quote:

Originally posted by nhtagmember:


rocket man - more like Estes Midget

Yeah. Rocket boy would've been even better.

James Comey (March 2017)

Mr. Comey told the House Intelligence Committee, “We have no information to support” President Trump’s assertion on Twitter that President Barack Obama wiretapped Trump Tower.

“We have no information to support those tweets,” Mr. Comey said, repeating moments later, “All I can tell you is that we have no information that supports them.”

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/0...d-trump.html?mcubz=3

By now, it should be crystal clear to everyone that James Comey is a bald-faced liar and a self-serving con man and you can't trust anything that comes out of his mouth.

Comey lived in the swamp, and seemed pretty comfy there.

I wonder why the committee felt the need to postpone the interview.

quote:

Tuesday, September 19, 2017
Senate Intelligence Committee postpones hearing with Trump lawyer Michael Cohen after he releases statement
by Todd Shepherd | Sep 19, 2017, 12:21 PM


The top two lawmakers on the Senate Intelligence Committee postponed today's interview with President Trump's longtime personal lawyer Michael Cohen after Cohen released his opening remarks to the press earlier in the morning.

"We were disappointed that Mr. Cohen decided to pre-empt today's interview by releasing a public statement prior to his engagement with Committee staff, in spite of the Committee's requests that he refrain from public comment," the statement from Chariman Richard Burr, R-N.C. and Vice Chairman Mark Warner, D-Va., said.

"As a result, we declined to move forward with today's interview and will reschedule Mr. Cohen's appearance before the Committee in open session at a date in the near future. The Committee expects witnesses in this investigation to work in good faith with the Senate."

Cohen's statement released earlier this morning blasted the investigations into Russia's meddling in the 2016 elections, and whether there was any coordination or collusion between Russia and the Trump campaign.

"I emphatically state that I had nothing to do with any Russian involvement in our electoral process," Cohen said in his four-page statement.

He also denied ever engaging in any efforts to cyber-hack anyone, including the Democratic National Committee, or that he "conversed with any member of the Russian Federation or anyone else to hack or interfere with the election."

"We will come back for a voluntary interview whenever we can to meet with them, and we look forward to voluntarily cooperating with the House committee and with anyone else who has an inquiry in this area," Cohen's lawyer told reporters after the postponement was announced.

Cohen's interview was expected to focus on newly leaked emails which showed that the Trump business organization was looking into the possibility of building a Trump Tower-like project in Moscow.

The attorney and also longtime friend to Trump also has had dealings with Ukraine that the committee is expected to investigate.

Link

"in spite of the Committee's requests that he refrain from public comment"

"The Committee expects witnesses in this investigation to work in good faith with the Senate"

afraid of the public being knowlegable ? why ?

These committees are NOT working in good faith w the administration, so why expect good faith in return ?

On another issue entirely, I'm sure that someone has mentioned that N. Korea is a communist country. The Chinese are communists. So are the Russians.

The Venezuelans are too, at least the leadership.

Come to think about it, so are the God Damned Commies, fka Democrats.

Hmmmmmmm. Whose side are they on?

another wiretap denier:

https://www.mediaite.com/colum...inst-trump-campaign/

In March the former Director of National Intelligence under President Barack Obama appeared on Meet the Press to respond to President Donald Trump‘s now-infamous tweets regarding a “wiretap” related to his campaign during the Obama Administration.

James Clapper:

"But I will say that, for the part of the national security apparatus that I oversaw as DNI, there was no such wiretap activity mounted against– the president elect at the time, or as a candidate, or against his campaign. I can’t speak for other Title Three authorized entities in the government or a state or local entity."

Chuck TODD: Yeah, I was just going to say, if the F.B.I., for instance, had a FISA court order of some sort for a surveillance, would that be information you would know or not know?

CLAPPER: Yes.

TODD: You would be told this?

CLAPPER: I would know that.

TODD: If there was a FISA court order–

CLAPPER: Yes.

TODD: –on something like this.

CLAPPER: Something like this, absolutely.

TODD: And at this point, you can’t confirm or deny whether that exists?

CLAPPER: I can deny it.

Does CNN not even know what CNN knows?

Susan Rice comments on wire tapping

https://youtu.be/PeqPaVWOSDk

So Rice says obama couldn't have done it. Only obama's buddy Eric Holder or Loretta Lynch could have done it. Make you feel better ?

More medicine for the Worry Warts

http://video.foxbusiness.com/v...2001/?#sp=show-clips

quote:

Originally posted by mbinky:
Lol that was good for a laugh. "Reality" and "CNN" don't even belong in the same paragraph let alone the same sentence.

Well maybe if the word "reality" was prefaced by the phrase "complete and utter lack of"

WHY OBAMA REALLY SPIED ON TRUMP - Obama had to spy on Trump to protect himself.
September 20, 2017 Daniel Greenfield

Last week, CNN revealed (and excused) one phase of the Obama spying operation on Trump. After lying about it on MSNBC, Susan Rice admitted unmasking the identities of Trump officials to Congress.

Rice was unmasking the names of Trump officials a month before leaving office. The targets may have included her own successor, General Flynn, who was forced out of office using leaked surveillance.

While Rice’s targets weren’t named, the CNN story listed a meeting with Flynn, Bannon and Kushner.

Bannon was Trump’s former campaign chief executive and a senior adviser. Kushner is a senior adviser. Those are exactly the people you spy on to get an insight into what your political opponents plan to do.

Now the latest CNN spin piece informs us that secret FISA orders were used to spy on the conversations of Trump’s former campaign chairman, Paul Manafort. The surveillance was discontinued for lack of evidence and then renewed under a new warrant. This is part of a pattern of FISA abuses by Obama Inc. which never allowed minor matters like lack of evidence to dissuade them from new FISA requests.

Desperate Obama cronies had figured out that they could bypass many of the limitations on the conventional investigations of their political opponents by ‘laundering’ them through national security.

If any of Trump’s people were talking to non-Americans, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) could be used to spy on them. And then the redacted names of the Americans could be unmasked by Susan Rice, Samantha Power and other Obama allies. It was a technically legal Watergate.

If both CNN stories hold up, then Obama Inc. had spied on two Trump campaign leaders.

Furthermore the Obama espionage operation closely tracked Trump’s political progress. The first FISA request targeting Trump happened the month after he received the GOP nomination. The second one came through in October: the traditional month of political surprises meant to upend an election.

The spying ramped up after Trump’s win when the results could no longer be used to engineer a Hillary victory, but would instead have to be used to cripple and bring down President Trump. Headed out the door, Rice was still unmasking the names of Trump’s people while Obama was making it easier to pass around raw eavesdropped data to other agencies.

Obama had switched from spying on a political opponent to win an election, to spying on his successor to undo the results of the election. Abuse of power by a sitting government had become subversion of the government by an outgoing administration. Domestic spying on opponents had become a coup.

The Democrat scandals of the past few administrations have hinged on gross violations of political norms, elementary ethics and the rule of law that, out of context, were not technically illegal.

But it’s the pattern that makes the crime. It’s the context that shows the motive.

Obama Inc. compartmentalized its espionage operation in individual acts of surveillance and unmasking, and general policies implemented to aid both, that may have been individually legal, in the purely technical sense, in order to commit the major crime of eavesdropping on the political opposition.

When the individual acts of surveillance are described as legal, that’s irrelevant. It’s the collective pattern of surveillance of the political opposition that exposes the criminal motive for them.

If Obama spied on two of Trump’s campaign leaders, that’s not a coincidence. It’s a pattern.

A criminal motive can be spotted by a consistent pattern of actions disguised by different pretexts. A dirty cop may lose two pieces of evidence from the same defendant while giving two different excuses. A shady accountant may explain two otherwise identical losses in two different ways. Both excuses are technically plausible. But it’s the pattern that makes the crime.

Manafort was spied on under the Russia pretext. Bannon may have been spied on over the UAE. That’s two different countries, two different people and two different pretexts.

But one single target. President Trump.

It’s the pattern that exposes the motive.

When we learn the whole truth (if we ever do), we will likely discover that Obama Inc. assembled a motley collection of different technically legal pretexts to spy on Trump’s team.

Each individual pretext might be technically defensible. But together they add up to the crime of the century.

Obama’s gamble was that the illegal surveillance would justify itself. If you spy on a bunch of people long enough, especially people in politics and business, some sort of illegality, actual or technical, is bound to turn up. That’s the same gamble anyone engaged in illegal surveillance makes.

Businessmen illegally tape conversations with former partners hoping that they’ll say something damning enough to justify the risk. That was what Obama and his allies were doing with Trump.

It’s a crime. And you can’t justify committing a crime by discovering a crime.

If everyone were being spied on all the time, many crimes could be exposed every second. But that’s not how our system works. That’s why we have a Fourth Amendment.

Nor was Obama Inc. trying to expose crimes for their own sake, but to bring down the opposition.

That’s why it doesn’t matter what results the Obama surveillance turned up. The surveillance was a crime. Anything turned up by it is the fruit of a poisonous tree. It’s inherently illegitimate.

The first and foremost agenda must be to assemble a list of Trump officials who were spied on and the pretexts under which they were spied upon. The pattern will show the crime. And that’s what Obama and his allies are terrified of. It’s why Flynn was forced out using illegal surveillance and leaks. It’s why McMaster is protecting Susan Rice and the Obama holdovers while purging Trump loyalists at the NSC.

The left’s gamble was that the Mueller investigation or some other illegitimate spawn of the Obama eavesdropping would produce an indictment and then the procedural questions wouldn’t matter.

It’s the dirty cop using illegal eavesdropping to generate leads for a “clean” case against his target while betting that no one will look too closely or care how the case was generated. If one of the Mueller targets is intimidated into making a deal, the question of how the case was generated won’t matter.

Mueller will have a cooperative witness. And the Democrats can begin their coup in earnest. It will eventually turn out that there is no “there” there. But by then, it’ll be time for President Booker.

There’s just one problem.

If the gamble fails, if no criminal case that amounts to anything more than the usual investigational gimmick charges like perjury (the Federal equivalent of ‘resisting arrest’ for a beat cop) develops, then Obama and his allies are on the hook for the domestic surveillance of their political opponents.

With nothing to show for it and no way to distract from it.

That’s the race against the clock that is happening right now. Either the investigation gets results. Or its perpetrators are left hanging in the wind. If McMaster is fired, which on purely statistical grounds he probably will be, and a Trump loyalist who wasn’t targeted by the surveillance operation becomes the next National Security Adviser and brings in Trump loyalists, as Flynn tried to do, then it’s over.

And the Dems finally get their Watergate. Except the star won’t be Trump, it will be Obama. Rice, Power, Lynch and the rest of the gang will be the new Haldeman, Ehrlichman and Mitchell.

Once Obama and his allies launched their domestic surveillance operation, they crossed the Rubicon. And there was no way back. They had to destroy President Trump or risk going to jail.

The more crimes they committed by spying on the opposition, the more urgently they needed to bring down Trump. The consequences of each crime that they had committed spurred them on to commit worse crimes to save themselves from going to jail. It’s the same old story when it comes to criminals.

Each act of illegal surveillance became more blatant. And when illegal surveillance couldn’t stop Trump’s victory, they had to double down on the illegal surveillance for a coup.

The more Obama spied on Trump, the more he had to keep doing it. This time it was bound to pay off.

Obama and his allies had violated the norms so often for their policy goals that they couldn’t afford to be replaced by anyone but one of their own. The more Obama relied on the imperial presidency of executive orders, the less he could afford to be replaced by anyone who would undo them. The more his staffers lied and broke the law on everything from the government shutdown to the Iran nuke sellout, the more desperately they needed to pull out all the stops to keep Trump out of office. And the more they did it, the more they couldn’t afford not to do it. Abuse of power locks you into the loop familiar to all dictators. You can’t stop riding the tiger. Once you start, you can’t afford to stop.

If you want to understand why Samantha Power was unmasking names, that’s why. The hysterical obsession with destroying Trump comes from the top down. It’s not just ideology. It’s wealthy and powerful men and women who ran the country and are terrified that their crimes will be exposed.

It’s why the media increasingly sounds like the propaganda organs of a Communist country. Why there are street riots and why the internet is being censored by Google and Facebook’s “fact checking” allies.

It’s not just ideology. It’s raw fear.

The left is sitting on the biggest crime committed by a sitting president. The only way to cover it up is to destroy his Republican successor.

A turning point in history is here.

If Obama goes down, the left will go down with him. If his coup succeeds, then America ends.

http://www.frontpagemag.com/fp....WcJnsPVvjNQ.twitter

Gun wielding FBI agents broke into Manafort's home while he was in bed sleeping with his wife. They insisted on checking his wife for weapons. He was wiretapped. --This is Jeff Session's FBI!

And this goes on while Hillary rakes in the dough for her shitty book and whines and blames on television!

http://www.thegatewaypundit.co...s-home-family-slept/

quote:

It’s why McMaster is protecting Susan Rice and the Obama holdovers while purging Trump loyalists at the NSC.

Huh?

Who picked McMaster?

This message has been edited. Last edited by: JALLEN,

quote:

Originally posted by mbinky:
Lol that was good for a laugh. "Reality" and "CNN" don't even belong in the same paragraph let alone the same sentence.

I equate CNN with Reality TV:

Overtly emotional - check.
Fabricated drama - check.
Unscrupulous editing - check.
Utter disdain for their gullible audience - check.
Stories presented as factual but based on unsubstantiated innuendo - quadruple check.

CNN - protecting the hoi polloi by doing the elitist thinking for them.

http://www.foxnews.com/politic...sis-sources-say.html

Samantha Power, the former U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, was 'unmasking' at such a rapid pace in the final months of the Obama administration that she averaged more than one request for every working day in 2016 – and even sought information in the days leading up to President Trump’s inauguration, multiple sources close to the matter told Fox News.

Two sources, who were not authorized to speak on the record, said the requests to identify Americans whose names surfaced in foreign intelligence reporting, known as unmasking, exceeded 260 last year. One source indicated this occurred in the final days of the Obama White House.

The details emerged ahead of an expected appearance by Power next month on Capitol Hill. She is one of several Obama administration officials facing congressional scrutiny for their role in seeking the identities of Trump associates in intelligence reports – but the interest in her actions is particularly high.

In a July 27 letter to Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats, House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes, R-Calif., said the committee had learned "that one official, whose position had no apparent intelligence-related function, made hundreds of unmasking requests during the final year of the Obama Administration."

The "official" is widely reported to be Power.

During a public congressional hearing earlier this year, Republican Rep. Trey Gowdy of South Carolina pressed former CIA director John Brennan on unmasking, without mentioning Power by name.

Gowdy: Do you recall any U.S. ambassadors asking that names be unmasked?

Brennan: I don't know. Maybe it's ringing a vague bell but I'm not -- I could not answer with any confidence.

Gowdy continued, asking: On either January 19 or up till noon on January 20, did you make any unmasking requests?

Brennan: I do not believe I did.

Gowdy: So you did not make any requests on the last day that you were employed?

Brennan: No, I was not in the agency on the last day I was employed.

Previous U.N. ambassadors have made unmasking requests, but Fox News was told they number in the low double digits.

Power has agreed to meet with the Senate and House intelligence committees as part of the Russia probe. She is expected before the House committee in a private, classified session in October.

quote:

Originally posted by parabellum:
By now, it should be crystal clear to everyone that James Comey is a bald-faced liar and a self-serving con man and you can't trust anything that comes out of his mouth.

And some will recall the guy from the "Eff Bee Eye" that was butthurt because a few here "smelled the stench from the trench", and did not like the citizens questioning those who should serve them.

I trust and hope that President Trump continues efforts to drain the swamp.

And I would be happy if he called for a special investigation into all of the crap, both GOP, DNC antics, tricks, deceits and shenanigans.

And if it pains me and mine, so be it.

The only way for us to become "healthy" is to deal with the sickness in the entire body, and not allow the "patient" to "protect" any part from scrutiny or "treatment".

And, once again, thank you for running this place as you do. It is nice to be able to read posts of things we might not otherwise see or read (Hat tip to JALLEN and others), and the discussions that we have, that certainly allow us to become enlightened without excess question of the validity of things discussed.

Chinese banks will follow UN sanctions, stop doing business with North Korea

This is huge, and apparently can be monitored and the Chinese held accountable.

Every day Trump gets bigger, and Obama gets smaller.

quote:

Originally posted by sjtill:
This is huge...

I couldn't agree more.