192
   

monitoring Trump and relevant contemporary events

 
 
snood
 
  3  
Sun 24 Nov, 2019 09:21 am
Womp-womp.
Aw, I guess the investigation led by US Attorney John Durham isn’t going to result in democrats going to jail after all.

Quote:
...Horowitz will conclude that the application still had a proper legal and factual basis, and, more broadly, that FBI officials did not act improperly in opening the Russia investigation ...


https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/justice-dept-watchdog-finds-political-bias-did-not-taint-top-officials-running-the-fbis-russia-probe-but-documents-other-errors/2019/11/22/4b2f51de-0d48-11ea-97ac-a7ccc8dd1ebc_story.html

Guess you Trumpie conspiracy cravers will have to cook up something else to distract from all the mess the doofus orange dirt clod and his minions have created.
revelette3
 
  2  
Sun 24 Nov, 2019 09:23 am
@snood,
He if he is subpoenaed, he said he will, or his lawyer said he would.

Bolton's lawyer says the ex-Trump adviser knows of undisclosed Ukraine meetings, conversations
neptuneblue
 
  2  
Sun 24 Nov, 2019 09:24 am
@izzythepush,
Yes, Izzy, it is a play on words. "the word twit is correct in this case but its other meaning makes it ironic as it's the social media of choice for the biggest idiot ever to serve as president?"



revelette3
 
  3  
Sun 24 Nov, 2019 09:27 am
@snood,
I guess they will say Horowitz is part of Deep State because they did find factual errors in the warrant. Like the Mueller report, it can twisted either way but at the end of the day, the Russian report, is what it is and Trump was/is always wrong.
snood
 
  2  
Sun 24 Nov, 2019 09:32 am
@revelette3,
Actually, what his lawyer - Cooper - says in the article you provided a link for, was that he is “willing to testify if the courts resolve a conflict between a White House directive not to testify and a congressional subpoena compelling such testimony.”
So, he’s not coming if subpoenaed - but only if the courts say he must. That sounds nebulous because it is meant to- they know that the courts could stay tied up for months over this.
snood
 
  2  
Sun 24 Nov, 2019 09:36 am
@revelette3,
They found one low level lawyer that had altered a document. I’m sure the aluminum beanies will say that means the whole investigation was bogus, but when it comes out on Dec 9, it’s message will be that the Russia investigation was started properly, and was not influenced by partisan motives.
0 Replies
 
izzythepush
 
  3  
Sun 24 Nov, 2019 09:36 am
@neptuneblue,
Thank you. I didn't know if twit had the same meaning over there.

Fanny doesn't.
0 Replies
 
revelette3
 
  2  
Sun 24 Nov, 2019 11:50 am
@snood,
Thank you, I actually didn't read it again, I just remembered something to the effect weeks ago and looked it up on google. I was in a hurry, (church) but chances are pretty good I might have missed that point anyway.

Edit:

Having taken the time to read it, I see the house withdrew the subpoena in favor of Charles Kupperman; so the point might be mute.
0 Replies
 
hightor
 
  5  
Sun 24 Nov, 2019 12:46 pm
The Double-Barreled Dream World of Trump and His Enablers

They wanted to take down Biden. But they also wanted to absolve Moscow of election meddling.

Quote:
The Ukraine scandal now unfolding in congressional impeachment hearings has at its core a Shakespearean twist: President Trump, abetted by his paladins of spin, has trapped himself in an alternate universe. To undermine the well-established fact that Russia corrupted the 2016 vote to help him win, Mr. Trump and his allies have tried to build a fiction that pins those crimes on Ukraine.

In doing so, he has confirmed our darkest fears. The president’s bid to solicit foreign help to impugn a domestic political rival in 2019 should wipe away any doubts about his willingness to do the same with Russian help in 2016.

Mr. Trump and his enablers — Rudolph Giuliani foremost among them — have scrambled all year to do two deeds at once. They want to besmirch Joe Biden, without foundation, for supposedly using his office as vice president to protect his son Hunter, who served until recently on the board of a Ukrainian gas company. And they want to reinvent what happened in 2016 so as to switch the blame for the election meddling from Moscow to Kyiv.

Congress is rightly focused on the quid pro quo demands that Mr. Trump was making of the Ukrainian president, Volodymyr Zelensky, to further his own personal political interests. But the effort to rewrite the history of 2016 is no less insidious.

As the founders of Fusion GPS, the research firm that commissioned the reports by the former British intelligence officer Christopher Steele that raised some of the earliest warnings of Russia’s actions, we’re willing to clear up some of the nonsense now so abundant on the right.

House Republicans like Representatives Devin Nunes and Jim Jordan seem eager to portray Fusion as co-conspirators with the Ukrainians in some devilish plot to undermine Mr. Trump’s 2016 candidacy. That could not be farther from the truth. None of the information in the so-called Steele dossier came from Ukrainian sources. Zero. And we’ve never met Serhiy Leshchenko, the Ukrainian former legislator and journalist whom Republicans want to blame for the downfall of Mr. Trump’s campaign chairman, Paul Manafort.

That said, our investigation of Donald Trump did get a great boost because of Ukraine, just not in the way Republicans imagine. We began looking into Mr. Trump’s business dealings and ties to Russia in the fall of 2015 with funding from Republicans who wanted to stop his political ascent. The Ukraine alarms went off six months later, when candidate Trump brought into his campaign none other than Mr. Manafort, a man with his own tangled history with Russian oligarchs trying to get their way in Ukraine.

It turns out we already knew a great deal about Mr. Manafort’s activities in Ukraine because we worked on several stories about his work for Russian-backed politicians eight years earlier, when we were both still writing for The Wall Street Journal. That reporting threw a spotlight on how Mr. Manafort, while representing clients involved in fierce geopolitical struggles over Ukraine, had neglected to comply with a lobbying law requiring that he register as a foreign agent — the very law, among others, to which he pleaded guilty of violating.

Those articles triggered years of media coverage exposing Mr. Manafort’s questionable lobbying activities and ties to pro-Russia oligarchs. In the meantime, we left The Journal and went on to found Fusion GPS, a research and strategic intelligence firm, in 2010.

We turned our focus back to Mr. Manafort in early 2016 and soon found a 19-page legal filing in a federal courthouse in Virginia in which one of his former clients, the Russian businessman Oleg Deripaska, accused Mr. Manafort in scorching detail of making off with tens of millions of dollars that he had promised to invest in Ukraine. The whole thing reeked of fraud and possible money laundering. It was as if Mr. Manafort had boarded the Trump campaign plane with baggage stuffed with figurative explosives. The Virginia filings later surfaced in various articles about Manafort in the national media.

A few months later we stumbled on some Ukrainian media reports noting that documents existed in Kyiv that chronicled the political spending of the pro-Russia ruling party at the time, which had hired Mr. Manafort. We wondered if his name might crop up in those papers. Someone suggested Mr. Leshchenko might be of help in the matter — a fact we stored away. To this day, we have never met him.

The New York Times got to the story first, in August 2016, reporting that a black ledger of illicit payments showed that millions of dollars had gone into the pocket of one Paul Manafort. That story led to Mr. Manafort’s ouster from the campaign, and undoubtedly fueled F.B.I. interest in his activities, though the so-called black ledger was never used in the criminal cases against him.

We’d love to take credit for finding the black ledger, but we didn’t, and any alert reporter following the Ukrainian press would have known to follow the leads that led to it.

That hasn’t stopped Republicans from weaving conspiracy theories about our work in Ukraine. Mr. Giuliani, the president’s personal lawyer and the main stirrer of the conspiracy pot in Ukraine, cooked up a fresh fabrication just this week, telling Glenn Beck on his TV program that he had “very strong evidence that a lot of the Steele dossier was produced in Ukraine” and that “Glenn Simpson spent a fair amount of time there during the time that the dossier was being written.”

By sheer coincidence, one of us — the aforementioned Mr. Simpson — found himself on a plane from New York to Washington with Mr. Giuliani just hours later, and he couldn’t resist confronting the former New York mayor about his claim after they landed.

“I understand you think I spent a lot of time in Ukraine?” Mr. Simpson inquired.

“You did spend some time in Ukraine,” Mr. Giuliani replied.

“Did I?” Mr. Simpson asked as he waved his phone in front of Mr. Giuliani, signaling that he was recording the encounter.

“What if I told you I have never been to Ukraine in my life?”

“Well,” Mr. Giuliani replied with equanimity, “O.K. I will find out if that’s true or not.”

It’s true. So, Mr. Giuliani is still investigating the lies he hopes will save a deeply corrupt presidency. That should chill all Americans.

nyt/simpson-fritsch

(Glenn Simpson and Peter Fritsch are the founders of Fusion GPS and authors of the upcoming book, “Crime in Progress: Inside the Steele Dossier and the Fusion GPS Investigation of Donald Trump.”)
coldjoint
 
  -2  
Sun 24 Nov, 2019 01:31 pm
@snood,
I do not see anything about Durham. Horowitz is an Obama appointee and will do as little damage as possible. The WP is not credible when it comes to anything involving Trump. Durhams investigation is different and will send people to jail. There is still the matter of foreign intelligence helping take Trump down, that is not in Horowitz's scope.
0 Replies
 
coldjoint
 
  -2  
Sun 24 Nov, 2019 01:34 pm
@hightor,
This is just more of the MSM's relentless onslaught of negative Trump stories. It is not working according to Trump's rising numbers. Keep it up the House will flip and Trump will win in a landslide.
revelette3
 
  2  
Sun 24 Nov, 2019 01:43 pm
@hightor,
Great find, hightor.
0 Replies
 
coldjoint
 
  0  
Sun 24 Nov, 2019 02:11 pm
Quote:
Impeachment Is Destroying Democrats

Quote:
The American people are becoming fatigued with this unfair partisan process. According to a new poll by Emerson College, support for impeachment has fallen from 48% to only 43% in the last month, while opposition has increased from 44% to 45%. The Emerson College poll also showed that the President’s approval rating has increased from 43% to 48% in the last month.

Overall, these results should worry Democrats who are putting all their political hopes on impeachment. Other than pursuing the President with multiple investigations, House Democrats do not have much of an agenda. There has been little to no action on healthcare, the opioid crisis, infrastructure, the USMCA trade agreement, etc.

Not exactly what the NYT is saying. But the NYT is no longer credible because of it obvious agenda and extremely sloppy journalism.
https://townhall.com/columnists/jeffcrouere/2019/11/24/impeachment-is-destroying-democrats-n2556987
0 Replies
 
coldjoint
 
  -1  
Sun 24 Nov, 2019 02:16 pm
Quote:
Navy Secretary shoots down NY Times report claiming he threatened to resign in protest of Trump

Did I say sloppy journalism? Should I have said supermarket tabloid journalism. An example of a newspaper that has turned into ****.
https://www.theblaze.com/news/ny-times-claims-navy-secretary-threatened-to-resign-in-protest-of-trump?utm_content=buffer4577f&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=twitter&utm_campaign=tw-theblaze
hightor
 
  4  
Sun 24 Nov, 2019 02:21 pm
@coldjoint,
Quote:
This is just more of the MSM's relentless onslaught of negative Trump stories.

Hey, they're just reporting on the relentless onslaught of lies, excuses, and corruption exhibited by the administration. If that means that Trump wins re-election, so be it — what's the alternative? I'd rather stay accurately informed than have all the media kissing his feet, spreading fake news, and whitewashing his squalid performance. It's bad enough with Fox and the other right-wing news outlets attempting to re-write events and cover up his misdeeds and those of his henchmen.
coldjoint
 
  0  
Sun 24 Nov, 2019 02:24 pm
@hightor,
Quote:
Hey, they're just reporting on the relentless onslaught of lies,

And who says they are lies? That would be the NYT. Bottom of the bird cage material.
0 Replies
 
hightor
 
  3  
Sun 24 Nov, 2019 02:38 pm
@coldjoint,
Quote:
The secretary of the Navy and the admiral who leads the SEALs have threatened to resign or be fired if plans to expel a commando from the elite unit in a war crimes case are halted by President Trump, administration officials said Saturday.

The high-level pushback to Mr. Trump’s unambiguous assertion on Twitter this past week that the commando, Chief Petty Officer Edward Gallagher, should remain in the unit was an extraordinary development in what was already an extraordinary case, one with few precedents in the history of presidential relations with the American military.

The Navy secretary, Richard V. Spencer, later denied that he had threatened to resign but said disciplinary plans against Chief Gallagher would proceed because he did not consider Mr. Trump’s statement on Twitter to be a formal order. Mr. Spencer added that the president, as commander in chief, had the authority to intervene and that it would stop “the process.”


Now, this is the source for the claim of possible resignations:

Quote:
Defense Secretary Mark T. Esper and General Mark Milley, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, conveyed to the president that if he followed up that tweet with a direct order, there would be huge consequences: Mr. Trump would lose Mr. Spencer and Admiral Green, further infuriate his top military leadership and do untold damage to decades of military justice doctrine, according to administration officials.

(...)

Mr. Spencer expanded on his remarks at the security forum during a separate discussion on Saturday with reporters. The military does not consider a tweet to be an official order, he said, but if he received an official order from Mr. Trump, it would be obeyed.

“If the president requests to stop the process, the process stops,” Mr. Spencer said. “Good order and discipline is also obeying orders from the president of the United States.”

It was unclear from his comments whether he would stay in his post if the president were to issue a formal order.

nyt

It's not "supermarket tabloid journalism" to print further information as a story continues to evolve — that's why daily coverage is more accurate that weekly publications. And it's why responsible media outlets sometimes have to edit or retract stories — that's not "sloppy" at all.
Walter Hinteler
 
  2  
Sun 24 Nov, 2019 02:43 pm
@hightor,
Similar report in the Defense News (Navy Times)
Quote:
Spencer’s statements came after NBC News reported that military leaders — hoping to keep Spencer from quitting — lobbied Trump on board Air Force One to stop intervening in Gallagher’s case.

Spencer said he did not know whether those conversations had happened.

A day earlier at the international gathering of national security experts, Spencer told the news agency Reuters that he planned to back the Navy’s top uniformed officials, who initiated post-conviction administrative proceedings to expel Gallagher from the SEALs. “I believe the process matters for good order and discipline,” Spencer told Reuters.
coldjoint
 
  0  
Sun 24 Nov, 2019 02:51 pm
@hightor,
Why don't we cut to the chase. The NYT is out to get Trump. That should not be their job. They are biased, they omit facts favorable to Trump. And have publicly announced they are working against him.

In short, they print the crap you haters live for. They are a disgrace to journalism.
coldjoint
 
  0  
Sun 24 Nov, 2019 03:03 pm
@Walter Hinteler,
Quote:
Spencer Denies Report that He Threatened to Resign over Trump Interference in Gallagher Review


https://www.military.com/daily-news/2019/11/24/spencer-denies-report-he-threatened-resign-over-trump-interference-gallagher-review.html?utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Twitter#Echobox=1574605162
0 Replies
 
 

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 0.03 seconds on 09/20/2024 at 07:18:58