192
   

monitoring Trump and relevant contemporary events

 
 
layman
 
  -3  
Sun 17 Dec, 2017 06:50 am
@izzythepush,
izzythepush wrote:


Quote:
"When we have obtained emails in the course of our ongoing criminal investigation, we have secured either the account owner's consent or appropriate criminal process," Peter Carr said.


http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-42382628


This is not "desperation," it is basic constitutional law. Any person can "consent" to a search of their own property, but they CAN'T give valid consent to search someone else's property.

A landlord, who owns the real property, cannot, for example, authorize the police to search premises which he "owns," but which he has rented to another. Consent from the tenant would be required. Either that, or a warrant. Otherwise there would be a 4th amendment violation.

Mueller's office is trying to play games by claiming the GSA gave "valid" consent. But the GSA would not have the authority to give valid consent. They "let" (rented) their offices and equipment to Trump's transition team, but they did NOT "own" their work product, attorney-client communications, private correspondence, etc., even if it was placed on equipment which they "owned." The were not the "account owner" for search purposes, as Mueller claims (disingenuously).
0 Replies
 
izzythepush
 
  1  
Sun 17 Dec, 2017 06:50 am
@farmerman,
It was fairly obvious what you meant, but you also implied that the Hugo Boss label had been fatally damaged by its association with Nazi Germany. The truth is it's thriving, and in no need of resurrection although it would probably shy away from being associated with Trump. You should check out the facts before you start spouting such nonsense, and if you have to accuse others of stupidity for pointing out your errors then you've already lost the argument.

Btw,I'm sure there's plenty of clothing companies in the deep south more than willing to provide uniforms for today's neo Nazis.
farmerman
 
  5  
Sun 17 Dec, 2017 07:10 am
@izzythepush,
makin up **** again eh?

Then why bring it up as if Revelette or I didnt understand what we were originally talking about.

0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  6  
Sun 17 Dec, 2017 07:24 am
Quote:
American liberals and other critics of Donald Trump have been beset for weeks now with a growing sense of dread that the president will fire Justice Department Special Counsel Robert Mueller, goaded into setting off a constitutional crisis by hyperventilating right-wing pundits and Republican members of Congress, all acting in bad faith.

These conservatives have seized on irrelevancies, like the fact that members of Mueller’s team donated to Democrats, and questionable concerns, like the fact that one of Mueller’s investigators appeared to hold Trump in deep disdain, to suggest the investigation is irreparably tainted by bias. (Note: Mueller is a Republican, FBI Director Chris Wray is a Republican, Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein is a Republican, and every prosecutor who investigated Bill Clinton was a Republican.)
brian Beutler

And there's this bit
Quote:
Rep. John Ratcliffe (R-TX) argued at a House Judiciary Committee hearing this week that the Mueller investigation might cause people to lose faith in the American justice system, and that we might “lose the Republic” as a result.
He says this while knowing that the project underway to encourage citizens to mistrust the FBI is entirely a right wing creation coming from Trump, senior GOP politicians and the right wing media universe. These are ugly people. And the GOP has become a very, very ugly party.
Below viewing threshold (view)
Below viewing threshold (view)
hightor
 
  5  
Sun 17 Dec, 2017 07:52 am
@layman,
Quote:
No matter how destructive of democracy it was, no matter how criminal it was, it was all justified because Trump had to be kept out of office by any means necessary.

But what was "destructive to democracy"? What was "criminal"? And if "Trump had to be kept out of office by any means necessary" why is he sitting there now? Pretty ineffective "deep state" if you ask me. Putin would not be impressed.
Quote:
It's useless to try to justify it on policy or moral grounds.

And unnecessary since "it" — "their attempts to sabotage Trump's campaign"— never happened.
Below viewing threshold (view)
blatham
 
  4  
Sun 17 Dec, 2017 07:59 am
Quote:
The past year of research has made it very clear: Trump won because of racial resentment
Another study produces the same findings we’ve seen over and over again.
Vox

Remember the constant right wing chant from eight years ago about how Obama had been "palling around with terrorists"? It wasn't just a smear, it was a lie. And an implication of this lie (in some cases, explicitly stated) was that Obama had his strongest affinities for non-white culture and values. Fox News promotion of "the terrorist fist jab" was just one of countless examples.

But as I said, the above stuff were lies.

And as to "palling around with", have you noticed that nowhere and nowhen has anyone in right wing media made the far more obvious and absolutely truthful claim that Trump along with his family and many in his transition team and his administration have a long record of palling around with corrupt Russian kleptocrats.
0 Replies
 
layman
 
  -4  
Sun 17 Dec, 2017 08:03 am
@hightor,
hightor wrote:
But what was "destructive to democracy"? What was "criminal"?


Hahahahahaha, just like a cheese-eater to have to ask, as though overturning the will of the voters by way of surreptitious illegal methods could not possibly be damaging to a democratic society, eh?

Quote:
if "Trump had to be kept out of office by any means necessary" why is he sitting there now? Pretty ineffective "deep state" if you ask me. Putin would not be impressed.


No one is impressed.

Quote:
It's useless to try to justify it on policy or moral grounds.


Quote:
And unnecessary since "it" — "their attempts to sabotage Trump's campaign"— never happened.


Hahahahahahaha. Nice try, cheese-eater.
blatham
 
  2  
Sun 17 Dec, 2017 08:14 am
There's a very good essay/book review up at NYRB. But I'll excerpt just the following bit because it relates to a recent discussion here on what "neoconservative" means and the key role of Leo Strauss in this story.
Quote:
...Until recently, the Claremont Institute had been seen as an outlier in the conservative firmament. For decades, the guiding spirit of Claremont was a brilliant and querulous scholar named Harry Jaffa. In 1964, Jaffa, who had been Strauss’s first disciple at the New School for Social Research and had followed him to Chicago as a student, worked on Barry Goldwater’s presidential campaign as a speechwriter, and soon after joined Claremont McKenna College in California. There he cultivated what became known as “West Coast Straussians,” in opposition to “East Coast Straussians.”

His main antagonist was Allan Bloom at the University of Chicago, author of the 1987 best seller The Closing of the American Mind. A number of Bloom’s students went on to become prominent academics or government officials, including Paul Wolfowitz and Francis Fukuyama. Other East Coast Straussians include William Kristol, who studied with the conservative political philosopher Harvey C. Mansfield at Harvard, and Yuval Levin, the editor of National Affairs and the champion of the “reformicon” movement, which attempts to appeal to the middle class rather than focusing on tax cuts for the wealthy.

After Strauss’s death in 1973, the battle among his disciples over his true legacy erupted...
0 Replies
 
hightor
 
  5  
Sun 17 Dec, 2017 08:54 am
@layman,
Quote:
as though overturning the will of the voters by way of surreptitious illegal methods could not possibly be damaging to a democratic society

Are you saying that the "will of the voters" was overturned? How? Where? I thought Trump won fair and square.
Quote:
false information disseminated in an attempt to convince the public that Trump was a russian agent

So now he's being accused of being a Russian agent???
layman
 
  -4  
Sun 17 Dec, 2017 08:57 am
@hightor,
hightor wrote:

Quote:
as though overturning the will of the voters by way of surreptitious illegal methods could not possibly be damaging to a democratic society

Are you saying that the "will of the voters" was overturned? How? Where? I thought Trump won fair and square.


Heh, Hi, do us both a favor and just quit playing the ignorant fool, eh?
Below viewing threshold (view)
hightor
 
  2  
Sun 17 Dec, 2017 09:05 am
@layman,
Hey, I'm just trying to understand what you're saying here. It seems there's a counter-narrative being spun which doesn't rely on evidence as much as innuendo. It looks like a bizarro world where every charge made against or suspicion raised about Trump is quickly followed with a similar charge being leveled at Schumer, H. Clinton, Mueller, et al. It just all seems so hastily contrived. Meanwhile there are a couple of actual indictments and a guilty plea to explain.
0 Replies
 
revelette1
 
  5  
Sun 17 Dec, 2017 09:06 am
Quote:

GSA Deputy Counsel Lenny Loewentritt told Buzzfeed that Beckler didn't make a commitment to the transition team that requests from law enforcement for materials would be routed through transition lawyers.
Loewentritt said the transition was informed that by using government devices, the agency wouldn't hold back records from law enforcement.

Transition officials signed agreements that warn them that materials kept on the government servers are subject to monitoring and auditing, he told Buzzfeed, and there's no expectation of privacy.


AP
Lash
 
  -3  
Sun 17 Dec, 2017 09:06 am
@layman,
layman wrote:

If it had surfaced that the FBI and other intelligence agencies had concocted some illegal scheme to get Obama removed from office if he was elected, the cheese-eaters would still be screaming today.

But given that it happened to Trump, not Obama, it's all laudable and every available propaganda tool is being employed to justify it.

This is what it’s all about.

If they’re allowed to overturn any presidency—even an outrageously unpopular one—even the tattered semblance of democracy we cling to is shelved.

There are political operatives on both sides of the duopoly within our spy agencies taking political action to attack the opposition party and cover for their aligned party. This has been going on forever, but because our spy agencies (FBI, CIA, NSA, etc) operate with no accountability or oversight, they’ve gotten sloppy.

You are ******* up more than you know to embolden this, Trump or not.
0 Replies
 
hightor
 
  4  
Sun 17 Dec, 2017 09:08 am
@layman,
Quote:
Last week, some muslim fanatic tried to blow up hundreds of people in a NYC subway.

But there was actual evidence that he did this. CC video, minor injuries to bystanders, and burns on the miscreant himself. Kind of difficult for him to deny it. It was real news.
Quote:
If it had surfaced that the FBI and other intelligence agencies had concocted some illegal scheme to get Obama removed from office if he was elected, the cheese-eaters would still be screaming today.

What do you mean? Who came up with the Kenyan birth accusations? How do you know it wasn't the FBI or other intelligence agencies, eh? And if it had been true Obama wouldn't have even been president. Nice try doughnut-eaters! Better luck next time.
layman
 
  -3  
Sun 17 Dec, 2017 09:13 am
@hightor,
Strzok and Andy's "insurance plan" was not revealed in some bogus email.
0 Replies
 
layman
 
  -4  
Sun 17 Dec, 2017 09:28 am
@revelette1,
revelette1 wrote:

Quote:

GSA Deputy Counsel Lenny Loewentritt told Buzzfeed that Beckler didn't make a commitment to the transition team that requests from law enforcement for materials would be routed through transition lawyers.
Loewentritt said the transition was informed that by using government devices, the agency wouldn't hold back records from law enforcement.

Transition officials signed agreements that warn them that materials kept on the government servers are subject to monitoring and auditing, he told Buzzfeed, and there's no expectation of privacy.


AP


Ya left out an important part of the article you cite, eh? To wit:

Quote:
Langhofer also said that a GSA official appointed by Trump in May had assured the transition in June that any request for records from Mueller's office would be referred to the transition's attorneys. According to Langhofer, the assurance was made by then-GSA General Counsel Richard Beckler...

The documents were provided to Mueller's team by the GSA in September in response to requests from the FBI, but the transition wasn't informed at the time, according to people familiar with the transition organization. Officials with Trump for America learned last Wednesday that GSA officials had turned over the cache of emails to Mueller's team.

The investigators did not directly request the records from Trump's still-existing transition group, Trump for America, and instead obtained them from the General Services Administration, a separate federal agency that stored the material, according to those familiar with the Trump transition organization.

The tens of thousands of emails in question pertain to 13 senior Trump transition officials. Many of the emails that Mueller's investigators have now include national security discussions about possible Trump international aims as well as candid assessments of candidates for top government posts, said those familiar with the transition.


It's truly amazing that the FBI did NOT try to set up the transition team by trying to obtain all the documents they had already stolen to see if they could claim some were withheld in violation of law, eh?

 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.78 seconds on 11/17/2024 at 04:43:45