56 replies to this topic

[Lysistrata]

It's been a while, but a lot has been going on with this. It looks like James Comey, John Brennan, Susan Rice, Michael Hayden, Andrew McCabe, and James Clapper are close to losing their security clearance, if they still have it.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/07/23/trump-looking-into-revoking-security-clearances-for-brennan-other-top-obama-officials.html

 

When they lose their security clearance, they are just as ordinary as any other Trump hater on the street. Pretty sure more will be coming. Crooked Hillary was supposed to win to cover their asses, but she didn't, and this is just a precursor to the obvious steamroller coming their way for allowing one candidate to get away with multiple crimes, and then trying to frame a President to hide their crimes.

[onbekende]

As most of those in your list already stated, they never kept it in the first place. And of the few that possibly still have it (cause of department continuity), people have already expressed a concern for a "clean sweep by ideology" that could spring forth from this.

 

Heck I think someone even noted that if you cleared any still persistant clearance (not like your lose your historical record), they might lose access to files to make their case if and when they get called before congress.

 

 

Kinda reminds me about the Kushner debacle, how's that tall tale going now?

[Lysistrata]

As most of those in your list already stated, they never kept it in the first place.

Nothing makes Trump laugh harder than watching the fake news media read a tweet, and then light their own hair on fire. They fall for it every time. He tweets out that he's looking into revoking somebodies security clearance, and then he just watches them create a meaningless firestorm over nothing. Hilarious.

[onbekende]

Perhaps the leader of your executive branch should start behaving like one... He tweeted out clearly false or misleading info and you find that OK?

 

His favorite past times of "lets rile up some libs" and golfing seem all fine and dandy up until you note that the guy is the actual leader of a nation.

 

Half the republicans cried wolf when Obama wore a tan suit, you folks have brought new meanings to being hypocritics.

[Lysistrata]

Perhaps the leader of your executive branch should start behaving like one... He tweeted out clearly false or misleading info and you find that OK?

 

His favorite past times of "lets rile up some libs" and golfing seem all fine and dandy up until you note that the guy is the actual leader of a nation.

 

Half the republicans cried wolf when Obama wore a tan suit, you folks have brought new meanings to being hypocritics.

I think you want our President to start behaving the way the European Union wants him to behave, but instead he's behaving exactly the way we elected him to behave... that includes a big finger to the EU. Germany wants to continue sending shiploads of Mercedes and BMW's over here, free of charge, so our wealthy millionaires will keep buying them. I wonder how many GMC trucks are cruising the Autobahn? Well, we now have a President more concerned about our economy than his approval rating in Europe. That's a breath of fresh air, and I will enthusiastically vote for him again in 2020.

[Lysistrata]

This is interesting. I just saw Tucker Carlson on Fox News call for any Republican that has seen the full FISA application to leak the unredacted information to him... he will release it to the public, so the American people know the truth, and we can decide for ourselves. He then went to a commercial break, and when he came back he shared a text message he received during the break.

 

The message was from "a very informed person in Washington", it said... "Diane Feinstein entered the so called CIA torture memo into the record of the Senate and was protected by the Speech and Debate Clause. Any Republican with access to the FISA warrant can do the same... complete immunity awaits them".

 

I will be watching for what happens now.

[onbekende]

 

Perhaps the leader of your executive branch should start behaving like one... He tweeted out clearly false or misleading info and you find that OK?

 

His favorite past times of "lets rile up some libs" and golfing seem all fine and dandy up until you note that the guy is the actual leader of a nation.

 

Half the republicans cried wolf when Obama wore a tan suit, you folks have brought new meanings to being hypocritics.

I think you want our President to start behaving the way the European Union wants him to behave, but instead he's behaving exactly the way we elected him to behave... that includes a big finger to the EU. Germany wants to continue sending shiploads of Mercedes and BMW's over here, free of charge, so our wealthy millionaires will keep buying them. I wonder how many GMC trucks are cruising the Autobahn? Well, we now have a President more concerned about our economy than his approval rating in Europe. That's a breath of fresh air, and I will enthusiastically vote for him again in 2020.

 

 

Stop trying to be communist, it hurts your agenda. Either be full on capitalist and acknowledge that americans buy foreign stuff for reasons besides "pissing off the other side" or go communist with your "america first" and go full protectionist and see how that works out.

 

Same way there are so few american style "trucks" in the EU (belief me, they do drive around here), perhaps europans just don't want them?

 

And about that "free of tax" and other catchy words you might have heared, consider actually looking into what VAT means, I know the US doesn't has it but it is the root of why some republicans think we are taxing US goods.

 

Frankly I don't really care how Trump "behave's" but the snowflakes across the pond should understand that a bully incites a bully. Soft-power is an alien concept to Trump, that we understand clearly.

 

This is interesting. I just saw Tucker Carlson on Fox News call for any Republican that has seen the full FISA application to leak the unredacted information to him... he will release it to the public, so the American people know the truth, and we can decide for ourselves. He then went to a commercial break, and when he came back he shared a text message he received during the break.

 

The message was from "a very informed person in Washington", it said... "Diane Feinstein entered the so called CIA torture memo into the record of the Senate and was protected by the Speech and Debate Clause. Any Republican with access to the FISA warrant can do the same... complete immunity awaits them".

 

I will be watching for what happens now.

Hence you might wonder why they haven't yet done so...

 

Or perhaps we could have another "Nunes memo" fiasco, how did that one work out? >_>

[Lysistrata]

Or perhaps we could have another "Nunes memo" fiasco, how did that one work out?

We're not gonna solve the trade issue here, but I trust that Trump will. The Nunes Memo did exactly what it was supposed to do. It was supposed to inform the American people that FISA warrants were issued to spy on a Presidential campaign using dishonest opposition research paid for, and compiled by, Hillary Clinton and the DNC. That has been proven to be true. It worked out just fine.

[onbekende]

The memo was shown, not just by the Dems responce but by the FBI and the DOJ aswell, to be crafted by cherrypicking the bad parts while ignoring or mystifying (or rather keping them under black marker) the whole FISA document and footnotes that showned both that the FISA document acknowledged the Steele dossier origin and that the judge(s) understood and took this under consideration.

[Lysistrata]

The Nunes memo was shown to be completely factual by the release of the FISA application. Those footnotes you're talking about was merely dancing around the source of the information, when it's really easy just to say it was paid for by the opposition candidate, but it never did that. This is called lying to the FISA judge. Andrew McCabe, an already disgraced and fired participant, has already admitted to Congress that without the salacious dirty dossier created by Hillary Clinton, they would not have been granted the warrant.

 

My buddy Trey Gowdy has stated very clearly, that if there was any evidence whatsoever of Trump collusion with Russia, Adam Schiff would have leaked it already. There is none. The evidence they are hiding is the Obama Administration activity that has framed a Presidential Candidate, a President-Elect, and then a sitting President, for crimes. The more that's uncovered, the more it's obvious, but the Trump haters just refuse to acknowledge the truth.

 

I'm still waiting for everything to be uncovered. The worse that can happen, from what I see, is Trump people getting embarrassed because they allowed themselves to be caught up in an entrapment scheme set up by an Obama Administration that just couldn't even stand the thought of a Trump Presidency. The chances are pretty good this is exactly what is going on.

[onbekende]

The same Gowdy that was the only person seeing the unrestricted FISA warrant before the Nunes memo (as such also clearly marking that Nunes was not completely informed) and afterwards, while finding that the Seele dossier shouldn't be in the application, still considered the Meuller investigation needed?

 

Him?

 

You had your fun with Hillary, let the Dems have there fun with Trump.

[Lysistrata]

The same Gowdy that was the only person seeing the unrestricted FISA warrant before the Nunes memo (as such also clearly marking that Nunes was not completely informed) and afterwards, while finding that the Seele dossier shouldn't be in the application, still considered the Meuller investigation needed?

 

Him?

 

You had your fun with Hillary, let the Dems have there fun with Trump.

That interview with Gowdy was on February 4, 2018... much has happened since then. That was before Stzrok and Page text massages came out saying that they will stop Trump from becoming President. Trey Gowdy is a lifelong lawman, and he will always come down on the side of law enforcement, until he's convinced that it's a dirty investigation. He's convinced it's a dirty investigation, so now he's saying to "finish it the hell up!".

 

Hillary Clinton is a straight up criminal. Trump has been framed. I don't think any of it is fun.

[onbekende]

Stzrok and Page got grilled for those texts (what, like a dozen in between >7k?) and nothing substantial came from it, no influence was found. They had personal thoughts they kept seperated from their professional carreers and investigation(s), let alone when you know that the text got send the night Trump railed against Khan and family.

 

No, you put your money with the man who can't keep his story straight, let alone truthfull.

[DeathMerchant]

No, you put your money with the man who can't keep his story straight, let alone truthfull.

Actually, Lysistrata and myself are putting our money with the man who is making us a boatload of cash in the stock market

[/thread derailment]

[Lysistrata]

Stzrok and Page got grilled for those texts (what, like a dozen in between >7k?) and nothing substantial came from it, no influence was found. They had personal thoughts they kept seperated from their professional carreers and investigation(s), let alone when you know that the text got send the night Trump railed against Khan and family.

 

No, you put your money with the man who can't keep his story straight, let alone truthfull.

omg... I really have a hard time understanding why it's so important for you to defend these people all the time.

 

From all the evidence that has been uncovered, it's obvious that Hillary Clinton was given a pass on the mountain of crimes involving her illegal, personal, email server, that she intentionally set up to hide her actions as Secretary of State.

 

From all the evidence that's been uncovered, or lack of it, it's obvious that Peter Stzrok launched a counter-intelligence investigation on the Trump campaign, and John Brennan supplied CIA operatives to infiltrate, and entrap them, in nefarious behavior. They intended to use this to take down the campaign before the election… but Trump was already on the trail, talking about how the election was rigged against him, and it would have been pretty bad to take that step. Hillary was already 90%+ certain to win the election according to all the twisted media polls, so they held off on leaking it to the media, and set it up as an "insurance policy", just in case he wins.

 

After Trump won the election, the Obama Administration thought he would be such a bad President that no one would even want to support him when they turned up the heat on their scam. They have been wrong all along... about him, his abilities, and his support.

 

So the questions remains the same... what's in it for you? Do you wish for our President to be taken down? Do you believe Mike Pence would turn things around for you? Would he sign us back up into the Paris Climate Accord? Run to Iran to get back into the nuke deal? Open up the borders and legalize anyone that jumps the fence or washes up on our shores? Why does a Cyber-Nations player from Belgium hate the President of the United States so much that he wants him to be thrown out of office? I'm curious.

[onbekende]

And we are back to "hate" and "you vs us" mentality, brilliant. Coupled with some nice conspiracy theories about your own executive branch makes me think you folks just love running after ghosts.

 

For the umptiest time, I do not think Trump himself did anything illegally, willingly atleast. Then again he just derailed the nearly 2y old 'It was only about adoption' explaination by himself in what else then his favorite medium: twitter.

 

As for Hillary, the folks going after her had (and still have) all the time to do so, what is keeping them to just spouting 1 theory after another is everyone's guess. Unless offcourse nothing too substantial can be found and they are just running on hot air alone.

 

What is in it for me? Personaly? Definatly nothing. Perhaps you folks can chalk it up to me just liking to play devils advocate but I do like to consider a wider range then just "me, me and people I like" mentality that has gripped nearly any politician around. Kinda like NIMBY but then without a "B".

 

 

@Deathmerchant: they were going up under Obama to, you thank him?

[DeathMerchant]

@Deathmerchant: they were going up under Obama to, you thank him?

 

Obama took office during the worst of the US Recession. The stock market had nowhere to go but up.

 

While I am grateful for the stock market increase under Obama's Presidency, those 8 years were a bit of a financial roller coaster. I recall many people were terrified of large scale investing because they were concerned about where the economy was going, the Affordable Care Act, the inconsistent US foreign policy. Very few individuals could say with a straight face that your investments will be worth more in 3-5 years, let alone worth the same exact value you put in. Conservative investing was the safe choice under Obama's 2 terms, I would have felt quite nervous had I been engaged in more aggressive investing. Of course, loses can be managed properly by not sticking all your eggs in 1 or 2 baskets, but nevertheless I still had a great degree of hesitancy.

 

Now that Trump is President, I do feel more confident in our country's economy and our stock market. I actively pursue more aggressive investing while still maintaining a diversified portfolio. The results have been quite lucrative for me so far. I won't get into the raw numbers, but figuratively speaking, some of these stock prices went through the roof.

[Lysistrata]

Then again he just derailed the nearly 2y old 'It was only about adoption' explaination by himself in what else then his favorite medium: twitter.

Wrong... they approached Trump people claiming they had information about Hillary Clinton that would help their campaign. Donald Jr. accepted the meeting... which turned out to be nothing. That's the story that it's always been. Fake news.

 

I believe it was all a set up... to get a meeting with Russians on the record, to make Trump look bad. Nothing was gained.

[onbekende]

 

@Deathmerchant: they were going up under Obama to, you thank him?

 

Obama took office during the worst of the US Recession. The stock market had nowhere to go but up.

 

While I am grateful for the stock market increase under Obama's Presidency, those 8 years were a bit of a financial roller coaster. I recall many people were terrified of large scale investing because they were concerned about where the economy was going, the Affordable Care Act, the inconsistent US foreign policy. Very few individuals could say with a straight face that your investments will be worth more in 3-5 years, let alone worth the same exact value you put in. Conservative investing was the safe choice under Obama's 2 terms, I would have felt quite nervous had I been engaged in more aggressive investing. Of course, loses can be managed properly by not sticking all your eggs in 1 or 2 baskets, but nevertheless I still had a great degree of hesitancy.

 

Now that Trump is President, I do feel more confident in our country's economy and our stock market. I actively pursue more aggressive investing while still maintaining a diversified portfolio. The results have been quite lucrative for me so far. I won't get into the raw numbers, but figuratively speaking, some of these stock prices went through the roof.

 

 

So would you agree that Obama did a fine job in getting the US out of that recession?

 

What US foreign policy inconsistancies? Was it Obama warming up to Russia (until Crimea) and Iran (with a treaty, which you may dislike but atleast there was talking). Heck he even smacktalked China, something you would approve of yes?

 

 

 

Then again he just derailed the nearly 2y old 'It was only about adoption' explaination by himself in what else then his favorite medium: twitter.

Wrong... they approached Trump people claiming they had information about Hillary Clinton that would help their campaign. Donald Jr. accepted the meeting... which turned out to be nothing. That's the story that it's always been. Fake news.

 

I believe it was all a set up... to get a meeting with Russians on the record, to make Trump look bad. Nothing was gained.

 

 

1) Firstly the meeting never happended, then it did and it was about adoption, then Jr. brought forward the mails with the "info on hillary" subtone but ignored that implication, then it was acknowledged it was about hillary info and lastly we now have Trump throwing his son's defence out the window.

 

2) What is ther actually "fake news" in this story anyway? The meeting happended and "dirt on hillary" was discussed, this is what has been reported. About possible implications then it is more assertions and guesses, but hardly "fake news".

 

3) So they found close Putin affiliates/allies/tied to... people to work for the FBI/CIA/deep state/DNC to get dirt on some part of Trumps campaighn staff? Now who's looking for conspiracies?

[Lysistrata]

You will not read this... but you should. The brand spanking new evidence that just came to the surface about the actions between Obama's #4 at the DOJ, Bruce Ohr, his wife Nellie that worked for Fusion GPS, Glenn Simpson of Fusion GPS, British spy, and Trump dossier author Christopher Steele... are not included in this book. If you really want to know the truth, read it. It's all real.

https://www.amazon.com/Russia-Hoax-Illicit-Hillary-Clinton/dp/0062872745/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1534103464&sr=8-1&keywords=greg+jarrett+new+book

 

If you want to know about the Ohr, Simpson, Steele collusion... it's here.

http://thehill.com/hilltv/rising/401185-the-handwritten-notes-exposing-what-fusion-gps-told-doj-about-trump

 

Congress is now calling for all of them to testify.