Why so many days to release? 19 Congressional working days might put it into summer. The rules were that it took a vote of the committee and no objection from the WH. That would take half hour, an hour tops in real life.

If you're looking for a new desktop picture, here's an Inauguration 2017 picture that's been updated w/anti-Trump & pro-Trump supporters by someone on Reddit

It's huge, 9900 x 5445 resolution and is about 20 Megabytes size....it is definitely not 56k-friendly

https://i.redd.it/2t89yojiqbb01.jpg



Gigabit internet version, 18000 x 9900 resolution, 46 Megabytes size, you've been warned!

https://ipfs.io/ipfs/Qmdz1mnQG...R4MWj1D2u1Qn2euP4v8o

quote:

Originally posted by JALLEN:
Why so many days to release? 19 Congressional working days might put it into summer. The rules were that it took a vote of the committee and no objection from the WH. That would take half hour, an hour tops in real life.

At What Point and How do We the People say enough is enough and we want to know what's going on!

I don't want to be played but the Dems or the Republicans.

Doesn't it seem like Hillary Clinton just sort of disappeared? She was like horseshit in Old Dodge, and then *poof*.

She knows the mucky depths of the corruption that is slowly being revealed. We don't yet know even the half of it. And if she comes to believe that she will really be nailed-- as in spend the rest of her days in an orange jump suit-- she and her partner in crime might well surface in Belize, seeking political asylum.

And speaking of disappearing women, how about the case of that blonde bimbo from the first debate who went after Donald Trump for his "war on women." From celebrity to obscurity in one giant step.

quote:

Originally posted by braillediver:

quote:

Originally posted by JALLEN:
Why so many days to release? 19 Congressional working days might put it into summer. The rules were that it took a vote of the committee and no objection from the WH. That would take half hour, an hour tops in real life.

At What Point and How do We the People say enough is enough and we want to know what's going on!

I don't want to be played but the Dems or the Republicans.

As POTUS, Trump could declassify the document. Then it could be released immediately, without anyone's permission. My hope is that if this gets tangled in bureaucratic gamesmanship, he will do so.

Pointer for Homeland Security - don’t let in folks from anywhere darker than pink.

quote:

Originally posted by justjoe:

quote:

Originally posted by braillediver:

quote:

Originally posted by JALLEN:
Why so many days to release? 19 Congressional working days might put it into summer. The rules were that it took a vote of the committee and no objection from the WH. That would take half hour, an hour tops in real life.

At What Point and How do We the People say enough is enough and we want to know what's going on!

I don't want to be played but the Dems or the Republicans.

As POTUS, Trump could declassify the document. Then it could be released immediately, without anyone's permission. My hope is that if this gets tangled in bureaucratic gamesmanship, he will do so.

No.

According to the information we have, release must be authorized by a vote of the committee then the material is sent to the WH which, if there is no objection within 5 days, the document(s) can be made public.

This is not “classified” in the national security sense, apparently, but a creation of committee rules, either this committee uniquely, or Congressionally.

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

Hoping that the establishment RINOs that have tried to derail Trump will get on board or become extinct at the ballot box. I have little hope for the progressively challenged (liberals with special needs) going beyond their political convenience. However the working Democrat (and there still are a few) may see how Trump and his administration are making their lives better and vote for that. Also hoping that I can figure out how to post a picture or add a profile picture.

I think he is doing much better than I thought he would. He has the economy moving faster and sooner then expected. He has plugged the right people into the right positions, and most of all his tweets send liberals up the wall daily.

As president, Barack Obama repeatedly mocked Donald Trump’s political ambitions, laughing at the idea of Trump ever winning the presidency.

Obama mocked Trump in 2011 for calling into question whether he was born in America. The state of Hawaii later released Obama’s longform birth certificate to put the matter to rest. Obama viciously mocked Trump for the controversy, before mocking the idea of Trump ever serving in the White House.

From the White House transcript of the event:

Now, I know that he’s taken some flak lately, but no one is happier, no one is prouder to put this birth certificate matter to rest than the Donald. (Laughter.) And that’s because he can finally get back to focusing on the issues that matter –- like, did we fake the moon landing? (Laughter.) What really happened in Roswell? (Laughter.) And where are Biggie and Tupac? (Laughter and applause.) But all kidding aside, obviously, we all know about your credentials and breadth of experience. (Laughter.) For example — no, seriously, just recently, in an episode of Celebrity Apprentice — (laughter) — at the steakhouse, the men’s cooking team cooking did not impress the judges from Omaha Steaks. And there was a lot of blame to go around. But you, Mr. Trump, recognized that the real problem was a lack of leadership. And so ultimately, you didn’t blame Lil’ Jon or Meatloaf. (Laughter.) You fired Gary Busey. (Laughter.) And these are the kind of decisions that would keep me up at night. (Laughter and applause.) Well handled, sir. (Laughter.) Well handled.Say what you will about Mr. Trump, he certainly would bring some change to the White House. Let’s see what we’ve got up there. (Laughter.) (Screens show “Trump White House Resort and Casino.”)


A month before the 2016 election, Obama mocked Trump’s campaign on “Jimmy Kimmel.” Obama read a tweet from Trump saying that Obama “will go down as perhaps the worst president in the history of the United States,” before turning Trump into a punchline. “Really? Well, @realDonaldTrump, at least I will go down as a president,” Obama said, dropping his phone on the floor for dramatic effect.

A year into the Trump presidency, Obama’s legacy is taking a beating.

Trump has overseen the dismantling of several of Obamacare’s most controversial aspects. The tax cuts package Trump signed last month included a provision repealing Obamacare’s individual mandate. Trump also rolled back the Obama administration’s contraception mandate, which forced religious groups like the Little Sisters of the Poor to provide birth control for all employees, regardless of conscientious objections.

Trump’s Department of Education rolled back several measures that conservatives had decried as federal overreach. The Trump administration repealed the Obama-era mandate that required all public schools to implement transgender bathroom policies and speech codes. The Trump administration also revoked a legally dubious Title IX guidance that regulated sexual assault proceedings on college campuses.

In July, Trump announced the United States would be pulling out of the Paris Climate Accords, which Trump blasted as a threat to American sovereignty. Trump’s Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) rolled back the Obama administration’s Clean Water Rule, which drastically increased federal regulations of streams, and repealed the Obama-era Clean Power Plan, which increased environmental regulations on coal-fired plants. Trump approved both the Keystone XL and Dakota pipelines that Obama had rejected.

Last month, Trump’s Federal Communications Commission (FCC) rolled back the Obama-era Net Neutrality policy that increased federal regulation of the Internet.

Trump’s foreign policy has made for a similar contrast with Obama’s.


Trump has embraced a distinctly more pro-Israel approach than his predecessor and has embraced a much harder line on Iran, which Obama sought to appease. Trump announced last month that the US recognizes Jerusalem as the capital of Israel, something Obama had promised to do, but never actually followed through.


The Trump administration announced in October that Trump planned on decertifying the Iran nuclear deal, which was a pillar of Obama’s foreign policy legacy. Trump’s national security strategy released last month slammed Iran, which is the number one state sponsor of terrorism, as the number one threat to peace in the Middle East.

The bad news for Obama: Trump has at least three more years to get the last laugh.

Link

I have to admit that I was wrong about Obama's policy regarding Daesh. If you will remember, the main strategy was to provide jobs to the JVs.

History has now shown that that strategy is the one that has managed to dismember that radical Islamic ideology. Jobs did the trick.

What I failed to consider, and Obama's policy did not make clear, is that when referring to jobs, Daesh's JVs job was--- to die.

Thanks, Obama. Your precognition and remarkable insightfulness has to be appreciated and commended. You're a genius. Einstein has nothing on you.

quote:

Originally posted by JALLEN:

quote:

Originally posted by justjoe:

quote:

Originally posted by braillediver:

quote:

Originally posted by JALLEN:
Why so many days to release? 19 Congressional working days might put it into summer. The rules were that it took a vote of the committee and no objection from the WH. That would take half hour, an hour tops in real life.

At What Point and How do We the People say enough is enough and we want to know what's going on!

I don't want to be played but the Dems or the Republicans.

As POTUS, Trump could declassify the document. Then it could be released immediately, without anyone's permission. My hope is that if this gets tangled in bureaucratic gamesmanship, he will do so.

No.

According to the information we have, release must be authorized by a vote of the committee then the material is sent to the WH which, if there is no objection within 5 days, the document(s) can be made public.

This is not “classified” in the national security sense, apparently, but a creation of committee rules, either this committee uniquely, or Congressionally.

This is from a blog by Glenn Greenwald:

"All classification by the U.S. government has no basis in laws passed by Congress (with one tiny exception that is irrelevant here). Rather, all classification is based on presidential executive orders, which rely on the president’s constitutional role as commander in chief of the armed forces. According to the Supreme Court, the presidential power “to classify and control access to information bearing on national security … flows primarily from the constitutional investment of power in the president.”

That means presidents can also declassify anything they chose to — for any reason or no reason — as they have done in the past. George W. Bush, under pressure in 2004, declassified the section of the 2001 presidential daily brief headlined “Bin Laden Determined to Strike in U.S.” Barack Obama declassified the Justice Department memos produced during the Bush presidency on the legality of torture."

Greenwald is a leftist, but he has written extensively on matters of the law, and what he says, above, seems pretty cut and dried.

https://theintercept.com/2018/...be-shameless-frauds/

As I understand the matter from what Greenwald has written, whatever the specifics of that memo, Trump as POTUS can issue an executive order and declassify it.

No?

What really irks me is that the boneheads in congress get paid during a shutdown. Our military does not.

This is a broken piece in our system. They work for us. They are our employees. Since when is it a good idea for our employees to decide their rate of pay, what healthcare plan they get, perks, benefits and retirement package. It seems this would be better suited for an unbiased branch or department to make for us. They certainly don't want We The People to decide with their abysmal approval ratings.

These bastards need some skin in the game with a strong desire to keep the gov open lest their own bank accounts be affected. They should also have an incentive to go get a real job after their term is up.

House Republicans are sharply divided over how to handle a classified memo that President Donald Trump’s allies say contains explosive details of misconduct by senior FBI and Justice Department officials.

The memo, compiled by House Intelligence Committee chairman Devin Nunes and fellow Republicans on the panel, claims that senior federal officials abused a secret surveillance program, commonly known as FISA, to target the Trump campaign. It also alleges other federal law enforcement wrongdoing that some Republicans insist should lead to the firings of senior officials.


But while several Republicans have publicly cited the document as cause for alarm—triggering an aggressive Twitter campaign that has featured dozens of supportive tweets by the president's son, Donald Trump Jr.—they have not detailed its specific allegations.

That has prompted Democrats to allege a smear campaign. The House Intelligence Committee’s top Democrat, Rep. Adam Schiff, calls the memo a misleading ploy to discredit federal probes into 2016 Russian election meddling and ties between Trump associates and the Kremlin.

“It’s designed to push out a destructive narrative and further the attacks on the FBI. It’s basically a burn-the-house down strategy to protect the president,” he said.


The memo, according to three people who have viewed it, raises questions about how the FBI handled a fall 2016 application for a warrant to surveil a Trump campaign adviser, Carter Page, and whether agents were forthcoming about the role a controversial dossier alleging Kremlin influence over Trump played in their decision to seek the warrant.

The dossier was compiled in 2016 by former British spy Christopher Steele, a trusted FBI partner in previous investigations, who had been commissioned by the private research firm Fusion GPS to investigate Trump's business ties to Russia. Fusion's work was funded at that time by a lawyer who represented Hillary Clinton's presidential campaign and the Democratic National Committee. It's unclear if Steele's relationship to the campaign was disclosed in the FISA application.


The main debate in the House centered not around the memo's secret allegations, but whether the classified document can be publicly released without compromising FBI sources and methods.

“You don’t want the enemy to know that,” said Rep. Peter King (R-N.Y.), an intelligence committee member who supports allowing his colleagues — but not the public — to see the full document. “This is not to protect the guilty. It’s to protect the innocent.”

Other members of the panel were similarly cautious. Rep. Mike Conaway (R-Texas), said that releasing the complete memo would be “dangerous.” Rep. Chris Stewart (R-Utah) said he’d only be comfortable if a “scrubbed” or “unclassified” version of the memo were released. And King said he’d support a “redacted” version of the report to inform the public of their findings.

But several of the president’s top congressional allies—who were already harsh critics of the FBI and the Justice Department—described the memo’s findings in dire terms and said it was urgent to reveal to Americans.

"I think that this will not end just with firings. I believe there are people who will go to jail,” said Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.) in an interview on Fox News.

“I no longer hold out hope there is an innocent explanation for the information the public has seen. I have long said it is worse than Watergate,” said Rep. Steve King (R-Iowa).

Several GOP lawmakers came close to describing the memo's classified contents Friday, saying it describes purported abuses of the FISA—or Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act—program by Obama administration officials, mishandling of a tool to "unmask" the identities Americans swept up in intercepts and mishandling of a disputed dossier that alleged criminal ties between Trump and Russia.

Nunes and other Republicans have previously alleged that Obama officials wrongfully unmasked Trump associates for political reasons, though they haven't substantiated those claims. Obama officials insist they did nothing wrong.


The House GOP push has spawned a trending hashtag on Twitter, #releasethememo that conservative media hyped throughout the day Friday.

By Friday evening, Trump Jr., had tweeted about the memo 37 times since the previous day. Fox News host Sean Hannity opened his Thursday night prime-time show with a discussion of the still-secret memo, which he treated as a bombshell that could lead to the end of special counsel Robert Mueller's investigation into Russian collusion and potential obstruction of justice by the president or his allies.

There appeared to be darker elements at work as well. Business Insider reported that the hashtag assigned to the memo debate has been fueled by Twitter accounts linked to Kremlin propaganda. Wikileaks, the website run by Julian Assange that intelligence officials say was complicit in the Kremlin's 2016 interference campaign, has offered a $1 million reward for a leaked copy of the memo.

In an instance of strange bedfellows, Republicans also picked up support from the ACLU and the former NSA contractor-turned-fugitive Edward Snowden. Both tweeted support for releasing the memo, saying that it could inform a debate about Congress's reauthorization of government surveillance powers contained in the FISA law. (Congress has since passed the measure, which Trump signed into law Friday.)

Conservative lawmakers hope the furor will help pressure House Speaker Paul Ryan to invoke a little-known House process that allows the public disclosure of a classified document.

Ryan declined to respond to a shouted question Friday on whether he’d read the memo, and a source familiar with his discussion with conservatives on Thursday said he deferred questions about the document's release to Nunes.

Nunes hasn’t indicated whether he’ll call for a vote, and he appeared to be waiting for more members of the House to review the text.

Asked about lawmakers who have described the contents of the memo, King said lawmakers have to "be careful what you say" since the substance remains classified. In fact, he said, that discussion was at the heart of internal discussions by the intelligence committee about whether to release the memo at all.

"It was enough of a fight to get this out" to Congress, he said. "It was a pretty heated debate."

One senior GOP senator, asked about his House colleagues' alarm over the memo's contents, sounded a more cautious line.

As he emerged from the House’s secure meeting room Friday, Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas) declined to say whether he'd actually seen the document. But when asked about the characterization by some rank-and-file Republicans that the memo's contents are “shocking,” Cornyn replied: “I think there’s a lot of paranoia around here when it comes to that topic.”

The lawmakers calling for a the release of the document have pointed to an obscure House rule that permits the intelligence committee to release classified information deemed to be in the public interest.

Under that process, the committee must notify Trump, who would have five days to decide whether to object. If he does, the committee may refer the matter to the full House, which would then meet in a "closed" session, out of public view, to debate and vote on the request.

Other than Schiff, Democrats have said little about the GOP memo, though it was unclear how many had viewed the document by Friday afternoon.

Schiff said he opposes the report’s release because the public would not be able to see highly classified source material on which the report is based, which he said would help identify “distortions” and inaccuracies.

Republicans, Schiff said, are “doing their best to tear apart the FBI to protect the president and I think it’s a terrible disservice to the country.”

A broader group of House intelligence committee Democrats called the concise memo—which they dismissed as “talking points”—an intentional attempt to mislead lawmakers because they'll never see the underlying documents that Republicans used to form their analysis.

“The documents that supposedly inform these talking points are highly classified," the lawmakers said in a joint statement. "And they will not be made public, making it impossible for the few Members who have seen the documents to explain the flaws and misstatements contained within the talking points without disclosing our most closely held intelligence sources and methods. This is by design."

Link

This sounds like more political double-speak. If there is important information that the public needs to know, scrub the document to remove sources and methods and release the damn thing.

If it comes out as a "black" page with an occasional word here or there, well then you have wasted our time and money you fucking political hacks.

RMD

and how do we make them pay for wasting our time?

thats the real issue - there needs to be some enticement to make them want to do the right thing, not the political thing

^^^ rduckwor: Far as I can tell, the only legitimate concern about release of the document is that FBI sources would be revealed. As you say, black them out. Would just be some names here and there, maybe here and there a sentence or phrase that could compromise a source.

Refusal to release is pure bullshit. It is based on what we would learn about the FBI, Mueller's investigation, Comey's behavior. Many otherwise level headed people who have seen it say it is absolutely shocking.

Trump could have it declassified and released, and if that's what it takes, I hope he does so.

So all of congress can read the 4 pages.

But it is so sensitive the public can't read it.

Maxine Waters can read it, but not us. BS

The issue that Schiff raises can be addressed. He says the summary is distorted and does not accurately reflect the detailed FISA documents.

After the document is released, Nunes can bring in FBI, CIA, NSA, DoJ leads and they can verify that the 4 pages do represent the details.

(Better yet, do that before the 4 pages are released)

We don't have to (and never will) get Schiff to acknowledge the truth. We just have to convince enough U.S. voters of the truth.

With all of the discussion on how the dossier was misused, it might help to revisit what the dossier said.

Here is the first report in the dossier provided by Christopher Steele and dated 20 Jun 2016.

Note that Steele generated this just a few weeks after being hired by Fusion. Steele then took it to the FBI in early July 2016.

Christopher Steele, out of MI6 for 7 years and acting as a private investigator, comes up w this in a few weeks.

IF it was true, where were were the CIA and NSA ? Remember multiple people in the FBI and CIA have said they couldn't corrobate any of it.









The Russians "cultivated" Donald Trump for at least 5 years. Why ? He had never run for office before.

Donald Trump announced he was running for president in June 2015. It was months before he had a "team" and that was a rag tag team at that.

It was Mar 2016 before it was highly likely Donald Trump would be the Republican nominee, even though the entire REP establishment was trying to stop his nomination.

"Kremlin had been feeding Trump and his team info intelligence on his opponents, including Clinton, for several years" ??


Also note that while the Kremlin was supposedly feeding Trump intel on Clinton for several years, the report concludes with the statement that the Kremlin Clinton dossier had not been made available to Trump or his campaign.