moment: “If you don’t vote for me, Jim Crow Joe Biden, then you can’t be Black”.
Projecting… lying Democrat Kluxxers claim that it’s one of their features just like their racism – not a bug.
Just a simple question.
If there was no collusion between trump and Putin.
Why does trump love Putin so much and treat him with loving care and a red carpet?
It’s called diplomacy. This is what world leaders do for any and all heads of state, regardless of ideology. It’s called manners, civility.
Putin has been charged with war crimes. A Red Carpet? Really?
Erodigan, MBS, Netanyahu – these are all people the US deals with who either committed heinous crimes or are charged with them.
The US still deals with them.
Biden’s disrepecting MBS const him and the US dearly in dealings with Saudi Arabia.
If you are a US president and you wish to take a moral stand against the conduct of the leaders of foreign countries,
that is fine, but you had better expect that it will make dealing with them far more difficult, and it will likely harm the interests of the american people.
I have no problems with taking difficult moral stances. But they come with consequences,
War Crimes, you say?
Review the Obama drone strikes and the Clinton intervention, “Operation Infinite reach,” and then justify your opinion.
So has trump you embicile
ATS – absolutely – Every president since Clinton has used Drone Strikes – though Obama is the Drone strike King.
Obama is the only president to intentionally kill US citizens.
Trump’s use of Drone strikes was WAY down from those of Obama.
But again all presidents since Clinton have used Drones to kill alleged bad guys outside of the US.
And all have caused significant casualties of innocent nearby civilians.
While the current strikes on Drug Transport speedboats are in the news and NOT drone strikes, they are otherwise similar EXCEPT, that the likelyhood of actually innocent casualties when a Speed boat transporting Drugs is destroyed in the ocean is near zero.
While a drone strike to kill a terrorist nearly always kills more inocent people than terrostis.
Rabble:
So, we should instead treat the rest of the world like you do when you don’t want to have civility. Ignore, walk off, cut off. Too bad that doesn’t work in the world at large, since trade, manufacturing, and collaboration are global.
We may not like the Russians, or Saudis, but we must still amicably meet with their leaders regardless of your ‘feelings.’
Trump didn’t meet Ukraine President Zelenskyy at the airport or arrange for a military aircraft flyover or roll out a red carpet, so not manners or civility and certainly not for all heads of state.
“. . . Ukraine President Zelenskyy . . .”
Russia is a tyranny; Ukraine a kleptocracy. A pox on both of their houses.
“Ukraine Corruption Scandal: A New York Times investigation has found that the Ukrainian government systematically sabotaged . . .”
Anonymous seems to have forgotten that Bill Clinton went to Russia and was given the red carpet treatment plus a boat load of cash. As a former president, Bill Clinton was paid $500,000 for a speech in Russia in 2010 by a Russian investment bank, Renaissance Capital. Anonymous seems to not remember that Hillary Clinton met with the Russians to present them with a restart button. Even after The Washington Post and The New York Times have admitted that RussiaGate was a hoax Anonymous is like Gullom crouching in a dank dark cave whispering the ring the ring the ring. Anonymous sits in the coldness of the cave exclaiming Putin Putin Putin in a gravelly snake like voice. The obsession is more than equal.
Trump does not “love” Putin – Trump flatters people when it is useful for him to do so, and he maligns them when that is useful.
Others here have called it diplomacy – which is true. But it is more than Diplomacy. it is Trump’s normal behavior and has been throughout his life.
I do not understand how it is effective – it does not work for me.
But in the real world it is effective.
It also does not mean anything.
Trump previously flattered Marjorie Taylor Green. More recently he criticized her and essentially drove her from congress.
It is just politics.
Rabble:
John, my half/cent on MTG is such: She is losing popularity, and would have just become another small footnote in the history books for years 2000-2030. Plus, she was nearing her tenure time, and all the benefits that that comes with. So, she decided to go out “with a bang.” turned into a whimper, really. Insult the man you helped garner trust and cooperation towards, slink off to join one of the lobby companies you took money from, and get paid by the taxpayer for the rest of your life. We’ll likely see her again, either in a 28 or 32 presidential run.
Just a simple question. If there was no collusion between trump and Putin. Why does trump love Putin so much and treat him with loving care and a red carpet?
A more simple, more basic and much earlier question: Was it only out of love that Obama promised Putin he would give him space to invade Ukraine? And was it only out of love that Putin gave Secretary Of State Clinton a cool $30 million dollars?
Collusion and quid pro quo – or bribes to sell America to Putin during Obama’s term, long before Trump?
What say you, anonymous commie Democrat?
““it is more than plausible that within a few decades at the latest, certain NATO members will become majority non-European.””
Yep, the trump administration just admitted they are racist. How can anyone deny this? But I’m sure MAGA will come to the defence of all this. RACIST.
ATS – it is not racist to state FACTS. PERIOD, ever. Unless you are prepared to accuse god or reality or nature of being racist.
It is actually incredibly important to take note of actual facts – even when they have implications related to race.
Blacks make up 17% of the US and commit 50% of the murders and are 50% of the murder victims.
Pretending that race and rates of violence and murder have nothing to do with each other deprives you of the ability to find the root causes and seek to improve them.
I do not have the answer to why the murder rate among blacks is so high. But I want us to figure that out and to bring it down.
You are afraid of all aspects of reality that have negative connotations with respect to race.
Your fears prevent you from inquiry that might lead to solutions to problems.
I used the black murder rate as an example – but there are many other issues that vary between races.
The rate of violent crime of Asians is half that of whites.
The rate of hispanics is 50% higher than whites.
The rate of blacks is double that of whites.
With minor variations this holds true throughout the world – not just the US.
Sweden took in a about a million refugees from the mid east over the course of a decade – and the murder rate doubled.
The rate of Rapes exploded many times. Sweden has gone from the most open immigration policies in the EU to the most restrictive in a few years. They now have net NEGATIVE immigration – more immigrants are leaving Sweden than entering.
They now have immigration laws policies that make Trump’s look immigrant friendly.
If you are an immigrant in Sweden and you commit a crime – you are deported.
If you are not self sufficient – you are likely to be deported.
If you are not self sufficient you can not bring in family.
If you do not learn to speak swedish – you will be deported.
If you are a naturalized swedish citizen and you commit crimes – you could get deported.
Sweden has deported hundreds of naturalized swedish citizens because of repeated criminal conduct.
In the US you can not be deported after you become a citizen and citizenship once granted can not be revoked EXCEPT for Fraud during the immigration process,. In the US about 7 people a year have their citizenship revoked and are deported.
Most of these are drug dealers who lied about being drug dealers when they came to the US.
I posted a comment I don’t think got posted; basically the DNC just gets slimier and more revolting by the day. Nothing in this piece is particularly a surprise at this point; pond scum is looking at the modern dems and saying, ‘Hold my beer.’.
It is astonishing how low and nasty the true believers on the left have become, and I mean that, as an independent voter – I used to respect and vote for certain dems. There are myriad reasons and causes for their descent, but it’s just an indisputable fact in 2025. The modern left are truly a lost cause. Nuclear waste is less toxic, less caustic, less violent, and likely more intelligent.
James,
Pond scum is more useful. Adds oxygen to the water.
@Upstate
No doubt. Only exemplifies what the Professor has written. The dems have become something that used to be confined to a petri dish. They are a step away from being worse – a ur**e sample, such is their disconnect from basic humanity. Amoebas have more sense.
Actually, most algae blooms depletes oxygen concentrations from the water. Blue green algae’s like Anabeanna respirate nitrogen instead of CO2 required to create oxygen. There are also some cyanabacters that produce cyanide gas in their respiration and follow events like the red tide algae blooms. Algae blooms are what you see as pond scum, typically depleting oxygen concentrations.
Ain’t collage great!
^^^^strate fromm weekeepeeedeya.
OT: Trump is proposing a $12 billion farm aid package to help farmers hurt by his stupid trade policies with China. That is an admission that his trade policies failed the American farmers. Where will he get the $12 billion? Seems he keeps adding more and more to the deficit while the economy continues to stagnate under Trump’s incompetence.
X says: OT: Trump is proposing a $12 billion farm aid package to help farmers…
Not off topic: Mad King George X ALWAYS goes off topic with desperate deflections, gaslighting, projections and lies. All to get sexual gratification from posting BBBBUUUTTTT…. MUH TRUMPPP!!!! I WANT BIDEN BACK!!!!
@X
On topic: X is George, and who knows how many others in these comments, and I do not know how privileged he/they are to be able to do this ad nauseam every day, for literally years on end. You, ‘X’, are either very old and retired and bored, very young and privileged and stupid, or very well paid and possibly a combination of both.
I guess at least, in the age of algorithms, we can at least rest assured you are a very real and very pathetic person.
James,
Well said.
James,
I noted else where in response to HullBobby about in the past few days the many attempts by the annony morons to deflect or distract.
I think I have figured out why, The stages of a color revolution — and where the U.S. is right now
https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2025/12/the_stages_of_a_color_revolution_and_where_the_u_s_is_right_now.html
This is not the first reference to a “color revolution” I have seen.
A Strategic Assessment of the American Cultural Revolution and the National Security State
https://genflynn.substack.com/p/a-strategic-assessment-of-the-american
@Upstate
No disagreement. It has all been too coordinated in whatever way, and that too, in lock step. I quite honestly pity anyone on the left that thinks they are still acting out of compassion, which I’m sure they possess, I tend to think the best of people. They have quite simply been lied to, for too long, and I guess that is tough to accept. Possibly too much for some.
James,
America says Hi! to the Moscow bureau. Keep cranking those hours.
X obviously never read anything about assisting farmers. Farm assistance under Biden
Discrimination Relief: $2.2 billion (IRA) and other funds for Black and minority farmers who faced USDA loan discrimination, with direct payments and loan forgiveness.
Distressed Borrower Assistance: Approximately $2.5 billion in loan forgiveness and assistance under IRA Section 22006 for struggling farm loan borrowers.
Climate & Conservation: Over $3 billion in the Partnerships for Climate-Smart Commodities Program (IRA) to promote sustainable practices.
Market & Competition: Investments to expand independent meat processing, support local food systems, and help specialty crop farmers with market barriers.
Disaster & Economic Relief: Ad-hoc aid, including $10 billion in economic assistance and $20.8 billion in disaster assistance for 2023/2024 losses, passed through stopgap bills.
Stupid is as stupid who doesn’t know to check the history before he opens his big yap.
@Thinkitthrough
You are assuming that ‘X’ reads anything, or that they even are capable of reading, or at the least, understanding what they have read and then relating it to experience (yes, we used to teach that in grade school). You ask too much. Far too much.
X – to be clear – any legislative proposal seeking money is an admission of failure ?
We are spending 400B+/yr on PPACA are you admitting that is a Failure ?
We spend a trillion a year on defence – does than mean that is a failure ?
I oppose Trump’s Farm bill – as I have REPEATEDLY p[ointed out – the claim that Trade policies are harming farmers is Garbage.
There is not a single global commodity market that is less elastic that Farm products.
When one country changes where it buys something, That ALWAYS leave a whole to be filled by their former trade partner.
PERIOD.
Trump did not create the laws of economics.
US soy prices in 2020 were $8.43, In November they were 11.24
There is no need to aid Farmers.
Again I am libertarian – I oppose ALL government aide or meddling in the market.
Even if there actually was a negative impact of otehrwise legitimate govenrment polices on the market
TOUGH. That is how things go.
I oppose Welfare, I oppose Corporate Welfare. I opppose Farm Welfare.
The distortions and negative impacts of Government involvement in the free market is exactly the failure of Socialism.
All government actions in the marketplace distort prices and that distorts the allocation of resources.
Productions shifts away from meeting the wants and needs of the people to meeting the wishes of govenrment – and the people get less of what they want and need and more of what govenrment thinks they should want and need.
The result is inefficiency and waste – that means either actually declining standard of living or at the very best a lower rate of increase in standard of living.
This is one of the major reasons that quasi socialist Europe is in trouble. It has a standard of living that is almost 50% lower than the US – Working class people in the US have a standard of living that is as high as the middle class in Europe. US minorites live as well as middle class European Caucasians.
This is the consequence of decades of meddling in the economy.
The US should not repeat the mistakes of the USSR or the CCP during Mao or of Europe since WWII.
John Say,
“X – to be clear – any legislative proposal seeking money is an admission of failure ?”
That’s not what I said at all. You’re not suffering from reading comprehension problem too are you?
Trump’s need to bail out farmers because they were harmed by his incompetent use of tariffs and “trade deals” is an admission that his trade deals are failures. He wouldn’t need to do that if they were successful.
“I oppose Trump’s Farm bill – as I have REPEATEDLY p[ointed out – the claim that Trade policies are harming farmers is Garbage.”
His trade policies ARE harming farmers. Your denial doesn’t change reality.
George X says: That’s not what I said at all. You’re not suffering from reading comprehension problem too are you?
Nobody has ever seen this genius move from George X before, as he struggles to live in the adult world without a developed prefrontal cortex.
It’s another textbook George X rebuttal: tell a lie in hopes of covering the original lie – and then desperately add a claim that the only way anyone would disagree with George X is because they have reading comprehension problems.
“We’ve had 4% GDP growth in a couple of quarters,” Bessent told CBS News’ Face the Nation on Sunday, and “we’re going to finish the year … with 3% real GDP growth.” Gross domestic product grew only 0.6% in Q1, but 3.8% in Q2, and the Atlanta Fed estimates Q3 growth may have been 3.5%.
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/stock-market-live-december-8-153142165.html?guccounter=1
2025 US Deficit 1.78T – that is WAY to high.
2024 Deficit 1.85T
The Deficit is going DOWN under Trump – not up.
It is still way way way too high.
At the same time – because 2025 Spending is MOSTLY determined by the 2024 Budget we are not actually seeing much of the impact of Trump on the deficit yet.
FY 2026 began in October. CBO is projecting a deficit of 1.7T in 2026 – that is down from 2025.
Of course it is very early to guage that.
The decrease in the deficit in 2025 was the result of a 4% increase in spending – that is attributable to Biden and studid budgeting provisions that essentially require the govenrment to increase spending even if nothing changes.
But there was a 6% increase in Federal revenue – for a net DROP in the deficit.
This is NOT nearly enough
But YOU are LYING when you claim Trump is increasing the deficit.
He is decreasing it.
But debt is increasing – and it will every years that the US does not run a surplus which has not happened since Clinton was president. and Clinton an Gingrich brought US debt under control.
This statement is NOT true, and therefore the underlying premise today’s piece is faulty: “… the Steele dossier, leading to the false Russian collusion scandal. ” The Steele dossier was not the instigating incident for the Russian collusion investigation. Excerpted from “News.com.Au”:
“AN Australian diplomat is at the centre of the FBI’s investigation into Russia’s alleged meddling in the 2016 US election.
Information shared by Australia has reportedly helped spark the FBI’s probe into Russia’s attempts to disrupt the election and possible collusion by Donald Trump’s campaign, The New York Times reported Saturday.
George Papadopoulos, a former Trump campaign foreign policy adviser who has pleaded guilty to lying to the FBI, told Australia’s ex-foreign minister Alexander Downer that Russia had “dirt” on Hillary Clinton, information that Australia later passed on to its close ally the United States, the Times said.
The conversation between Papadopoulos and Downer, then Australia’s high commissioner to Britain, took place at an upscale London bar in May 2016, the Times said, after Papadopoulos had been told that Moscow had thousands of emails that would embarrass Hillary Clinton, the Democratic presidential challenger in the election which Trump won.
“Two months later, when leaked Democratic emails began appearing online, Australian officials passed the information about Mr Papadopoulos to their American counterparts,” the Times said, citing four current and former American and foreign officials with direct knowledge of the Australians’ role.
“It was first-hand information from one of America’s closest intelligence allies” that alarmed the FBI and helped prompt them to begin investigating, the Times said.
“The hacking and the revelation that a member of the Trump campaign may have had inside information about it were driving factors that led the FBI to open an investigation in July 2016,” the newspaper said.
The investigation was also spurred by intelligence from other allies, including the British and Dutch governments, the Times said.
It is also not clear why the Australian government waited two months to pass the information to the FBI, the Times said.
The Times said Papadopoulos shared this information with Downer, but it was unclear whether he also shared it with anyone in the Trump campaign.
Downer was Australia’s foreign minister from 1996 to 2007 and became high commissioner to Britain in 2014. He was also leader of the Liberal Party while it was in Opposition from May 1994 until January 1995.
Former Attorney-General George Brandis is about to head to London to replace him as High Commissioner to the UK.
Trump fired FBI director James Comey in May, citing Comey’s probe into possible links between the presidential campaign and Russian interference, as well as Comey’s alleged protection of Clinton.
Comey’s firing led to the appointment of Special Counsel Robert Mueller, who is carrying on the investigation, a wideranging probe that includes whether Trump’s campaign team colluded with Moscow, and whether there was possible obstruction of justice related to the firing of Comey.
Mueller’s team has already charged four people, including Papadopoulos, who pleaded guilty to lying over his Russian contacts and agreed to co-operate with the investigation.
Trump has repeatedly said there was “no collusion” between his campaign and Russia.
White House lawyer Ty Cobb declined to comment, saying in a statement that the administration is continuing to cooperate with the investigation now led by special counsel Robert Mueller “to help complete their inquiry expeditiously.”
Just another MAGA media effort to re-write history. There are many others.
While you are correct that the Papadoulis /Downer meeting was the initial trigger of investigations of the Trump campaign
you are otherwise completely inaccurate.
The FBI investigated the meeting in August of 2016 and within a Few Days was able to establish there was NOTHING to it.
Papadoulis had no inside knowledge of anything. His remarks to downers did NOT mention emails.
And could not have refered to the DNC emails even if they had.
There are significant further problems with that case and event as it appears that there were US paid spies – Halper to set up a honeytrap – that failed. It is illegal for US agents to spy on US persons without a Warrant, yet the purpose of the attempted entrapment of Page, and Papadoulis was to Get such a warrant.
Regardless, the Whole Halper, Page, Papadoulis nonsense entirely fizzled.
The Claim that Papadoulis reveal inside knowledge of the DNC hacking completely fizzled. Even Downer when interviewed by the FBI contradicted the story YOU are citing.
Yes, the Steele Dossier Was the trigger for the Collusion delusion. It just was NOT the only attempt to gin up a hoax to allow spying on the Trump campaign.
The Papadoulis “investigation” had DIED before the FBI started pursing the Steele Dossier.
To make things Worse the Steele Dossier investigation was constitutionaly DEAD by late December 2016, and dead as a door knob by early january 2017 When Danchenko was interviewed by the FBI and confirmed that evenrything in it was hoaxes, lies and rumous – mostly coming from the DNC and there were no sources for anything in it.
I would note that was BEFORE Mueller was appointed, Before Flynn was interviewed.
The Crossfire Hurricane investigtation was supposed to be closed when the Danchenko interview completely destroyed any reasonable suspicion that FBI had for the collusion delusion nonsense.
None other than Peter Strzok called on the agent responsible for Closing the investigation as unfounded and asked him to unconstitutionally keep it opened a few more days, so that he could conduct the Framing of Gen Flynn.
From Late December or early January at the very latest – the FBI had ZERO legitimate bases to continue Crossfire Huricane.
The PapaDoulis claim had collapsed – The steele Dossier had been established as a complete fabrication.
And there was no other foundation for the easonable suspicion necescary to keep the investigation opened.
The constitution does NOT allow law enforcement to conduct fishing expiditions.
Investigating US persons without reasonable suspicion necescary to do so is a CRIME – it is a violation of civil rights under color of law.
So absoluely everything that occured regarding Crossfire Huricane after Jan 5th 2017 was ILLEGAL, and a Criminal conspiracy to deprive people of their civil rights.
While it is POSSIBLE that Mueller did not know that his appointment was illegal immediately after he was appointed. He certainly knew by the time he got the Crossfire Huricane Records.
Mueller was constitutionally obligated to close the Special Counsel investigation the moment that he learned that Danchenko had asserted that there was no sources for the claims in the Steele Dossier – that is was all made up.
The entire Mueller special counsel investigation was Criminal Misconduct by all of those involved and it was an illegal and unconstitutional conspiracy against rights.
John Say says: While you are correct that the Papadoulis /Downer meeting was the initial trigger of investigations of the Trump campaign
you are otherwise completely inaccurate.
No, that is not correct. Followup investigations found that long before that meeting, Comey had FBI agents placing CIs i.e. “Case Agent 1” and “MITCH” inside the Trump campaign and already investigating Trump without even assigning those investigative efforts a name. That was months before the engineered meeting between Papadopoulis and Downer.
And Mueller, while he may now be functioning beside Biden in the Diaper Brigade, was fully cognizant at the time he accepted the Special Counsel appointment. He already knew that the “Russia Dossier” that his dear lifelong friend and business partner James Comey engineered was a product of Clinton and Obama for the Clinton election campaign. As did his primary police state fascist, Weissman. Weissmann in particular was present at the meeting prior to the election when Deputy Director Glen Ohr warned all of them that the Dossier he had obtained from his wife Nelly Ohr through DNC employment was political – not intelligence agency product.
And Mueller and Weissmann, like Comey, as lifelong prosecutors and investigators of federal crimes, knew that it was a criminal offence for a political campaign to hire foreigners to work on their political campaigns. Particularly when they hired foreign spies like Igor Danchenko to write their dossier – while he was at that time also being investigated by the FBI, suspected of committing espionage on behalf of Putin.
Other than that, yes, that entire post was pretty much Trump-Russia BS which should be long dead after having stakes driven through it’s heart by three seperate Inspector General’s reports, three different Congressional committee investigations that also ended up having Lisa Page admit under oath that she had texted Strzok several times to tell him that Obama was involved at the head of their “Russia” investigation and wanted to be kept up to date on what they were doing all the time.
And then there’s about three or four books now that detail all the information that Mueller’s solution to was to pretend it didn’t actually exist.
This statement is NOT true, and therefore the underlying premise today’s piece is faulty: “… the Steele dossier, leading to the false Russian collusion scandal.
Let’s lie to try rewriting Democrat felony history! Let’s try the “Australian diplomat” BullSchiff and hope nobody has read any of the later congressional findings, TWO Inspector General’s reports, and about three books written on this Democrat-Obama crime wave.
“Nothing To See Here, Please Believe Our Felons, Don’t Believe Your Lying Eyes™” And please forget what that other unindicted Democrat felon said, fired FBI Director Andrew McCabe: “Without the Trump-Russia Dossier we wouldn’t have been able to conduct our FISA warrant investigation of Trump”.
Once again, predictably, we have another one of the Democrat’s lying excuses for the massive felonies that were the Clinton/Obama fictional and felonious Trump-Russia Dossier.
The similarly exposed lie that it was all launched by the FBI (kicking four criminal investigations they were doing at the time of presidential candidate Clinton to the curb) because a half drunken Papadopolous told an Australian diplomat who searched him out for some reason or other to ask to meet with him, said something so alarming they had to investigate Trump for Russian collusion instead.
“There was no suggestion from Papadopoulos nor in the record of the meeting that we sent back to Canberra, there was no suggestion that there was collusion between Donald Trump or Donald Trump’s campaign and the Russians,” Downer said.
The FBI finally got around to interviewing the dangerous potential Russian spy, Popodopoulus, in January of 2017. EIGHT MONTHS after they began their repeated trips to FISA courts to perjure themselves to get felonious spy warrants about Trump. Which they’d already done before they talked to Downer about the meeting he requested with Papadopoulos… an inexplicable delay in such a serious investigation… for some reason or other.
Kind of like it taking them four years to find the J6 pipe bomber that the new FBI Director could figure out in about ten months using the exact same same information as Wray and Merrick Garland had all that time.
Obama’s poor ol’ FBI guys in the head office: so incompetent that they couldn’t multitask and continue their FOUR criminal investigations of Clinton regarding her Russia ties and Espionage Act felonies while also investigating Trump at the same time. (some might think that is actually deliberate… like the inability to find the J6 pipe bomber)
And while they hunted down Popadopoulus like he was one of the J6 grannies who trespassed to take a selfie on the Senate lawn, they couldn’t give the person most closely tied to the Russia Dossier scam, Professor Josef Mifsud, more than a five minute interview about his previous lies to the FBI prior to setting him free and sending him on his way.
No charges of “lying to the FBI” for Mifsud – just as there weren’t charges of perjury for those Obama FBI Directors and Attorney Generals who perjured themselves to FISA courts in order to jail Popadopoulus for lying.
But they never got around to interviewing Popadopolous until well after the initial BI memos show they were already investigating Trump, specifically hoping to find a Russia Conspiracy.after they were running to Judge Boasberg’s FISA courts to repeatedly perjure themselves that the felonious Russia Dossier was 100% verified as per the FISA courts mandatory Woods Procedures.
Just another commie Democrat police state fascist lie to cover the felonies of these criminal Democrats and their unindicted co-conspirator and also unindicted felon lawyer Marc Elias.
Democrat felony history! …. Democrat-Obama crime wave.
Anonymous @ 2:48. Excellent synopsis. MUST READ!
You could dip them in boiling oil and if the barrel was labeled “Trump” they would go in without a complaint.
“The Russian Collusion Hoax”
Seriously ?!?
Trump gets on national TV and asks Russia to find Hillary’s emails. The next day Russian hackers do just that and the emails are leaked. Fact.
The Mueller Report documents 146 contacts between the Trump campaign and Russian assets. Fact.
The Mueller Report documents 10 incidents of Trump interfering in the investigation of his campaign’s interactions with Russian assets which rise to the level of Obstruction of Justice. Trump’s AG Bill Barr decides not to take action. Fact.
I can’t think of any legitimate or ethical reason for any US Presidential candidate’s campaign to have even a single contact with Russian assets, let alone 146. But enlighten me – tell me why it is all perfectly proper.
And, please, don’t rant about the definition of “collusion” or that Trump was not convicted of anything. Address the three facts I listed and tell me why the allegations are properly called a “hoax”. Because I don’t buy it.
Roger,
You are absolutely correct with the facts you outline.
But unfortunately, as we well know, the MAGA mob prefers ALTERNATIVE FACTS.
Standby for a tirade of abusive nonsense from the MAGA mob.
Roger’s outline and the resulting ALTERNATIVE FACTS are the result of quite a bit of conspiracy theory inculcated by the Obama/Clinton democrats as part of their political cover-up, and aiding their 2016-Election coup d’etat with endless TDS news cycles to create public opinion and faith (like yours).
If you two can’t think of any legitimate reasons for any US candidates to have any contact with Russian assets, then you surely haven’t learned about Barak Obama and Hillary Clinton’s URANIUM ONE deals with Russia and the subsequent $145M (+) that enriched the Clinton Foundation. Such deal, strategically important to PUTIN. Guess who was part of HRC’s legal team??? ROBERT MUELLER!
https://thehill.com/policy/national-security/355749-fbi-uncovered-russian-bribery-plot-before-obama-administration/
Roger, that.
The Mueller report itself suggested that there was no evidence of coordination of conspiracy. Period.
Yes, there was suggestions that there were “contacts”. Many of those contacts were business related (not political) and many included Russians who were several degrees of separation from anyone in Russia who may have been trying to influence anything. They also included interactions during the transition in that number. My favorite example of silliness is still Manafort’s employee Konstantin Kilimnik – who is actually Ukrainian and not Russian (but he sounded Russian).
It’s almost as if you believe that the entire country of Russia (140 million) was all part of your so-called conspiracy, huh? Must have all been in on it, including some Ukrainians.
“coordination of conspiracy”
I wasn’t talking about the legal definition of conspiracy. The Mueller Reported, though, DID document contact with Russian assets, not all of whom were innocent “business” contacts, but were operatives. Sorry, but you can’t polish that turd.
The Mueller Reported, though, DID document contact with Russian assets, not all of whom were innocent “business” contacts, but were operatives. Sorry, but you can’t polish that turd.
Here you are, handing us all your turds and promising us we can pick them up by the clean ends. We’re speaking about Obama’s former FBI Director Mueller – who also joined Comey and Obama’s last two Attorney Generals in going before Judge Boasberg’s FISA courts to perjure himself about the fictional and felonious “Trump-Russia Dossier”, correct? Same guy you’re talking about?
How magical that Mueller and his 30 FBI agents on loan could track down all Russian contacts with those within the Trump campaign while investigating that “Dossier”. But (and this is AMAZING), with the very best of the best the FBI had to offer, it never occurred to Mueller or a single one of them to find out where the Russia Dossier they were investigating came from! Especially when their were fears it might have come from some Russians!
Mueller and his most evil unindicted police state felon Weissman, with the help of the best law enforcement people in the entire world, and they missed that!
A rookie Mexican cop on the beat for his first day wouldn’t miss that!
Found all those Russian contacts you’re desperately hoping you can use for insinuations – but somehow or other missed finding out that the “dossier” was commissioned and paid for by Clinton and Obama throwing DNC money in to keep it going.
The best of the best and they never thought to find out the origins – which would have led them to find out that Clinton and Obama were illegally paying a Russian spy to write that “dossier” and another spy, British spy Christopher Steele, to spread it through federal agencies and “leak” it to the news.
Mueller successfully fumbled his investigation so that all the Obama felons and Clinton were never discovered and indicted – but he was pure hell on wheels on discovering any Russian who in business, academic, or any other capacity had some sort of contact with somebody within the Trump campaign!
Better than that: with Comey as Mueller’s bestie inside and outside the FBI for over 20 years, he never once interviewed Comey of what he had learned about the dossier during his Special Counsel investigation.
Another amazing – but wonderfully helpful oversight. An investigation of his bestie would have been awkward, because Comey had already been told by CIA Director John Brennan while sitting with Obama and Biden, that Clinton was having a “Trump-Russia” document written to take the public heat off of her after the revelations of her Espionage Act felonies and the ongoing investigation into them.
But you tried, you little police state fascist commie Democrat, you did try.
There was no coordination because Putin knows he cannot count on Trump to follow through on anything.
The business contacts to the Trump Presidential Campaign Headquarters?
What business were the Russians seeking to get from the Trump Presidential Campaign? Decorating advice?
The Russians have been looking to get the best deals from Trump at the expense of the USA as much as possible.
RL
The DNC hack started over a year before Trump’s Remarks.
Further the claim that it was Russia that hacked the DNC was debinked long ago.
Crowdstrike – the alleged source of the claim the hack was by Russia testified to congress that they had absolutely no evidence that identified the source of the hack. While the Hackers used One old version of a Russian hacking tool, That Tool – as well as tools from the CIA that were released by Snowden was avaialble to every hacker in the world. Numerous hacks that We KNOW came from Turkey, Pakistan and elsewhere in the world used the FancyBear and CozyBear hacking tools. The Claim by Guicifer 2.0 that he had Hacked the DNC was also completely debunked – as were any consequential ties between him and Russia.
Further todate there is no evidence that the DNC emails that were released were exfiltrated from the DNC by Hackers. The crowdstrike analysis of the Hack found evidence in Loggs of Hackers getting into the DNC servers on several occasions over a 15+ month period ENDING in May 2016, and rummaging arround those servers, But it NEVER found evidence of anything being removed by those hackers or access to the DNC emails.
Conversely the VIPS analysis of the DNC email release strongly indicates they were likely copied to a USB stick by someone in the DNC rather than hacked.
Finally Trump asked Russia to Release the Clinton State Department Emails NOT the DNC emails which no one knew about at the time of his Remarks.
Hillaries Emails – were the emails that were on her unsecured basement bathroom server.
Trump’s request for Russia to release them would be HUGE if Russia had done so.
Not because Trump would have done anything wrong.
But because If Russia was in possession of the US state department classified Emails from Clinton’s unsecured that would have entirely obliterated Comey’s smary attempt to exhonerate Clinton.
It would prove beyond any doubt that Clinton’s mishandling of classified documents resulted in their getting into the hands of a hostile foreign power.
If Russia established they had Clintons Sate Department emails – Clinton was going to jail.
Regardless, Putin was NEVER going to do that – as has now been confirmed repeatedly – Putin wanted Clinton NOT Trump as president.
The idiotic claim that Putin favored Trump is garbage that Brennan manufactured it was NOT the evidence based conclusion of CIA analysts.
You rant that there were 146 connections between the Trump campaign and Russia – this is mostly false and what little is not is NONSENSE.
Absolutely Trump conducted the 2013 Mis Universe pagent in Moscow – as a result he had LOTS of contacts with Russians. It is even possible that some of them were Russian intelligence. None of those contacts were illegal and none of them mean anything beyond that Trump conducted a Beauty pagent in Russia and Tried unsuccessfully to build a Trump Tower in Moscow.
Conversely Hillary Clinton had Thousands of contacts with Russia – including contacts with people she KNEW were Russian Intelligence.
She was after all the US secretary of State.
It is irrelevant whether you can find some coincidental or even intentional contact between either Clinton or Trump and Russia that is because of their legitimate activities. Even Outside the state department – Clinton received Hundreds of Millions of dollars from Russian Oligarchs. and Bill Clinton received half a million in CASH from Russia for a speech in Moscow.
Further we KNOW that Hillary granted expedited access to the State department for those who contributed to the Clinton Foundation including Russians.
“The DNC hack started over a year before Trump’s Remarks.” etc etc etc
Please.
Yes, we all know Trump does business in Russia. The question is what the devil is his CAMPAIGN doing interacting with Russian government assets. It was not ethical or innocent.
The Mueller Report documents:
The report details a broad set of contacts, including:
Outreach from Russian‑linked individuals offering “political synergy” and assistance to the campaign.
Discussions about a potential Trump Tower Moscow project that continued into the campaign period.
Social‑media amplification by campaign figures of content produced by Russian troll accounts.
Multiple meetings and communications between campaign officials and Russian officials or intermediaries, including the June 9, 2016 Trump Tower meeting with a Russian lawyer who was described as bringing damaging information on Hillary Clinton.
12 Russian operatives were indicted by Mueller himself for interfering in the 2016 election in a number of ways, including hacking the DNC and Hillary Clinton. This was accomplished by the Russian government using two intelligence units, and is of “high probability” according to the U.S. intelligence community, the Justice Department, and bipartisan congressional reports.
“Assessing Russian Activities and Intentions in Recent US Elections” is a (2017) declassified version of a highly classified assessment that has been provided to the President and to recipients approved by the President. It was published by the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, documents Russian interference on Trump’s behalf, and can be found here:
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/9a/Intelligence_Community_Assessment_-_Assessing_Russian_Activities_and_Intentions_in_Recent_US_Elections.pdf
Imagine if Kamala Harris got on TV and asked Iran to release the Epstein files and they mysteriously appeared a week later. Imagine if her campaign had 146 contacts with Iranian operatives. And then she won the election. Imagine if Democratic attorney bloggers kept writing about the “Iran Collusion Hoax”.
Please. Yes, we all know Trump does business in Russia. The question is what the devil is his CAMPAIGN doing interacting with Russian government assets. It was not ethical or innocent.
Please: your projecting is sophomorically inept. Yes, we know Putin was doing business with Hillary Clinton to the tune of $30 million dollars given to her while she was Obama’s Secretary of State. And another cool $500,000 to BJ Clinton through Putin banks to give a 20 minute speech.
Putin hasn’t had any spare cash for the Clintons since she was no longer SecState and failed to win the presidency. What was Putin buying with that Clinton Cash he paid?
And Obama got caught on a hot mic passing a message to Putin that if he would just behave himself and not invade any more countries until after he was had successfully won his final election, he would “give him some space”.
Which Putin did, and shortly after Obama won his last election, his second term as president – Putin invaded Ukraine while Obama looked on and did nothing.
Both Clinton and Obama then doubled down to illegally hire a Russian spy who was currently under FBI investigation for espionage, Igor Danchenko, to write their fictional and felonious “Trump-Russia Dossier”.
To quote a lying Democrat apparatchik you’re very close with: “It was not ethical or innocent”. To that I will add, it was criminal.
It looks like your problem is that Bill an Hillary Clinton swindled Russian oligarchs out of millions of dollars and, in return, did them zero favors.
Unlike Trump, who has promised the mineral rich territory of Ukraine to be handed on a silver platter to Putin.
You can write all the fan fiction you like, but Trump will not be helping you, not even with your inept spelling.
RL – If you wish to continue to buy the idiotic collusion delusion nonsense – you are free to do so.
You rant about the Mueller report.
Prosecutors speak in court through indictments and convictions.
Mueller’s report makes LOTS of claims – but NONE of its prosecutions substantiate ANY of that Mueller “gossip”.
There is a SINGLE Russian entity that Mueller attempted to prosecute, and that ended up in a very early dismissal and threats to hold Mueller in contempt for making claims that he had no evidence to support.
The only successful effort by Mueller to “get” a Russian. Was Maria Butina who was a Russian college student in the US who was a gun rights advocate and appears to have had romantic relationships with a few NRA members. Mueller held her in Solitary for 18months and eventually got her to plead guilty in order to get released and deported back to Russia. There is no actual evidence that she did anything wrong.
She certainly had nothing to do with the Trump campaign or even any actual US politician. It is POSSIBLE though highly unlikely that she was a Russian agent – but if so her target was the NRA.
Papadoulis was extorted into a guilty plea for mistating the date of an email in an FBI interview – after 80 hours of interviews by the FBI.
Van Zandt plead guilty for a similar slip. Manafort who was barely with the Trump campaign for a few days was convicted of tax evasion for being sloppy about documenting loans that he had taken from himself. Had he documented them properly they would have been perfctly legal.
He was also convicted of violating FARA – which just goes to prove how corrupt Mueller and the courts and juries were.
Manafort did NOT engage in lobbying for Ukraine or other foreign govenrments in the US. He Hired Tony Podesta to handle the US lobbying side of his services for foreign govenrments. It was Podesta that did not register with FARA.
This also demonstrates how nepotistic politics is. Tony Podesta is a major Democratic Lawyer – similar to Marc Elias, and the borther of John Podesta who was the idiot at the DNC who clicked on something in an email he should not have that allowed the DNC hack to take place.
The Mueller investigation was Unconstitional and an illegal criminal conspiracy to violate rights under color of law.
And those involved KNEW they had no foundation for their investigation – and still F#$Ked over people anyway.
If the Trump DOJ was going after Leticia James for Mortgage Fraud in VA – and James did not own a house in VA – that would be the same as the Mueller investigation.
People are not stupid. Trump’s DOJ is going after political enemies for REAL CRIMES that they actually committed – Mortgage Fraud Perjury.
Crimes that ordinary people understand. Crimes where there is REAL evidence that people can see, touch and feel.
Usually crimes that Ordinary people would be prosecuted for if they committed them.
Not this delusional nonsense investigating pee tapes that never existed, or alleged collusion because an international business man knows people in foreign countries.
RL – Carter Page – a US Naval Academy Graduate was also a US Asset being used by the CIA to spy on Russia. Long before he had anything to do with the Trump campaign.
Carter Page absolutely undeniably had many many contacts with Russia – probably even with Russian state operatives. Alone he may have over the years had hundreds of such contacts.
Page is the main target of surveilance in the FISA warrants that are at the core of the entire Crossfire Huricane and later Mueller investigation.
Keven Klinesmith plead guilty to lying to the FISA court – by altering an email from the CIA that confirmed that Page was a CIA asset such that the altered email denied that Page was a CIA asset.
Who knows what the FISA court would have done had they known the truth – after all Judge Boasberg was the Judge in these FISA warrant applications – and we now know that he does not actually read the warrant and subpoena applications he signs.
Regardless, correctly identifying Page as a CIA asset combined with the fact that the rest of the FISA warrant application – the Steele Dossier was a HOAX. does not readh the standard of reasonable suspicion required to open an investigation – much less probable cause needed for a warrant.
John Say says: Who knows what the FISA court would have done had they known the truth – after all Judge Boasberg was the Judge in these FISA warrant applications – and we now know that he does not actually read the warrant and subpoena applications he signs.
Didn’t know – or studied and careful willful blindness? The extent of the criminal corruption within the Obama Administration’s FBI Directors, last two Attorney Generals, and Special Counsel Robert Mueller is so expansive that, after Boasberg had incontrovertible evidence that this cabal at the highest levels of American law enforcement had repeatedly perjured themselves to both he and the FISA courts… HE DIDN’T HAUL A SINGLE ONE OF THEM BACK INTO HIS COURTROOM TO FACE CRIMINAL SANCTIONS FOR THEIR REPEATED FELONIES RIGHT THERE IN FRONT OF HIM.
And as a related note, the “Woods Procedures” are a FISA-court ordered process that those requesting FISA warrants must put their evidence through. They were formed to ensure what they intend to put before the FISA courts is both 100% accurate and that there is no discoverable exculpatory evidence that might throw question on the material being used to request that spy warrant.
They were instituted after then FBI Director Robert Mueller was hauled in front of the courts after it was discovered that the FBI under his leadership were regularly lying their asses off in their FISA applications
FBI Director Mueller Hauled Before Secret FISA Court To Address FBI Abuses, Congress Told
https://thehill.com/opinion/white-house/428755-mueller-hauled-before-secret-fisa-court-to-address-fbi-abuses-in-2002/
Robert Mueller, the former FBI director and current special prosecutor in the Russia case, once was hauled before the nation’s secret intelligence court to address a large number of instances in which the FBI cheated on sensitive surveillance warrants… Mueller told the court the FBI had created a new system called the Woods Procedures — named for the FBI lawyer who drafted them — to ensure FISA warrant applications were accurate and did not omit material information.
Thanks to congressional oversight and declassified documents, we now know the FBI failed to tell the court that the primary evidence it and Mueller used to support their warrants — the so-called Steele dossier — was political opposition research produced on behalf of and paid for by the Democratic Party and Hillary Clinton’s campaign, in hopes of harming Trump’s election chances.
None of those admissions and lecturing stopped later Special Counsel Robert Mueller going further and perjuring his own ass off to get the FISA spy warrant he wanted. And to violate the Woods Procedures he himself had put in place to save his ass and FBI Directorship the first time he and his FBI were found to have abused FISA warrants.
Mueller and the rest of Obama’s felons swore under oath the evidence they put before the FISA courts had gone through the mandatory Woods Procedures – when in fact they deliberately avoided doing that.
That’s even more relevant because the reason the “Woods Procedures” exist in the first place is because Chief Justice Roberts in an earlier review of FISA warrants found that then FBI Director Mueller had presented shady, disingenuous and unsupportable evidence while omitting exculpatory evidence over 70 times previously to obtain FISA spy warrants. Which then lead to the Congressional oversight hearings that followed.
Judge Boasberg was completely unaware of the importance of the Woods Procedures prior to the history of his FISA courts just a few years earlier?
And here we are now. None of Obama’s felons in the FBI or DOJ have been charged, nor has Mueller, for their perjury in Boasberg’s FISA courts. None of them including Boasberg have been charged for depriving THOUSANDS of ordinary citizens of their First and Fourth Amendment rights through color of law.
And Chief Justice Roberts still sees no need to address any of that occurring due to the way the FISA courts he’s ultimately responsible for are ran. Nor does he see a problem with Boasberg continuing to wage lawfare from the bench, just as he did before from FISA.
Justice Roberts’ term of willful blind eyes turned towards FISA courts used as Soviet-style weapons for political lawfare, along with his equal willingness to often deliberately rewrite Congressional intent such as his two opinions making Obamacare constitutional may end giving future legal scholars something to argue over. Whether Chief Justice Taney and his Dred Scott decision are better or worse than Roberts’ willful neglect of FISA court criminality and judicial legislating from the SCOTUS bench.
I don’t know if it amounts to a RICO Democrat crime wave, or if there is such a thing as a federal grand conspiracy, but there’s enough crime going around among these Democrats to need attention to prevent them continuing to do it.
Trump has alternative facts and he’s the bestest, bigliest Covefe ever.
Trump has alternative facts and he’s the bestest, bigliest Covefe ever.
Nothing remotely as alternative as your fictional and felonious Russia Dossier and alternative fact that you’re now actually a woman… because you say you’re the best alternative to real women ever.
May or may not be the bestest, bigliest case of TDS ever. But that’s a very high bar to pass.
Roger Lambert – Can you provide the evidence that Russian actors hacked Clinton’s private email server? Both the State Dept and the DOJ denied that a foreign power hacked her state department account.
Roger
Where did Steele buy Hillary her information from? With Hillary’s illegal server, it’s a fact that her handling of highly classified documents was intercepted by foreign intelligence agents. Trump knew it, Assange knew it, our own FBI knew it. It was Hillary colluding and conspiring a fraud against Trump that was the real Russian conspiracy. Yellow Cake anyone, you can wash it down with some pee pee tape.
Mr. Marc Elias and all the other leftist’s floating on a pile of crap smelling the whole country of a putrid rotting concept of a bright future of a nanny state where you shouldn’t worry your pretty little head everything will be alright.
The issue is more important than the players; elections are the glue which holds the country together, without true and impartial elections we will descend into the abyss.
A younger me always felt one of the errors of the Constitution was the lack of a right to a plebiscite (referendum) by the citizens. After starting my first business and hiring employees I became aware of their gullibility and lack of understanding what was being given to them by the government was being taken from them by the government and thought what it would look like if the public could elect benefits to themselves. That’s what has happened in places like California or should I say most all states where there is a majority lacking understanding or are downright lazy to the concepts of freedom from tyranny.
*. OT Has California GOP filed to stop the partisan gerrymander? Equal protection, interference in vote and electoral, just bad faith. 40% of California voters are republican. They’ve been cut to 4 representatives out of 53. It’s one thing to prepare maps contiguous and compact without considering partisanship and another thing considering partisanship. Texas was the former.
You need to get your facts straight.
In the Supreme Court decision allowing Texas to gerrymander, Alito explicitly stated that the Texas gerrymander is allowable because it is purely partisan.
Partisan gerrymandering is allowable.
Alito also said that the California gerrymander is equally partisan and allowable, so there will be no attempt by the GOP to block California.
Rabble:
Got any sauce with that pasta? You didn’t even cook it. You’ve got dry noodle sticks on a plate.
It would be great if you understood what Alito meant. No, I’m not splainin’ it.
Partisan gerrymanders are 100% legal. The problem with the California one is that it was consciously based on race. The designer openly admitted it. So it stands a decent chance of being struck down.
Alito also said that the California gerrymander is equally partisan and allowable
Did he really say that? How could he possibly know, since he hasn’t yet heard that case? I can’t believe he would prejudge a pending case like that.
OK, I looked it up. He does have a throwaway line saying this, but it’s pure dicta, and if/when the case ever gets before him and he reads the briefs he may very well decide otherwise.
Thank you professor for reminding us of Elias various attempts to undermine democracy.
It is lamentable that Marc Elias exists. But the strategy of removing inconvenient people from the ballot did not originate with him. The DNC and the Democratic Party has for years tried to kick inconvenient people off the ballot, and now they have started adding “false flag” candidates to ballots to confuse Republican voters. Nice people.
….And they make up stories about the National Guard (Trump’s Military arm) being used to influence or deter the vote. Goes to show how weak shallow and their brains are—the things done under the color of blue-collar, i.e., Elias’s skills, are far more insidious and dangerous.
Rabble:
I hope at some point the president uses his actual military arm (The USMC) to scare them by giving them a taste of what they say he does.
What is truly lamentable is that he has not been disbarred.
I give Marc Elias one thing. He is clever……………….in a Machiavellian sort of way.
It’s no wonder that there are few attorneys who want to reciprocally engage him in some of his lower-level petty schemes and maneuvers.
Curiously, he seems uncertain about loyalty. One of his more recent controversial moves is to compel Elias Law Group employees to non-disclosure agreements and arbitration-only dispute resolution. What is he afraid of?
https://news.bloomberglaw.com/business-and-practice/marc-elias-firm-sees-four-exits-after-forcing-arbitration-deals
As per the article, and for the historically-challenged, with a few important additions:
“Elias has long cemented his position as a fierce legal advocate in Democratic and progressive circles, including for Hillary Clinton’s 2016 presidential campaign [facilitating the Russia Collusion fabrication and the dirty “Steele Dossier]. He took over Perkins Coie’s political law group in 2009 after Bob Bauer, who was President Barack Obama’s top campaign lawyer, joined the White House [facilitating the dirty “Steele Dossier,” including Bruce and Nelly Orr, co-conspirators, and the subsequent FISA Court/Boasberg abuses!].”
Elias is as fiercely-dirty as they come, and merits disbarment.
Why would that be cause for raising suspicion? Every law firm imposes contractual limitations on its employees. Is it not their prerogative? It’s not out of the ordinary.
Why would “compelling Elias Law Group employees to non-disclosure agreements and arbitration-only dispute resolution” be cause for suspicion???
Go back to your strong feelings and suspicions about the Stormy Daniels “non-disclosure.” At that time, NO TDS-leftist had one-iota of understanding a “prerogative,” something “not out of the ordinary.” So, admit it, there was NO substantive difference for the implications of self-protection in such an agreement for Trump, and yet you all went to the depths of hell, with fevers and screams, to raise further suspicions….
Lin, given the reputation of the unindicted felon, Marc Elias, any attorney getting in line to work with such a immoral, corrupt and criminal man is already letting the world know they’re the same kind of person and the same kind of lawyer as Marc Elias is.
They, like Elias, have no fear whatsoever that their Bar Association will take disciplinary action against them when Elias has yet to be disbarred, never mind criminally indicted.
Felons of a feather flock together, and all that stuff.