US Politics Thread 2021-24

[August]

Well it's up the prosecutor to convince the Jury and the Judge that Trump did it on purpose.

I do hope the jury and the judge is 150 % political neutral and only concentrate on the law.

Markus




Did what exactly? Like Rockstar says so far it's all smoke and mirrors.

[Dowly]

The DOJ in response to not support the unsealing of the search affidavit calls it a "criminal investigation". The response also mentions that unsealing the affidavit would reveal information about witnesses and their statements.

Me thinks someone snitched. :)


https://www.politico.com/f/?id=00000182-a333-dc87-a5ea-e73f29010000

[mapuc]

Did what exactly? Like Rockstar says so far it's all smoke and mirrors.


Thank you August and Rockstar.

I mean
The intention behind -They found these paper at his Resident in Mar-A-Lago.

Did he planned on taking those paper with him when he left Washington, if so then he did it with full intention(On purpose).

It's the level of intention the prosecutor has to convince the jury. To send Trump 10 years behind bars-The prosecutor has to really convince the Jury and the judge that Trump had planned it and he had planned on using them-Selling them a.s.o.

Markus

[Otto Harkaman]

Thank you August and Rockstar.

I mean
The intention behind -They found these paper at his Resident in Mar-A-Lago.

Did he planned on taking those paper with him when he left Washington, if so then he did it with full intention(On purpose).

It's the level of intention the prosecutor has to convince the jury. To send Trump 10 years behind bars-The prosecutor has to really convince the Jury and the judge that Trump had planned it and he had planned on using them-Selling them a.s.o.

Markus

lol they just took some "documents" so far, from where are you getting this jury and conviction thing? As we joked if this ever becomes a criminal thing all of you fools in Europe will have died of Zaporizhzhia poisoning before its even remotely resolved.

[mapuc]

lol they just took some "documents" so far, from where are you getting this jury and conviction thing? As we joked if this ever becomes a criminal thing all of you fools in Europe will have died of Zaporizhzhia poisoning before its even remotely resolved.

I didn't say that.
Personally I believe
Trump will be found not-guilty or he will get a fine.

Prison no. I do not believe this.

Markus

[Rockstar]

If it helps by “believing” in this or that so you sleep better at night. Here’s to good health. :Kaleun_Cheers:

[Otto Harkaman]

I didn't say that.
Personally I believe
Trump will be found not-guilty or he will get a fine.

Prison no. I do not believe this.

Markus

Here is what the true punishment is going to be, its going to be the tax payer who ends up paying for this "investigation" and if the Starr Investigation cost the tax payers $52 million it will be easily doubled that.

$52 Million Starr Probe Costliest Ever

Former independent counsel Kenneth W. Starr spent more than $52 million investigating President Clinton, officially making his Whitewater and Monica S. Lewinsky probe the most costly independent counsel investigation ever, according to a General Accounting Office report released yesterday.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/politics/2000/04/01/52-million-starr-probe-costliest-ever/3be88582-f0ee-4673-ac0c-f66c87326e82/

[Skybird]

You pay with something much worse than dollars. You pay with the destruction of your political culture, the completion of the erosion of trust into institutions, and a polarization that sooner or later must lead to violent extremes and fanatism exceeding the scale if it does not get stopped.



You pay with fulfilling Russia's hopes.

[Rockstar]

You pay with something much worse than dollars. You pay with the destruction of your political culture, the completion of the erosion of trust into institutions, and a polarization that sooner or later must lead to violent extremes and fanatism exceeding the scale if it does not get stopped.



You pay with fulfilling Russia's hopes.


The political culture is working just fine IMO because I think the vast majority of people think this is exactly how it’s supposed to be. We’re a world predominantly made up of gullible morons who don’t know any better. Being spoon fed tailored information we’re left to argue with each other over feelings, best guesses, cut and paste wars, jabbing each other in ernest trying to defend our opinions and bias about things we honestly know nothing about. The people feeding you know you better than you know yourself and it just ends up getting regurgitated.

#1. Use hot-button issues to stir up controversy like abortion, monkey pox, polio, gay marriage, race, BLM, Nazis, facists, white supremecy, terrorist, Muslims, police or some other politically charged drama that doesn’t affect the establishment directly. I oft wondered whatever happened to Occupy Wall Street. I’m thinking because they actually directed everyone’s attention towards politicians and corporations it was all quickly put down and forgotten. Notice now not much is said about, about spending, abuse, wages, inflation, future of the country, foreign or domestic policy. You know those things that would reflect directly on the leadership. Nope just party DERP.

#2. Have one group get emotionally outraged or do something that will provoke a emotional reaction from the other group.

#3. Let the people vent out their anger onto each other and get at each other’s throats.

#4. When the issue fades away, foment a new controversy and wash, rinse, repeat to maintain the status quo. No evidence necessary “just believe”. But like I said if it helps you sleep better a night all the more power to ya, it’s your world.

https://youtu.be/cHdp4iGjVUs

[Otto Harkaman]

https://youtu.be/jVUqK6ta6no

[Rockstar]

‘It’s just a ride, you can get off anytime you want.” - Bill Hicks

[Jimbuna]

If it helps by “believing” in this or that so you sleep better at night. Here’s to good health. :Kaleun_Cheers:

LOL

[Dowly]

How many Trump supporters does it take to change a lightbulb?
None. Trump says it’s changed and his supporters all cheer in the dark. :D

[Bilge_Rat]

He didn't. The documents were kept in Hoffman Estates by the NARA, since it was planned that the Barack Obama Presidential Library would be located there. NARA had the documents, not Obama.

No, not according to the legal agreement signed by the Obama Foundation and NARA in 2018.

paragrapgh 7 of the legal agreement states:

7. The Obama Foundation agrees to transfer up to ...[$3,300,000]... to support the move of classified and unclassified Obama Presidential records and artifacts from Hoffman Estates to NARA-controlled facilities that conform to the agency's archival storage standards for such records and artifacts, and for the modification of such spaces.

https://www.obama.org/wp-content/uploads/BOF-NARA-LOI.pdf

It is written in black and white that "Hoffman Estates" holds "classified" documents and that it is NOT a "NARA-controlled facilities that conforms to the agency's archival storage standards for such record".

Hard to be more clear than that.

These agreements are negotiated, drafted and reviewed by lawyers on both sides and the language is carefully chosen. What is clear from the legal agreement is that in september 2018, NARA was still negotiating with Obama's team on how to handle the "classifed" documents.

This takes us right back to the original question, i.e. why is Trump being treated different than Obama? NARA negotiated with Obama but with Trump they ask DOJ to launch a criminal investigation?


Here's NARA's statement from August 12:

That NARA press release is a joke since it directly contradicts the 2018 legal agreement, but reaction to it does not surprise me at all. Anti-Trumpers will grasp at any straw if they think it will somehow hurt Trump.

[mapuc]

A question

Could Obama access these paper mentioned in post #4014

If so how easily had he access to them ?

Markus

[Catfish]

I cannot rmember Trump making any proposal for handing over or storing his classified papers, be it to Nara or any "foundation", not secretly, not publicly, rather not at all. He clearly wanted to keep them himself, alone. Or am i wrong?
This is a tiny bit of difference for me.

[em2nought]

How many Trump supporters does it take to change a lightbulb?
None. Trump says it’s changed and his supporters all cheer in the dark. :D


We don't force changes in lightbulbs, we let the market decide. :D

[Dowly]

No, not according to the legal agreement signed by the Obama Foundation and NARA in 2018.

paragrapgh 7 of the legal agreement states:



https://www.obama.org/wp-content/uploads/BOF-NARA-LOI.pdf


The records were stored in Hoffman Estates temporarely from where they where then moved to NARA's own facilities when Obama decided to not build a Presidential Library but instead go with the digitization route. Paragraph 7 simply states that Obama is financially supporting NARA in moving the documents. The records remained in NARA's ownership all the way through. That you whine about anti-trump this, anti-trump that when it comes to NARA's own statement in the matter is your problem, just don't mistake it for a valid argument.


https://www.archives.gov/publications/prologue/2016/fall/archivist.html

When a President has served two full terms, as President Obama has, we have time to plan. The decision to build the future Obama Library in Chicago was made in 2015, and this year a temporary storage site was chosen in the Chicago area.https://share.america.gov/clearing-out-presidents-attic/
The trucks are headed for Illinois to the temporary headquarters of the Obama Library, until the permanent library in Chicago opens in 2021.https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/obama-center/ct-obama-archives-to-hoffman-estates-20160531-story.html
A massive volume of paperwork, electronic data and artifacts will find a temporary home at the old Plunkett Home Furnishings store on Golf Road in Hoffman Estates.

[..]
The National Archives employees will organize, digitize and preserve the contents of what is sometimes called the "president's attic," said John Laster, who directs the Presidential Materials Division at the agency and has toured the Hoffman Estates site.

[August]

I cannot rmember Trump making any proposal for handing over or storing his classified papers, be it to Nara or any "foundation", not secretly, not publicly, rather not at all. He clearly wanted to keep them himself, alone. Or am i wrong?
This is a tiny bit of difference for me.


Trump gave the Feds 15 boxes of of his personal papers at the beginning of this year and was in negotiations to give them more, but you can't "remember" eh? :)

[nikimcbee]

This is the same Government that FAKED it's Space Program to appear more advanced then it ever was.


It's true, I saw the documentary.:Kaleun_Thumbs_Up:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OezKgnDmrUU

[mapuc]

On several occasion I have read following on Twitter-

Its origine is from Elon Musk
"why hasn’t the FBI raided anyone on Epstein’s list."

I thought they had raided some of the people on this list.

This was an off topic detour
Back to discuss US politics- Gestern, Heute, Morgen

Markus

[em2nought]

Bye bye Liz. :up:
https://i.imgflip.com/5999sh.jpg

[Skybird]

Less "Grand" and more Orange in "GOP". The destruction continues. Long live the autocrats!

[Jimbuna]

Voters in the US state of Wyoming have ousted congresswoman Liz Cheney, a rare Republican critic of former President Donald Trump, in a primary election.

She has been trounced by a relative political newcomer and Trump-backed candidate, Harriet Hageman.

Ms Cheney, 56, was one of only two members of her party to join the congressional committee investigating Mr Trump's attempts to cling to power.

The three-term congresswoman was once a rising Republican star.

Conceding defeat, Ms Cheney signalled that this was the beginning of a new chapter of her political career. "Our work is far from over," she told a group of her supporters, including her father, former Vice-President Dick Cheney.

All 10 Republicans who voted to impeach Mr Trump after his supporters attacked the US Capitol building in January last year have been targeted in a scorched-earth campaign of revenge.

So far, four have retired, and now four have been defeated by his chosen candidates in primary ballots in the states of Wyoming, Washington, Michigan and South Carolina.

Only two have successfully maintained their places on the Republican ticket for re-election.

Ms Cheney was the last of the 10 to face the Trumpian assault.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-62569056

Talk about the US Civil War :o

[Rockstar]

Less "Grand" and more Orange in "GOP". The destruction continues. Long live the autocrats!

I know what you mean about those darn autocrats they do seem to be everywhere these days, huh.

Former German chancellor Gerhard Schroeder will remain a member of the ruling Social Democrats (SPD), the party said Monday, finding his ties with Vladimir Putin did not breach its rules.

https://bilder.t-online.de/b/54/59/72/92/id_54597292/tid_da/eng-befreundet-altkanzler-gerhard-schroeder-und-der-wiedergewaehlte-russische-praesident-wladimir-putin.jpg

At least the voters in the Wyoming primary showed you Germans and the rest of the world they had a choice and their opinions mattered. Baltic States, Poland, Ukraine getting rid of their parasites and symbols of Russian oppression. Germany keeps their’s.


Oh boy I tell ya I’m gonna have another great night sleep. ;)

[Rockstar]

Talk about the US Civil War :o

Civil war? It’s Wyoming, I don’t live there doesn’t bother me a bit who they send as their represenative. Only civil war going on is in peoples pants.:haha: (Whatever that means) :o

[Bilge_Rat]

The records were stored in Hoffman Estates temporarely from where they where then moved to NARA's own facilities when Obama decided to not build a Presidential Library but instead go with the digitization route. Paragraph 7 simply states that Obama is financially supporting NARA in moving the documents. The records remained in NARA's ownership all the way through.


Is that really the best you can do? Pretend the 2018 Legal Agreement does not say what it actually says in plain language and then post irrelevant links to PR material?

I will post again the text to article 7 of the 2018 Legal Agreement:

7. The Obama Foundation agrees to transfer up to ...[$3,300,000]... to support the move of classified and unclassified Obama Presidential records and artifacts from Hoffman Estates to NARA-controlled facilities that conform to the agency's archival storage standards for such records and artifacts, and for the modification of such spaces.

https://www.obama.org/wp-content/uploads/BOF-NARA-LOI.pdf

The language is black and white and unambiguous. There were classified douments held by the Obama Foundation in the Hoffman Estates in 2018 and the Hoffman Estates was not a NARA-controlled facility that conforms to the agency's archival storage standards for such records.

Now in an objective Court of Law, there is something known as the hierarchy of evidence:

-On the one hand, you have a legal agreement drafted in 2018 which makes it clear that Obama was holding classified documents in potential violation of the presidential Records Act.

-On the other hand you have a "cover your ass" bureaucratic press release written by NARA when it is the middle of a potential political scandal.

The problem with Rabid Anti-Trumpers, like you, is that they are so blinded by their hatred of Trump that they can no longer look at facts objectively. They just latch on to whatever story they think will potentially hurt Trump even though it is as flimsy as a house of cards.

So when the question came up if Trump is being treated differenty from other ex-Presidents, NARA conveniently issues a PR docmunent and all the MSM latched on to it: "Oh Look, a shiny object! case closed! no need to investigate further!"

Now if these were more normal political times, you might expect journalists to dig a little deeper and ask some simple questions like:

-WHO actually wrote the NARA press release?;
-Was the author of the NARA press release aware of the 2018 Legal Agreement?;
-Can NARA explain the discrepancy between what they are saying now and what was in the 2018 Legal Agreeement?;

So again we are back to the same question as before, why is Trump deing treated differently than Obama?

You can be sure all these questions and more will be asked in 2023 when NARA officials are hauled in front of congressional committees to answer them under oath.

[mapuc]

Depending on where a person stands they either support or goes against Trump. However-We may discuss until judgement day whether he's not guilty or guilty, 'cause at the bottom line it's the American law who has the last word in this adventure.

What kind of sentence he will get none of us know-It can go from free(not guilty) to max guilt = 10 years prison.

Markus

[Dowly]

I will post again the text to article 7 of the 2018 Legal Agreement:
https://www.obama.org/wp-content/uploads/BOF-NARA-LOI.pdf

The language is black and white and unambiguous.
As you yourself said the language is chosen carefully. So, what does paragraph 7 say? Without any assumptions?

It says that the Obama Foundation is funding the transfer of documents and artifacts from one place to another, and specifies that the new place has to be up to NARAs standards. It says nothing about the standards of the facility located in Hoffman Estates. You are just making assumptions based on what you want it to say.


So when the question came up if Trump is being treated differenty from other ex-Presidents, NARA conveniently issues a PR docmunent and all the MSM latched on to it: "Oh Look, a shiny object! case closed! no need to investigate further!"
My links are all from 2016-2017. I intentionally dug up stuff from before Trump's current legal troubles so you couldn't call them biased. Yet here we are...

[August]

What I get from this pissing contest is that Obama had private possession of hard copies of classified presidential documents for two years before finally turning them over to NARA in 2018.

He was lucky the letter agencies weren't out to get him or he'd have gotten the Trump treatment, if he wasn't a Democrat that is...

[mapuc]

Is Trump being treated different because he's...Trump ?

Markus

[August]

Is Trump being treated different because he's...Trump ?

Markus


Pretty much.



BTW I found out the reason that Trump has two passports. The second one is a diplomatic passport issued to all presidents and senior admin officials.



The U.S. government issues several different types of passports (https://py.usembassy.gov/wp-content/uploads/sites/274/2017/05/CAHeader-TYPES-OF-PASSPORTS-Nov-22-2016.pdf) to its citizens. Most U.S. passports fall under the category of “fee passports,” which are blue and also known as “regular” or “tourist” passports. They are valid for 10 years when issued to people 16 years of age and older, or five years when issued to people under 16.

Special issuance passports are issued to U.S. government officials, like the president, and sometimes their family members. These passports may also be issued to third-party contractors working for the U.S. government “in limited circumstances,” the U.S. Department of State says. The passports are valid for up to five years, can’t be used for personal travel and can be issued in addition to a regular passport.

The State Department outlines four types of special issuance passports:



Black diplomatic passports: Issued to Foreign Service officers and other people with diplomatic or comparable status.
Maroon official passports: Issued to other U.S. government officials or employees traveling abroad for official duties, and to military personnel when required by their country of destination.
Gray service passports: Issued on a limited basis to third-party contractors traveling to support the U.S. government whose travel can’t be accomplished by using a regular passport.
Blue no-fee regular passports: Issued to certain employees within the Department of Defense, American National Red Cross, and Peace Corps volunteers assigned overseas.





https://www.wcnc.com/article/news/verify/government-verify/fact-check-who-can-have-multiple-us-passports-president-trump-fbi-mar-a-lago-search/536-1e9aa3b4-f824-436b-9c8c-101161fb82e7

[mapuc]

Pretty much.



BTW I found out the reason that Trump has two passports. The second one is a diplomatic passport issued to all presidents and senior admin officials.



Wasn't it three passport ?

I myself had once two passport.

Markus

[August]

Wasn't it three passport ?

I myself had once two passport.

Markus




The third one was expired. They don't collect expired passports or drivers licenses over here. Most of us middle aged folks have several of them laying around.

[Dowly]

What I get from this pissing contest is that Obama had private possession of hard copies of classified presidential documents for two years before finally turning them over to NARA in 2018.
Nope. Ownership of the documents transferred to NARA as soon as Trump took the office.


Both Bilge Rat and you seem to mistake the 2018 letter of intent as some kind of first agreement for Obama to turn over the documents; it's not.

[mapuc]

It was first now I had time to read about Liz Cheney's defeat in the primary election in Wyoming

I can say this
If you show disrespect against the leader of a party-Like the Republican the voters will punish you.

She was one of the Rep who voted for impeach Trump-The voters don't care this politician has in their eye shown disrespect

Markus

[Kptlt. Neuerburg]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ekefMUICOGo

[August]

Nope. Ownership of the documents transferred to NARA as soon as Trump took the office.


I didn't say anything about Trump. Try reading before commenting buddy.

[Gorpet]

Is that really the best you can do? Pretend the 2018 Legal Agreement does not say what it actually says in plain language and then post irrelevant links to PR material?

I will post again the text to article 7 of the 2018 Legal Agreement:



https://www.obama.org/wp-content/uploads/BOF-NARA-LOI.pdf

The language is black and white and unambiguous. There were classified douments held by the Obama Foundation in the Hoffman Estates in 2018 and the Hoffman Estates was not a NARA-controlled facility that conforms to the agency's archival storage standards for such records.

Now in an objective Court of Law, there is something known as the hierarchy of evidence:

-On the one hand, you have a legal agreement drafted in 2018 which makes it clear that Obama was holding classified documents in potential violation of the presidential Records Act.

-On the other hand you have a "cover your ass" bureaucratic press release written by NARA when it is the middle of a potential political scandal.

The problem with Rabid Anti-Trumpers, like you, is that they are so blinded by their hatred of Trump that they can no longer look at facts objectively. They just latch on to whatever story they think will potentially hurt Trump even though it is as flimsy as a house of cards.

So when the question came up if Trump is being treated differenty from other ex-Presidents, NARA conveniently issues a PR docmunent and all the MSM latched on to it: "Oh Look, a shiny object! case closed! no need to investigate further!"

Now if these were more normal political times, you might expect journalists to dig a little deeper and ask some simple questions like:

-WHO actually wrote the NARA press release?;
-Was the author of the NARA press release aware of the 2018 Legal Agreement?;
-Can NARA explain the discrepancy between what they are saying now and what was in the 2018 Legal Agreeement?;

So again we are back to the same question as before, why is Trump deing treated differently than Obama?

You can be sure all these questions and more will be asked in 2023 when NARA officials are hauled in front of congressional committees to answer them under oath.

I think Dowly should move to the USA and run for President.Seems he has more knowledge of our Constitution than our own Politicians. The problem is the Oath they take.

[Gorpet]

Nothing: So all you allies that haven't been screwed already. We Americans are going to screw you some more with the full knowledge and backing of your politicians. Look the best minds you have in your country have fallen to power and money.

The Chinese loosed upon the world a virus.If it was accidental why were they working on it Why? Who and what countries were they going to wipe out with this virus ? The United States ,The United Kingdom,Canada,India,Russia ,South America ,Africa The rest of the world? Have your Politicians been living up to the oaths they have taken? And hold the Chinese responsible?

How in the hell did the smartest people in our countries that we elected to represent us and they took a Oath of Office to protect the integrity of our people and our nation's.Bring us to this point? Of total world collapse?

In our past our leaders were chosen from those who lived with us day to day hour by hour.They experienced the realty's of a world made by their decisions There were no escapes.Maybe it should be so again.

[Buddahaid]

Oops, Trump lies again.

https://apnews.com/article/fact-check-obama-million-documents-929954890662

[Gorpet]

Has any Allied News Organization asked any President or Head of Government of an Allied Country the cost per day to finance Volodymyr Zelenskyy the President of Ukraine's war?
Now the United States President has taken Trillions of his citizens money without even asking or taken a vote on it.If your talking Democracy i think the Citizens of country should take a vote and decide before One Party or one Leader of a Party makes this kind of decision.If you have a Political Party running off making decisions about wars against another country.

Without even considering what the people of his own country think about it.That's not Democracy that's What ?
Oh yes The United States Government our Grandma's and Grandpa's and their children and the World's Same must have a Planet they can Dominate . And if it means War to hide their secrets then let slip the Dogs.

[Gorpet]

Well Joe Biden is Joe.
But is his party any different than Mr.Putins ? I would say no ,We the everyday people in this country are getting screwed by this Party. If everyone will be equal without prejudice why do we still have unions ? Why are the Democrats going crazy?

Our Communist will be the Best.That's what America's ruling families are about, Our Communist families will show yours and the World how to be the best.They failed at keeping a moral compass based on the simple principles of their own laws. Power is what turns everyday citizens and the party's they join into Dictators. Right down to the people who teach your children,your neighbors, law enforcement hell the guys who pick up your garbage. How is your government any different ?

You don't know!

[Gorpet]

[QUOTE=Buddahaid;2823561]Oops, Trump lies again.

https://apnews.com/article/fact-check-obama-million-documents-929954890662[/QUOTE

Your own party,Lives in your head everyday.It's not Donald Trump.You have a weakness in your mind. If you were to get out and spend 12 hrs a day doing some construction work. I will guarantee you the last thing on your mind at the end of the day will not be Politics.

[Gorpet]

It was first now I had time to read about Liz Cheney's defeat in the primary election in Wyoming

I can say this
If you show disrespect against the leader of a party-Like the Republican the voters will punish you.

She was one of the Rep who voted for impeach Trump-The voters don't care this politician has in their eye shown disrespect

Markus

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BITBjv6RJqI

[August]

Interesting.



FBI Unit Leading Mar-a-Lago Probe Earlier Ran Discredited Trump-Russia Investigation

By Paul Sperry (https://www.realclearinvestigations.com/authors/paul_sperry/), RealClearInvestigations
August 18, 2022

The FBI division overseeing the investigation of former President Trump's handling of classified material at his Mar-a-Lago residence is also a focus of Special Counsel John Durham's investigation of the bureau's alleged abuses of power and political bias during its years-long Russiagate probe of Trump.

The FBI's nine-hour, 30-agent raid of the former president's Florida estate is part of a counterintelligence case run out of Washington – not Miami, as has been widely reported – according to FBI case documents and sources with knowledge of the matter. The bureau's counterintelligence division led the 2016-2017 Russia "collusion" investigation of Trump, codenamed "Crossfire Hurricane."

Although the former head of Crossfire Hurricane, Peter Strzok, was fired after the disclosure of his vitriolic anti-Trump tweets, several members of his team remain working in the counterintelligence unit, the sources say, even though they are under active investigation by both Durham and the bureau's disciplinary arm, the Office of Professional Responsibility. The FBI declined to respond to questions about any role they may be taking in the Mar-a-Lago case.

In addition, a key member of the Crossfire team – Supervisory Intelligence Analyst Brian Auten – has continued to be involved in politically sensitive investigations, including the ongoing federal probe of potentially incriminating content found on the abandoned laptop of President Biden's son Hunter Biden, according to recent correspondence (https://www.grassley.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/grassley_to_justice_deptfbipoliticalbiasfollowup.p df) between the Senate Judiciary Committee and FBI Director Christopher Wray. FBI whistleblowers have alleged that Auten tried to falsely discredit derogatory evidence against Hunter Biden during the 2020 campaign by labeling it Russian "disinformation," an assessment that caused investigative activity to cease.


Auten has been allowed to work on sensitive cases even though he has been under internal investigation since 2019, when Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz referred him for disciplinary review for his role in vetting a Hillary Clinton campaign-funded dossier used by the FBI to obtain a series of wiretap warrants to spy on former Trump campaign adviser Carter Page. Horowitz singled out Auten for cutting a number of corners (https://www.realclearinvestigations.com/articles/2021/03/30/meet_the_russiagate_prober_who_couldnt_verify_anyt hing_in_the_steele_dossier_yet_said_nothing_for_ye ars_769667.html) in the verification process and even allowing information he knew to be incorrect slip into warrant affidavits and mislead the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act court.

https://www.realclearinvestigations.com/articles/2022/08/18/fbi_unit_leading_mar-a-lago_probe_previously_led_russiagate_hoax_848582.h tml

[August]

The Savages!


Constitution be damned, the FDA is moving ahead to ban almond milk

by Justin Pearson (https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/author/justin-pearson)

August 18, 2022 01:54 PM



Governing a country as large as the United States is hard. Sometimes, government officials make mistakes. But that is no excuse for doing something they know is wrong. The FDA (https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/tag/fda) knows it is unconstitutional to ban terms such as “coconut milk,” “almond milk,” and “oat milk.” But because large and powerful groups have asked for the ban, the FDA is planning to impose it anyway.

The FDA knows the ban would violate the First Amendment because of Mary Lou Wesselhoeft, a Florida dairy farmer who refused to inject anything artificial into her farm’s dairy products. She sold pasteurized whole milk and cream, along with the skim milk that was left over from skimming the cream.
The problem for Mary Lou was that Florida had copied an FDA requirement that skim milk without artificial vitamin additives could not be called "skim milk." Instead, because the product only consisted of pure skim milk, it was required to be called “imitation skim milk” or “imitation milk product.” Rather than mislabel her skim milk and comply with the government’s demand that she lie to her customers, Mary Lou literally poured her skim milk down the drain.
Mary Lou launched a First Amendment lawsuit challenging this ridiculous regulation in 2014. Florida argued that it could ban Mary Lou’s label because her pure skim milk had a different vitamin content than skim milk with artificial additives. A federal appellate court disagreed (https://ij.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/201612049.pdf). In 2017, the court ruled in Mary Lou’s favor and explained that nutritional concerns could not justify a ban on speech. At best, the government could demand a content-neutral requirement for more information, with a nutritional fact panel being the best-known example. Mary Lou had always been willing to provide this additional information.

The FDA knows all about this ruling. In fact, when a subsequent lawsuit challenged the federal regulation that Florida had copied, the FDA’s director of food safety filed a sworn declaration (https://ij.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/FDA-Skim-Milk-Declaration.pdf) in federal court explaining that because of the ruling in Mary Lou’s case, the FDA would no longer enforce this regulation. The FDA also posted a letter (https://ij.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/Letter_to_South_Mountain_Creamery___4_22_2020_.pdf ) on its website telling states around the nation that they were no longer required to enforce the unconstitutional regulation either.
But then came the international dairy conglomerates. They are making the exact same argument that the federal appellate court rejected — that because of differences in nutritional content, the government can ban plain language that reasonable consumers generally understand.
Here, the banned terms are labels such as “coconut milk,” “almond milk,” and “cashew milk,” which the dairy cartel disingenuously says might confuse consumers. In fact, multiple (https://ij.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/FDA-Skim-Milk-Declaration.pdf) courts (https://www.thompsoncoburn.com/docs/default-source/blog-documents/8-21-order.pdf) have already explained that these types of bans are just as unconstitutional as the ban in Mary Lou’s case. The FDA undoubtedly knows about these court rulings too.
Yet despite knowing that the ban will violate the First Amendment, the FDA cannot bring itself to say no to the dairy industry’s powerful special interest groups. So, according to several (https://www.motherjones.com/food/2022/05/oat-milk-almond-milk-dairy-lobby-fda-labeling-plant-based/) reports (https://www.ajc.com/life/health/the-fda-may-force-plant-based-milk-alternatives-to-drop-the-milk-from-their-labels/QFA36QARFVDJ7K5LQQVKZC3D34/), the FDA is moving ahead with its plans to ban these terms that people understand perfectly well.

Worse, this ban already technically exists, even if it has never been enforced. The FDA’s regulations already say that only cow’s milk can be called "milk." Indeed, even goat milk does not qualify as "milk." But because no reasonable consumer actually thinks that coconut milk comes from a cow, this regulation has never been enforced. Nonetheless, in the coming weeks, the Office of Management and Budget (https://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/eoDetails?rrid=237264) could give the green light to the FDA’s new draft guidance on enforcing this previously unused, ridiculous clause buried deep in the regulatory code.
Despite knowing these bans will be challenged in court and that the FDA will lose, regulatory officials seem bent on wasting millions of taxpayer dollars defending an unconstitutional law to satisfy corporate interests, rather than allow consumers simply to read the labels and make the choice that is right for them. When those powerful groups come calling, the FDA’s desire to do the right thing goes down the drain, just like Mary Lou’s pure skim milk once did.
Justin Pearson is a senior attorney at the nonprofit Institute for Justice, where he was the first attorney in U.S. history to win a First Amendment challenge against a food standard of identity. He has written extensively on this topic, including in the Georgetown Journal of Law and Public Policy.

[em2nought]

Milk is milk, and women are women. :D

[Skybird]

https://www.nbcnews.com/health/health-care/frustrated-pharmacists-are-opting-insurance-system-saving-customers-hu-rcna36706



A small but growing number of "cash" pharmacies take no insurance, instead selling generic drugs, often at far lower prices than customers pay with insurance.

[August]

Biden administration caught in a whopper.





Biden White House facilitated DOJ's criminal probe against Trump, scuttled privilege claims: memos

"I have therefore decided not to honor the former President's 'protective' claim of privilege," acting National Archivist Debra Steidel Wall wrote Trump's team in May.

Long before it professed no prior knowledge of the raid on Donald Trump's estate, the Biden White House worked directly with the Justice Department and National Archives to instigate the criminal probe into alleged mishandling of documents, allowing the FBI to review evidence retrieved from Mar-a-Lago this spring and eliminating the 45th president's claims to executive privilege, according to contemporaneous government documents reviewed by Just the News.
The memos show then-White House Deputy Counsel Jonathan Su was engaged in conversations with the FBI, DOJ and National Archives as early as April, shortly after 15 boxes of classified and other materials were voluntarily returned to the federal historical agency from Trump's Florida home.
By May, Su conveyed to the Archives that President Joe Biden would not object to waiving his predecessor's claims to executive privilege, a decision that opened the door for DOJ to get a grand jury to issue a subpoena compelling Trump to turn over any remaining materials he possessed from his presidency.
The machinations are summarized in several memos and emails exchanged between the various agencies in spring 2022, months before the FBI took the added unprecedented step of raiding Trump's Florida compound with a court-issued search warrant.

[1Patriotofmany]

Big Giant fishing expedition. Imagine If the roles were reversed.

[em2nought]

So I had to give up a few years of my life in exchange for two years of college, I wonder if I'm going to get handed $10,000 from our benevolent federal government? :har:


https://www.foxnews.com/politics/biden-announces-student-loan-handout-national-debt-soars

[Jeff-Groves]

So I had to give up a few years of my life in exchange for two years of college, I wonder if I'm going to get handed $10,000 from our benevolent federal government? :har:


https://www.foxnews.com/politics/biden-announces-student-loan-handout-national-debt-soars

The 87,000 new IRS Agents probably gonna come after US for that money!

[Rockstar]

Take the money it’s free it will not cost you anything vote for us. Putin does the same thing to recruit soldiers for his cause in Ukraine.

[Buddahaid]

The 87,000 new IRS Agents probably gonna come after US for that money!

You do realize that half of the IRS employees we have now will be retired within five years and the 87,000 new ones is a ten year plan to maintain the normal staffing level.

[MaDef]

You do realize that half of the IRS employees we have now will be retired within five years and the 87,000 new ones is a ten year plan to maintain the normal staffing level.

Now Why on earth would I believe that, given how often the FEDS lie and obfuscate.

[Jeff-Groves]

You do realize that half of the IRS employees we have now will be retired within five years and the 87,000 new ones is a ten year plan to maintain the normal staffing level.

You do realize how much BS you just shoveled out right?
Don't see any announcements on other branches of the Criminal Enterprise known as The US Government.
Christ! If they got RICO'd? There'd be NO Government!

[Bubblehead1980]

You do realize that half of the IRS employees we have now will be retired within five years and the 87,000 new ones is a ten year plan to maintain the normal staffing level.

Not even worth trying to get people to understand this.

I am no fan of the feds or especially the IRS but looked into issue and 87,000 is to replace those lost to retirement etc. in coming years. So essentially, they will not actually gain many if employees. Plus all 87,000 will not be in the enforcement arm.

Superficially informed and overly assured people parroting nonsense out of fear.

[Buddahaid]

Now Why on earth would I believe that, given how often the FEDS lie and obfuscate.

Ya'll voted for the man that would run the government like business. This is an example of doing that.

[MaDef]

Ya'll voted for the man that would run the government like business. This is an example of doing that.

Yeah, right.... Can't blame this on Trump, he isn't in office anymore. This is more like the "Big Guy" ensuring he gets his 10%.

[August]

Not even worth trying to get people to understand this.

I am no fan of the feds or especially the IRS but looked into issue and 87,000 is to replace those lost to retirement etc. in coming years. So essentially, they will not actually gain many if employees. Plus all 87,000 will not be in the enforcement arm.

Superficially informed and overly assured people parroting nonsense out of fear.

Assuming it's true then how come this explanation has to come from you and Budda and not from the White House who should be the ones selling this to the public?

Like em or hate em it can't be argued that the Biden administration is absolutely horrible at getting their message out.

[Buddahaid]

Assuming it's true then how come this explanation has to come from you and Budda and not from the White House who should be the ones selling this to the public?

Like em or hate em it can't be argued that the Biden administration is absolutely horrible at getting their message out.

I won't argue that democrats are bad at messaging but I would also ask why so many republican sources are spreading the lie. I know, dumb question.

[mapuc]

And now to something quiet different

In some post on Twitter I read following.
Biden:
cognitively = 79 years old
cognitive = Dead
(can have misspelled some words)

Thought I would share it with my American friends to see if they agree or not.

Markus

[em2nought]

And now to something quiet different

In some post on Twitter I read following.
Biden:
cognitively = 79 years old
cognitive = Dead
(can have misspelled some words)

Thought I would share it with my American friends to see if they agree or not.

Markus


Biden seems cognitively max two years from death if I go by my father who died with memory issues at 79.

[August]

I won't argue that democrats are bad at messaging but I would also ask why so many republican sources are spreading the lie. I know, dumb question.


About as dumb as asking why so many democrat sources perpetuated the Russia collusion lie. Your boy Schiff ever produce the iron clad proof he and the media claimed to have on Trump?

[August]

Shows you that the Democrats just make it up as they go along.


Biden student loan handout to cost roughly $500B, according to Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget

........


Critics have argued Biden's program will contribute to already record-high levels of inflation in the U.S.
Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell argued the program is "yet another way to make inflation even worse, reward far-left activists, and achieve nothing for millions of working American families who can barely tread water."
Biden, however, touted the program as a fulfillment of his campaign promise to cancel $10,000 in student debt. Democrats had initially stated that the White House lacks the authority to unilaterally cancel debt and that the president must go through Congress.
"People think that the President of the United States has the power for debt forgiveness. He does not. He can postpone, he can delay, but he does not have that power. That has to be an act of Congress," House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said in 2021.
Biden himself doubted his authority to cancel debt through executive order last year.
"I don’t think I have the authority to do it by signing the pen," he said in February.






Suddenly he does have the authority? What changed?

[MaDef]

Shows you that the Democrats just make it up as they go along.





Suddenly he does have the authority? What changed?

I think he's trying to help midterm elections. An outright endorsement by Biden seems to be toxic, so this is a a way for him to "get-out-the-vote" for democrats without being directly involved.

While Biden doesn't have the authority to directly forgive Department of Education loans, he can play with the rules/regulations in such a way that the balance on the loans can be adjusted without repayment. having said that, the real problem is his assertion that anyone that has a student loan and makes <125,000$ is ineligible to take advantage of the "new rules/regulations", that will be challenged under the Equal protection clause of The Constitution

[Bubblehead1980]

Assuming it's true then how come this explanation has to come from you and Budda and not from the White House who should be the ones selling this to the public?

Like em or hate em it can't be argued that the Biden administration is absolutely horrible at getting their message out.


I am not a fan of Biden, but I hate lies, intellectual dishonesty etc, falsehoods made to stir up the masses.

Whitehouse should do more explaining on the 87,000 agents front, guess to them it's just not that big of a deal to them , because it really is not, just been made into a talking point for opposition. The pundits and politicians know they can get superficially informed people to parrot their nonsense without looking into things.

Hiring of 87,000 IRS agents alarmed me, but I looked into things and found reasonable explanations.

[August]

I am not a fan of Biden, but I hate lies, intellectual dishonesty etc, falsehoods made to stir up the masses.

Whitehouse should do more explaining on the 87,000 agents front, guess to them it's just not that big of a deal to them , because it really is not, just been made into a talking point for opposition. The pundits and politicians know they can get superficially informed people to parrot their nonsense without looking into things.

Hiring of 87,000 IRS agents alarmed me, but I looked into things and found reasonable explanations.


I imagine it would seem reasonable to you but I have my doubts. The main one being that retiring agents do not need an act of congress to be replaced.

But what do you care, aren't you bailing on us to move to another better country than ours?

[Rockstar]

There is no mandate to hire an additional 87,000 IRS employees. The team D team R party talking points is the usual b.s. we little people are spoon fed so we can argue with each other. Instead of paying attention to facts that matter.

One possible reason for the distraction is the IRA may increase tax revenue but so what? We little people don’t have any say how our taxes will be spent anyway, right?. Especially if nobody knows anything about it! The IRA may also reduce our after tax incomes, and reduce national economic output in the long run. But if nobody knows about that possibility and it does happen, whose to blame? I’m sure Congress will find some pointless distraction to feed the little people to argue with each other again. :D

https://taxfoundation.org/inflation-reduction-act/

The Inflation Reduction Act (IRA), successor to the House-passed Build Back Better Act of late 2021, has been touted by President Biden to, among other things, help reduce the country’s crippling inflation. Using the Tax Foundation’s General Equilibrium Model, we estimate that the Inflation Reduction Act would reduce long-run economic output by about 0.2 percent and eliminate about 29,000 full-time equivalent jobs in the United States. It would also reduce average after-tax incomes for taxpayers across every income quintile over the long run.

By reducing long-run economic growth, this bill may actually worsen inflation by constraining the productive capacity of the economy.

Our analysis contains estimates of the budgetary, economic, and distributional impacts of the Inflation Reduction Act as specified in bill text that was amended and passed in the Senate on August 7 and agreed upon in the House on August 12.

Using the General Equilibrium Model, we estimate that the tax provisions, IRS enforcement, and drug pricing provisions in the bill would increase federal revenues by about $676 billion over the budget window, before accounting for $352 billion in expanded tax credits for individuals and businesses, resulting in a net revenue increase of about $324 billion from 2022 to 2031.

Excluding the anticipated revenue from increased tax compliance and the drug pricing provisions, the bill would lose about $84 billion in revenue over the budget window.



https://youtu.be/_o7OrV_pv28

[mapuc]

Can you find anything in all this, that would have given FBI reason to search Mar-A-Lago some weeks ago ?

https://edition.cnn.com/2022/08/26/politics/mar-a-lago-search-warrant-affidavit-memo/index.html

Markus

[ET2SN]

Rockstar, the IRS has been bled dry since Regan was in office. :yep: Its the classic idea that if you can't get rid of the taxes, get rid of the enforcement. :03:

Look at all the sweetheart deals the big (and not so big) corporations have gotten over the years. Remember when "the rising tide will lift ALL of the boats"?

:har:

If you faithfully filed your 1040's without using some shady math, you were a sucker. Everyone cheated because everyone thought they could get away with it.

Meanwhile, we're still dealing with a global pandemic. I told you folks a long time ago, eventually we would have to pay for those stimulus checks back when the economy went into lock-down.

Were you expecting people to buy "Victory Over The Virus" bonds? Heck no, we were all too busy wearing our Jammies all day long and ordering from Amazon. :yeah:

[Buddahaid]

Oh yeah, the trickle down theory and Reagan beginning the erosion of the middle class.

[Rockstar]

Oh yeah, the trickle down theory and Reagan beginning the erosion of the middle class.

King Reagan and his pesky tax policy decrees. :har:


The thing is, it’s congress who’s empowered by the constitution to tax, who to tax and how much to tax. Not a president, and supply side economics policy has been going on for a lot longer than Reagan. 90 plus years has passed since the term ‘Trickle Down Economics’ was first coined by Will Rogers in 1932. In 1989 President Bush slandered the policy calling it ‘Voodoo Economics’, yet it continued. Now we suddenly hear proclamations of how Biden is finally ending it. Ya right, :haha:. I’ll believe it when someone can explain how it will happen without chanting the usual party slogans and snazzy catch phrases.

The words I remember Biden saying is “nothing will fundamentally change” if he’s elected. He wasn’t lying when he said that, or was he?

[Rockstar]

Speaking of those 87,000. Seems I was wrong and it isn’t a distraction as I first suggested, it’s just that staff increases will not be immediate. Though I don’t for a moment think it’s some spooky shadow army. Rather it seems that after some calculations the return on this particular investment makes it worth while.


https://www.cbo.gov/publication/57444

According to the CBO: Spending would increase in each year between 2021 and 2031, though the highest growth would occur in the first few years. By 2031, CBO projects, the proposal would make the IRS’s budget more than 90 percent larger than it is in CBO’s July 2021 baseline projections and would more than double the IRS’s staffing. Of the $80 billion, CBO estimates, about $60 billion would be for enforcement and related operations support.



https://home.treasury.gov/system/files/136/The-American-Families-Plan-Tax-Compliance-Agenda.pdf

Because the expansion in the IRS’s budget is phased in over a 10-year horizon, each year the IRS’s workforce should grow by no more than a manageable 15%. By the end of the decade, however, the IRS’s budget would be roughly 40% above 2011 levels in real terms as a result of this proposal.

On the bright side for all us po’ folk. They say their sights will be set primarily on those making $400,000 or more.

[em2nought]

Oh yeah, the trickle down theory and Reagan beginning the erosion of the middle class.

Such B.S.

The frugal middle class all DIED, and left their money to their leftist educated children who spent it all and then some. Reagan had nothing to do with it except for not seeing the infiltration of education by the left. :D

"The fault, dear Brutus, is not in our stars, But in ourselves, that we are underlings."

[MaDef]

On the bright side for all us po’ folk. They say their sights will be set primarily on those making $400,000 or more.And the Moon is made of green cheese.

[Rockstar]

And the Moon is made of green cheese.

No, but Apollo 17 took photos of an area between the Manilius and Cono Craters called Ina located in Lacus Felicitatis that suggest the Moon may be made of Bleu Cheese. :D

[Kptlt. Neuerburg]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mXaO4kd0kbc

[Rockstar]

The skyrocketing costs of tuition according to the New York Federal Reserve Bank is caused by, can you guess? Government paying off student loan debts. :doh:

https://www.newyorkfed.org/medialibrary/media/research/staff_reports/sr733.pdf

Which in turn leads too…

Most colleges do not have set prices for tuition. If you are someone they want in their school your tuition cost will be less than the average Joe or Jane’s cost. So, because of government interference colleges raise prices even further to maintain the status quo.

…writing in The New York Times Magazine, Adam Davidson said the "single most important factor behind the rise in tuition" is that high tuitions allow colleges to "shape" their student bodies.

https://www.businessinsider.com/this-could-be-the-single-most-important-reason-why-college-tuition-is-skyrocketing-2015-9?op=1


Seems politicians create a problem then claim to have all the answers on how to solve it. Spend, spend, spend, vote for us, we care a lot. People do love it so.

[Otto Harkaman]

What could possibly go wrong :woot:

[Buddahaid]

What could possibly go wrong :woot:

Your wife is smarter than you?

[mapuc]

What is it about your food processing facility who seems to spontaneously ignites ?

Markus

[Rockstar]

What is it about your food processing facility who seems to spontaneously ignites ?

Markus

Considering over a half million fires are reported in the U.S. each year. I’m going with the Baader-Meinhof Phenomenon.

[mapuc]

Considering over a half million fires are reported in the U.S. each year. I’m going with the Baader-Meinhof Phenomenon.

Nevertheless a conspiracy has evolved out of this.

Markus

[August]

Claiming that estimated deficit reduction pays for billions in new spending.


That's like saying if you overdraft on your bank account by only half as much as you did previously it justifies spending even more money that you don't have on something else.




DAY SEVEN: White House refuses to explain who will pay for Biden's $500B student loan handout

Economists say taxpayers are likely on the hook for it

By Haris Alic (https://www.foxnews.com/person/a/haris-alic) | Fox News (https://www.foxnews.com)

President Biden and White House officials remain silent about how they plan to pay for the cancelation of between $10,000 to $20,000 in student debt for millions of Americans.
Despite unveiling the policy last week, administration officials have yet to explain how Biden's student loan handout will be paid for in the long term. Economists say that since the proposal calls for the government to forgive the lending outright, taxpayers are likely on the hook as the principle and interest are piled on top of the nearly $31 trillion in existing U.S. debt.
"If this ends up being added to the national debt, it's just going to drive up the interest costs needed to not default on that figure," said Brian Riedl, a senior fellow in economics at the center-right Manhattan Institute. "All of that is eventually going to drive up taxes because at some point you'll have to figure out a way to pay that debt."
Fox News Digital has reached out to the White House multiple times about how it plans to pay for the student loan handout or if future tax hikes will be needed. Administration officials have yet to provide an explanation but say the handout is "fully paid for" through deficit reduction that is occurring separately from the new handout. The deficit reduction is occurring after trillions in temporary federal spending to combat COVID-19.


https://www.foxnews.com/politics/day-seven-white-house-refuses-explain-who-will-pay-bidens-500b-student-loan-handout

[Skybird]

Are the midterm elections not as safe as the Oranges had hoped after all? I assume the abortion thing is something that impacted heavily against them, considering that there is a bipartisan majority throughout society against banning abortion.



https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2022-election/are-signs-republicans-hopes-red-wave-are-receding-ahead-2022-elections-rcna45336

[Catfish]

^ the "conservatives" lost some female voters for sure

[u crank]

^ the "conservatives" lost some female voters for sure

It would be an insignificant number. Most people's position on abortion is fairly well hardened. There are much more pressing issues for US voters than abortion.

[August]

Barr unloads on Mueller: 'He made some very serious errors'

by Daniel Chaitin, Deputy News Editor (https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/author/daniel-chaitin)

August 25, 2022 10:16 PM
| Updated Aug 26, 2022, 01:10 AM

Former Attorney General William Barr (https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/tag/william-barr) is unleashing heavy criticism of former special counsel Robert Mueller (https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/tag/robert-mueller) to an unprecedented degree years after his Russia investigation came to an end.
"I don’t think he was on top of his game. I think he made some very serious errors," Barr said in an interview with former New York Times editor Bari Weiss on her (https://www.commonsense.news/p/bill-barr-calls-bullsht?triedSigningIn=true)Honestly (https://www.commonsense.news/p/bill-barr-calls-bullsht?triedSigningIn=true) podcast (https://www.commonsense.news/p/bill-barr-calls-bullsht?triedSigningIn=true) published Thursday.
Mueller, a former FBI director, was appointed special counsel by Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein in May 2017 after then-President Donald Trump fired FBI Director James Comey. The FBI's Crossfire Hurricane counterintelligence investigation, which was examining links between Russia and Trump's 2016 campaign, was wrapped into that effort along with an obstruction of justice inqui (https://www.usnews.com/news/national-news/articles/2019-02-14/andrew-mccabe-says-he-ordered-obstruction-of-justice-probe-into-donald-trump)ry (https://www.usnews.com/news/national-news/articles/2019-02-14/andrew-mccabe-says-he-ordered-obstruction-of-justice-probe-into-donald-trump).

Barr, who began his second stint as attorney general in February 2019, chastised Mueller over the members picked for his team and also reignited criticism (https://www.cnbc.com/2019/05/01/ag-barr-criticizes-mueller-for-not-saying-if-trump-obstructed-justice.html) of the special counsel's handling of the obstruction aspect of the investigation.
"He goes out and hires partisan Democrats to make up his investigative team, which means half the country is going to be suspicious from the very beginning," Barr told Weiss, according to the transcript. "That defeated the whole purpose of naming him. I think it was pretty evident within a few months of his taking the position that there had been no collusion."

"But instead of stopping it at that point and letting the country move on, he took two instances, which clearly on their face were not obstruction and which even his final report doesn’t try to argue were obstruction," and used them to "bootstrap the rest of the two-year investigation," Barr added.

Mueller's report was released in April 2019. The special counsel said his team could not establish a criminal conspiracy between Russia and the Trump campaign. In addition, the special counsel outlined 10 instances of possible obstruction of justice (https://apnews.com/article/donald-trump-ap-top-news-elections-james-comey-north-america-e0d125d737be4a21a81bec3d9f1dffd8), including the firing of Comey and a desire by Trump to fire Mueller, but did not reach any conclusions on them. Mueller also said he “determined not to apply an approach that could potentially result in a judgment that the president committed crimes” but that “while this report does not conclude that the president committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him.”

Before releasing Mueller's report, Barr disclosed that he and Rosenstein concluded that there was not sufficient evidence (https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/03/24/us/politics/barr-letter-mueller-report.html) to establish Trump committed an obstruction of justice offense. A Justice Department (https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/tag/justice-department) memo supporting Barr (https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/tag/william-barr)'s decision not to prosecute former President Donald Trump for obstruction of justice in the Russia investigation was released without any redactions (https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/justice/justice-department-releases-memo-barr-trump-obstruction-russia) for the first time this week from a Freedom of Information Act legal fight.

Andrew Weissmann, a former Justice Department official and FBI general counsel who was known as Mueller's "pitbull," (https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/mueller-prosecutor-manhattan-district-attorney-insider-trump-criminal-case) appeared on MSNBC on Wednesday and criticized what he said was a "shocking" document (https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/justice/mueller-prosecutor-barr-memo-trump-obstruction). The Russia investigation, which Trump derided as a "witch hunt," is now under review by special counsel John Durham, who was appointed to the task by Barr.
Critics of Barr have long condemned his rollout of Mueller's report, including his sending a letter to Congress with a summary of its findings (https://www.npr.org/2019/03/24/706351394/read-the-justice-departments-summary-of-the-mueller-report) that preceded the report's release. But in speaking with Weiss, Barr expressed exasperation at what he said was the Mueller team's failure to heed his request to deliver to him a report that could be released to the public immediately.

"I asked him, when you give me the report, you have to sanitize it so I’m in a position to release it as soon as you give it to me because if there’s a delay between the time you give me the report and the time I can make it public under the law ... a lot of damage can be done to the country, the stock market, and our foreign adversaries. People are going to wonder if the president's going to jail. So you have to give it to me in a form in which I can release it," Barr said.

The former attorney general said what he got, a report with no redactions and grand jury materials that needed to be concealed, forced him to come forward with a summary while redactions were implemented for roughly three weeks. This was despite Mueller saying he understood Barr's directive to give him a report that could be released quickly, the former attorney general said.

"I don’t know why it was done. It was inexplicable to me," Barr said. He said in the intervening period he had to tell people "what the bottom line was: that there was going to be no indictment of the president and, therefore, there was no collusion. He didn’t reach a decision on obstruction. I took the sentence from his conclusion and said while he didn’t find obstruction, he didn’t exonerate him. I put that in the letter. And then I said, 'However, I am making the decision based on the report, and I don't find there was obstruction.' And then I explained why I didn't find there was obstruction. So half the letter is me explaining my decision — not Mueller’s decision. And I thought that was the responsible thing to do. People who are acting in good faith can scour that letter and not see anything misleading in it."

He added: "The other thing I haven’t really understood what the thrust of this complaint is because we got the report out a couple of weeks later, and if the stuff was so damaging, why didn't Congress impeach him at that point? There were crickets. So the idea that I affected the thing by summarizing the report ... was the left-wing throwing a tantrum because Mueller didn’t deliver the goods as far as they were concerned."

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/william-barr-robert-mueller-serious-errors?fbclid=IwAR3hP5bhwnx0SuyMCd5k_UfFmwUE0gxjkI xPBHwDjzEj2RetaZjgAQlegKU

[em2nought]

Barr on Mueller: I think he made some very serious errors.


Yeah, right they were errors. :har:


Are the midterm elections not as safe as the Oranges had hoped after all?


Depleting our entire strategic reserve to drop the price of gas probably helped good ol' Brandon more. Oh, and giving out free college money for votes never hurts a democrat either.

[August]

Yeah, right they were errors. :har:


Yeah nice way of putting it eh? :doh:

[Buddahaid]

...Oh, and giving out free college money for votes never hurts a democrat either.

Education should be free anyway. Wouldn't you want your kids to get an education without having to refi your house to help pay down the debt, or do you thing those higher paying job opportunities only belong to the rich kids?

[Rockstar]

Ah yes more trickle down economics. Raise taxes even further to pay the wealthy their due for providing your free education. Who pays the teachers, administration offices and those who make the curriculum? What about room and board heating and air conditioning? Who pays for the building maintenance and the furniture? Now that government is paying for it who determines eligibility to attend?

Nothing in life is free, but hell let’s continue adding more people to the government plantation by nationalizing the education system. To hell with lower taxes, jobs and a decent wage, huh?

If the New York FED was correct then it’s government interference what’s causing tuition prices to skyrocket. To top it off FREE means things turn out like California’s Black Education Failure. More government interference more debacles.

https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/california-black-education-failure/

[Skybird]

The Neue Zürcher Zeitung quotes three American high profile law experts regarding whether or not to sue the Donald.
-------------------
Donald Trump's handling of classified documents has many parallels to the confidential emails on Hillary Clinton's private server. There was never an indictment then. Why should this be different now? Three legal experts provide different answers.

The search for truth in the USA has probably never been as difficult as it is today. The political polarization is so immense that even proven experts have great difficulty maintaining their credibility as neutral observers. This is currently very evident in the investigations by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) against Donald Trump. Among other things, it accuses the former president of having withheld highly secret documents from his private club Mar-a-Lago in Florida and hiding them from investigators. The house search on Aug. 8 strengthened those suspicions. But is that enough to indict a former president and possible future presidential candidate?

"Yes," says Harvard professor emeritus and constitutional lawyer Laurence Tribe. "The violation of the Espionage Act is extremely serious and extremely clear," says Barack Obama's former mentor. "The only question is when this indictment will occur." It's also quite likely that Trump will be held accountable for obstruction of justice, he says. "After lying to the government about possessing these highly classified documents, he stored them in unsecure locations."

There's no question that instead of turning the documents over to the National Archives or back into the custody of the intelligence community, Trump moved countless boxes of files from the White House to his private Florida residence - a club where foreign guests also come and go - after his term ended a year and a half ago. The former president handed over some of the documents voluntarily, and another only after pressure from a court subpoena. On June 3, a lawyer signed a statement on behalf of Trump's office saying that "to the best of her knowledge" all documents requested by the FBI had been turned over. However, the Aug. 8 house search exposed this as a sham. Even in Trump's personal office, investigators found documents subject to the highest level of secrecy. For Tribe, it is therefore clear: Trump stole these documents from the state and hid them from investigators. For that, he must be held accountable.

Alan Dershowitz, however, has a very different opinion. He, too, is a Harvard professor emeritus and describes himself as a Democrat. "I didn't vote for Trump twice and I wouldn't vote for him a third time." Dershowitz believes the FBI's evidence is sufficient for an indictment. But even so, he believes a prosecution is wrong based on the current facts. For former presidents or future presidential candidates, he says, different requirements apply: "You don't indict them unless the evidence is so overwhelming that both political parties agree."

"An indictment of Trump has to pass the Nixon test and the Clinton test," Dershowitz says. In the Watergate affair of the 1970s, he says, the president's offenses were so serious and the evidence so overwhelming that the Republican Party had to drop Richard Nixon. At the same time, he said, Trump cannot be impeached today after Hillary Clinton got off scot-free with the negligent handling of her emails. "Otherwise, we become a banana republic where a dictator says, 'For my friends, everything; for my enemies, the law.'"

Indeed, there are some parallels between Trump's handling of classified documents and the Clinton affair. During her time as secretary of state from 2009 to 2013, she used personal email servers through which she communicated on business. Among the 30,000 messages the eventual presidential candidate turned over to the State Department in 2014, FBI investigators found 110 emails containing information that was classified at the time they were sent. Of those, 8 correspondences contained information that was considered "top secret" and 36 contained information that was considered "secret."

Clinton's lawyers themselves sorted out what they considered to be relevant emails for investigators. The remaining messages were then deleted. The FBI, however, found no evidence that this triage was not done honestly. Clinton's handling of highly classified information was "extremely careless," but ultimately the facts were not sufficient to support an indictment, then-FBI Director James Comey said after the investigation concluded. Specifically, the evidence was insufficient to prove Clinton engaged in intentional and willful misconduct in handling classified information.

For Tribe, it's clear that the FBI was following the letter of the law politically independently then and continues to do so now. "All of the claims that Trump is being targeted more harshly than Clinton are a mere distraction from the actual facts." The confidential information on Clinton's email servers ended up there by mistake, he said. "And she never refused to turn it over." Dershowitz, who has repeatedly defended controversial figures such as O. J. Simpson, Jeffrey Epstein, Julian Assange and Trump, however, distrusts government institutions. "The Justice Department generally overdoes things," he said. He was a lawyer in the case of the "Pentagon Papers" on the Vietnam War, he said. "The government said the publication of those papers would be enormously damaging to U.S. security. The Pentagon Papers were published, and they caused no harm."

Which Harvard professor should we believe? Tribe, who called Trump and individual supporters "terrorists" on his Twitter account for subliminally threatening social unrest should impeachment occur? Or Dershowitz, whose argument bolsters Trump's narrative of a political vendetta, helping to further erode public trust in American institutions?

Perhaps David Laufman is right. "Comparisons to the Clinton case are premature because we don't have all the facts yet," says the former head of counterintelligence and export control at the Justice Department. In his role at the time, the lawyer oversaw the investigation into the email affair. It was a unanimous decision, he says: "There was a consensus that prosecution was not warranted in the Clinton case."

However, based on the details already known in Trump's case, Laufman says, "Secret documents were withheld even after a court subpoena was issued. These are far more serious factors than the facts uncovered in the Clinton investigation." Already, he said, the public details are pretty damning for Trump. "And they're going to get more damning as we learn more," he said.

"No one else but Trump would have been handled with such merciful kid gloves," Laufman adds. And if the former president ends up being indicted, he said, he will have the opportunity to defend himself in the U.S. and cross-examine the government's witnesses. "That's how our criminal justice system works. He's not above the law. He's not above the Constitution."
-------------------------

I'm lining up somewhere between Laurence Tribe and David Laufman.

[August]

I'm lining up somewhere between Laurence Tribe and David Laufman.


Of course you do. :roll:

[Buddahaid]

One more piece of collateral damage from the lies still being pushed.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-62761037

[August]

The US President is starting to sound a lot like another guy who vilified an entire people:


https://i.imgur.com/PLeNVOZ.png


He had better not expect Republicans to get in the cattle cars so obligingly.

[Rockstar]

One more piece of collateral damage from the lies still being pushed.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-62761037

Explain this big lie you’re talking about? I’ve stated very early on that people have the right to assemble, peacefully protest and voice their opinions. Regardless wether you or I think it right, wrong, justified, stupid, or not, at least I thought they did. I also stated if during protests people are found breaking the law they should be charged, apprehended and prosecuted just like that police officer was. The problem I have with this so called investigative process especially when congress gets involved, it doesn’t have a damn thing to do with justice. Instead it becomes politicized for personal and political party gains. Endless ‘probes’, assumptions and sensational headlines and not one charge of wrongdoing can cause a lot people to lose hope in the system. Long live the party!

Note it wasn’t a congressional dog and pony show or party boondoggle that had anything to do with that police officer being charged and prosecuted.

[mapuc]

You may dislike a politician or a President, but giving them ugly nicknames is not ok.

Secondly-Forget everything about the Orange man-He has to fight his own battle to stay afloat. He may end up with a 20 years prison.

Markus

[August]

You may dislike a politician or a President, but giving them ugly nicknames is not ok.

Secondly-Forget everything about the Orange man-He has to fight his own battle to stay afloat. He may end up with a 20 years prison.

Markus


Markus lectures people about using ugly nicknames then proceeds to use one himself in the very next sentence. :doh:

[Buddahaid]

The US President is starting to sound a lot like another guy who vilified an entire people:


https://i.imgur.com/PLeNVOZ.png


He had better not expect Republicans to get in the cattle cars so obligingly.

I can play that game. ;-)
https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2016/11/7/13512960/donald-trump-plato-democracy-tyranny-fascism-2016-elections

[mapuc]

Markus lectures people about using ugly nicknames then proceeds to use one himself in the very next sentence. :doh:

Is orange man an ugly nickname ? if it is then I'm sorry and use his real Name Donald Trump.

Edit
I'm not gonna write here what People have called Biden on social media
End edit

Markus

[Rockstar]

Current state of American politics

President A. claims election was stolen. :roll:

President B. Accuses 70 million American voters of being extremists and a threat to democracy because of what once just a slogan Make America Great Again has now been identified as an ideology. :roll:

Meanwhile, the debt rolls on, inflation rolls on, war rolls on, taxes hikes roll on and the list goes on.

[em2nought]

Education should be free anyway.


If education is made "free" then you'll get what you pay for. :03:



President A. claims election was stolen.


President A.'s claims are just, it was a stolen election, or insurrection. There can't be a second insurrection on Jan 6th is the actual insurrection occurred at the voting booth.

[Rockstar]

If education is made "free" then you'll get what you pay for. :03:


True, on top of that standards will be set by government which imo will mean academic standards will be lowered so they can be more inclusive. Let those who know how to run a school run the school. The last thing this country needs is a bunch of idiot feel good party fanbois politicizing every aspect of life by nationalizing education handing out free diplomas just for showing up.

There are over 30 very prestigious centers of higher learning in this country that will assist a student achieve their goals. If you have unquenchable drive, desire to achieve, something to offer society, you know, those qualities that actually mean something. Colleges will take you in. Some offer work to pay tuition, some help with costs, some even pay for your education out right. But not one of them want government paid freeloaders, which as the New York FED suggested is what is actually driving up costs.

[Skybird]

President B. Accuses 70 million American voters of being extremists and a threat to democracy because of Make America Great Again ideology. :roll:

Thats is explicitly not the reason. But claiming that it is, and this manipulative way of arguing, illustrates why he said what he said, and why he is right on target.

[August]

Is orange man an ugly nickname ? if it is then I'm sorry and use his real Name Donald Trump.

Edit
I'm not gonna write here what People have called Biden on social media
End edit

Markus

Excuse me Markus but it's kind of difficult for me to believe that you didn't understand that orange man was an insult. It was obviously meant to mock and dehumanize him, so how is that not ugly?

As to your edit statement, are you saying that calling Trump ugly nicknames is somehow justified because Biden is also called ugly nicknames?

[mapuc]

Excuse me Markus but it's kind of difficult for me to believe that you didn't understand that orange man was an insult. It was obviously meant to mock and dehumanize him, so how is that not ugly?

As to your edit statement, are you saying that calling Trump ugly nicknames is somehow justified because Biden is also called ugly nicknames?

It wasn't my intention to mock and dehumanize him NOT at all. I used the sentence cause I remember people being tired of hearing or reading his name. So I chose a known nickname.

Bidens nick starts with P and ends on R

To be honest The nickname Biden have got is far more ugly than the nickname Donald Trump got.

I feel sad for having called him something ugly-Which was NOT my intention.

Markus

[Rockstar]

Thats is explicitly not the reason. But claiming that it is, and this manipulative way of arguing, illustrates why he said what he said, and why he is right on target.

:har: You have got be kidding me. Good one. :up:

[August]

Bidens nick starts with P and ends on R


Not sure what that refers to but it's not Brandon or Cornpop which are two ones that I have heard him called. Whatever I'm just hoping that he'll be called "former president" just as soon as possible.

[August]

I can play that game. ;-)
https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2016/11/7/13512960/donald-trump-plato-democracy-tyranny-fascism-2016-elections


Ohh yeah nice one but the difference is Trumps was an accidental gesture. Bidens is deliberate.

Look at the backdrop, it is not changed or enhanced, he chose the guards and the blood red lighting.

https://i.imgur.com/FriPHms.jpg

[Buddahaid]

Ohh yeah nice one but the difference is Trumps was an accidental gesture. Bidens is deliberate.

Look at the backdrop, it is not changed or enhanced, he chose the guards and the blood red lighting.

Doesn't work. MAGA is a political position not a racial group.

[Buddahaid]

Current state of American politics

President A. claims election was stolen. :roll:

President B. Accuses 70 million American voters of being extremists and a threat to democracy because of what once just a slogan Make America Great Again has now been identified as an ideology. :roll:

Meanwhile, the debt rolls on, inflation rolls on, war rolls on, taxes hikes roll on and the list goes on.

I seriously doubt Trump/MAGA has anywhere close to those numbers now. Trump will likely not get the Republican nomination and have to form a MAGA party to run in 2024. Those votes will show the true numbers.

[mapuc]

I seriously doubt Trump/MAGA has anywhere close to those numbers now. Trump will likely not get the Republican nomination and have to form a MAGA party to run in 2024. Those votes will show the true numbers.

If this should happen-Wouldn't it mean the end of the Republican party ?

Markus

[August]

Doesn't work. MAGA is a political position not a racial group.


Don't see the difference but in any case the same people are saying that MAGA people are all white supremacists so I guess it really is about racial groups ain't it?

[Buddahaid]

Don't see the difference but in any case the same people are saying that MAGA people are all white supremacists so I guess it really is about racial groups ain't it?

Politics does tend to use wide paintbrushes with only two colors. Time for beer.:Kaleun_Cheers:

Oh wait, I'm Californian, time for some wine.

[mapuc]

Have read a lot of status from Biden and he mention MAGA and MAGA together with the word Republican.

https://twitter.com/JoeBiden/status/1565837049562800131

https://twitter.com/JoeBiden/status/1565496477748760577

https://twitter.com/JoeBiden/status/1565493589181960194

This was only a few of many.

Edit
I know now what MAGA stand for.
End edit

Markus

[ET2SN]

The truth is that the GOP has a demographics problem, namely you can't vote from Heaven. :yep:

Maybe chill out with the flamethrowers and the chain saws then come back to the middle. This "double down when you're losing" idea is only making the other side smile. :up:

Instead of punishing strangers you've never met, maybe try living your own life for a change?

If you think its bad now, wait until there is only one political party and you'll really be p****d off. :03:

[Rockstar]

I seriously doubt Trump/MAGA has anywhere close to those numbers now. Trump will likely not get the Republican nomination and have to form a MAGA party to run in 2024. Those votes will show the true numbers.

MAGA is and always been simply a political slogan, make America great again is no different than, we like Ike, Yes we can, no new taxes, or build back better they are catch phrases slogans just like every other one found is in U.S. political history to be believed or laughed at nothing more But today our president redefined it as an ideology of extremists. Both the presidents the one who said the election was stolen and the one who accuses American voters of extremism and threats to democracy are way out of line.

[August]

The truth is that the GOP has a demographics problem, namely you can't vote from Heaven. :yep:

Maybe chill out with the flamethrowers and the chain saws then come back to the middle. This "double down when you're losing" idea is only making the other side smile. :up:

Instead of punishing strangers you've never met, maybe try living your own life for a change?

If you think its bad now, wait until there is only one political party and you'll really be p****d off. :03:




Do they let real people visit you in this fantasy land that you inhabit? Flamethrowers and chain saws, really. :roll:

[ET2SN]

Well, keep punching yourself in the face because its really effective. :up:

[Gorpet]

If this should happen-Wouldn't it mean the end of the Republican party ?

Markus

No, All American Politicians left or right are members of the same Country Club.

[Buddahaid]

No, All American Politicians left or right are members of the same Country Club.

I thought is was more like an Army Navy Game.
http://www.west-point.org/users/usma1989/46256/images/tickets/an1939.jpg

[August]

Well, keep punching yourself in the face because its really effective. :up:


Nope, never have done that either. Self abuse sounds more like something that a European would take too.

[Gorpet]

The US President is starting to sound a lot like another guy who vilified an entire people:


https://i.imgur.com/PLeNVOZ.png


He had better not expect Republicans to get in the cattle cars so obligingly.

Tally Ho.

[Gorpet]

I thought is was more like an Army Navy Game.
http://www.west-point.org/users/usma1989/46256/images/tickets/an1939.jpg

From the politicians point of view it is.And when the two beat themselves to death. It's will be time for Mileys Rainbow Warriors.

[Gorpet]

The Neue Zürcher Zeitung quotes three American high profile law experts regarding whether or not to sue the Donald.
-------------------
Donald Trump's handling of classified documents has many parallels to the confidential emails on Hillary Clinton's private server. There was never an indictment then. Why should this be different now? Three legal experts provide different answers.

The search for truth in the USA has probably never been as difficult as it is today. The political polarization is so immense that even proven experts have great difficulty maintaining their credibility as neutral observers. This is currently very evident in the investigations by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) against Donald Trump. Among other things, it accuses the former president of having withheld highly secret documents from his private club Mar-a-Lago in Florida and hiding them from investigators. The house search on Aug. 8 strengthened those suspicions. But is that enough to indict a former president and possible future presidential candidate?

"Yes," says Harvard professor emeritus and constitutional lawyer Laurence Tribe. "The violation of the Espionage Act is extremely serious and extremely clear," says Barack Obama's former mentor. "The only question is when this indictment will occur." It's also quite likely that Trump will be held accountable for obstruction of justice, he says. "After lying to the government about possessing these highly classified documents, he stored them in unsecure locations."

There's no question that instead of turning the documents over to the National Archives or back into the custody of the intelligence community, Trump moved countless boxes of files from the White House to his private Florida residence - a club where foreign guests also come and go - after his term ended a year and a half ago. The former president handed over some of the documents voluntarily, and another only after pressure from a court subpoena. On June 3, a lawyer signed a statement on behalf of Trump's office saying that "to the best of her knowledge" all documents requested by the FBI had been turned over. However, the Aug. 8 house search exposed this as a sham. Even in Trump's personal office, investigators found documents subject to the highest level of secrecy. For Tribe, it is therefore clear: Trump stole these documents from the state and hid them from investigators. For that, he must be held accountable.

Alan Dershowitz, however, has a very different opinion. He, too, is a Harvard professor emeritus and describes himself as a Democrat. "I didn't vote for Trump twice and I wouldn't vote for him a third time." Dershowitz believes the FBI's evidence is sufficient for an indictment. But even so, he believes a prosecution is wrong based on the current facts. For former presidents or future presidential candidates, he says, different requirements apply: "You don't indict them unless the evidence is so overwhelming that both political parties agree."

"An indictment of Trump has to pass the Nixon test and the Clinton test," Dershowitz says. In the Watergate affair of the 1970s, he says, the president's offenses were so serious and the evidence so overwhelming that the Republican Party had to drop Richard Nixon. At the same time, he said, Trump cannot be impeached today after Hillary Clinton got off scot-free with the negligent handling of her emails. "Otherwise, we become a banana republic where a dictator says, 'For my friends, everything; for my enemies, the law.'"

Indeed, there are some parallels between Trump's handling of classified documents and the Clinton affair. During her time as secretary of state from 2009 to 2013, she used personal email servers through which she communicated on business. Among the 30,000 messages the eventual presidential candidate turned over to the State Department in 2014, FBI investigators found 110 emails containing information that was classified at the time they were sent. Of those, 8 correspondences contained information that was considered "top secret" and 36 contained information that was considered "secret."

Clinton's lawyers themselves sorted out what they considered to be relevant emails for investigators. The remaining messages were then deleted. The FBI, however, found no evidence that this triage was not done honestly. Clinton's handling of highly classified information was "extremely careless," but ultimately the facts were not sufficient to support an indictment, then-FBI Director James Comey said after the investigation concluded. Specifically, the evidence was insufficient to prove Clinton engaged in intentional and willful misconduct in handling classified information.

For Tribe, it's clear that the FBI was following the letter of the law politically independently then and continues to do so now. "All of the claims that Trump is being targeted more harshly than Clinton are a mere distraction from the actual facts." The confidential information on Clinton's email servers ended up there by mistake, he said. "And she never refused to turn it over." Dershowitz, who has repeatedly defended controversial figures such as O. J. Simpson, Jeffrey Epstein, Julian Assange and Trump, however, distrusts government institutions. "The Justice Department generally overdoes things," he said. He was a lawyer in the case of the "Pentagon Papers" on the Vietnam War, he said. "The government said the publication of those papers would be enormously damaging to U.S. security. The Pentagon Papers were published, and they caused no harm."

Which Harvard professor should we believe? Tribe, who called Trump and individual supporters "terrorists" on his Twitter account for subliminally threatening social unrest should impeachment occur? Or Dershowitz, whose argument bolsters Trump's narrative of a political vendetta, helping to further erode public trust in American institutions?

Perhaps David Laufman is right. "Comparisons to the Clinton case are premature because we don't have all the facts yet," says the former head of counterintelligence and export control at the Justice Department. In his role at the time, the lawyer oversaw the investigation into the email affair. It was a unanimous decision, he says: "There was a consensus that prosecution was not warranted in the Clinton case."

However, based on the details already known in Trump's case, Laufman says, "Secret documents were withheld even after a court subpoena was issued. These are far more serious factors than the facts uncovered in the Clinton investigation." Already, he said, the public details are pretty damning for Trump. "And they're going to get more damning as we learn more," he said.

"No one else but Trump would have been handled with such merciful kid gloves," Laufman adds. And if the former president ends up being indicted, he said, he will have the opportunity to defend himself in the U.S. and cross-examine the government's witnesses. "That's how our criminal justice system works. He's not above the law. He's not above the Constitution."
-------------------------

I'm lining up somewhere between Laurence Tribe and David Laufman.

I prefer the way's of your ancestors. Short ,Sweet and to the point.

[Gorpet]

The US President is starting to sound a lot like another guy who vilified an entire people:


https://i.imgur.com/PLeNVOZ.png


He had better not expect Republicans to get in the cattle cars so obligingly.

Damn that is good. These old politicians are micming and living as the conquerors of the past.

[em2nought]

The truth is that the GOP has a demographics problem, namely you can't vote from Heaven. :yep:



...and if you do vote from heaven the vote mysteriously gets cast for a democrat. That, and the fact the democrats feels voting is sort of like the movie Minority Report, they think you'd vote for them so somebody does it for you. :03:

[mapuc]

A translate article about the upcoming Midterm Election in USA.

Something crazy has happened in the US
- Trump and his followers should be nervous

Just six months ago, it was considered completely impossible.

But with two months to go, something crazy has happened in the US.

Joe Biden and the rest of the Democratic Party actually have a real chance of not being all but wiped out in the November midterm elections.

The polls have long been in the Republican Party's favour.

A long pandemic, a failing economy, sky-high gas prices, inflation run amok. The explanations were many.

And in the spring, it looked like Joe Biden and the rest of the party would lose their majority in both the Senate and the House. With a bang.

Biden would thus be left with no real chance of getting policy through Congress. A so-called 'lame duck'.

But several things now point to something quite different.

One signal came the other day in the state of Alaska.

Here, former Republican governor and vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin lost in a surprise upset to Democrat Mary Peltola in a special election for the state's only seat in the House of Representatives.

"We'll have to watch for several things in the time ahead. Just look at Alaska. We have a case where a Democrat got the votes of many who would normally vote Republican," says editor-in-chief of Kongressen.com, Anders Agner.

"Sarah Palin was massively supported by Trump with huge funds and the seat had been Republican for many years. Yet Trump-backed Palin lost. That trend must be extremely troubling for Trump," Anders Agner says.

"Things have very much changed."

On the whole, the Democrats and Joe Biden are significantly better off.

The pandemic is less of an issue, gasoline prices have fallen and the US Supreme Court has abolished the right to free abortion at the federal level and left the decision to the individual states.

"Abortion looks to be a big issue in the midterm elections. It has mobilised voters - and that's usually a good sign for the Democrats when more people vote," says Anders Agner.

"A few months ago, the Democrats looked like they were going to get one. Now that picture has completely reversed," he says, elaborating:

"Trump and the Republicans must be nervous

Translated with www.DeepL.com/Translator (free version)

When I read it I thought I'm going to translate it and post it in our US-Politics thread and hear what my friends has to say about it.

Markus

[Onkel Neal]

:haha:

https://youtu.be/ApfBvkql0lI

[mapuc]

After having read this article I fear that America has come one big step close to a civil war-Yes maybe it's me who interpreter things wrong-I hope so

Danish TV2News writes:


Trump labels Joe Biden an enemy of the country at voter rally

Donald Trump verbally lashed out at Biden at a voter rally in the US state of Pennsylvania on Sunday night.

A roaring crowd turned out in the small Pennsylvania town of Wilkes-Barre to hear former President Donald Trump speak on Sunday night.

And the accusations against the Democrats and current President Joe Biden were fierce and delivered at high frequency.

- He is an enemy of the country. You want to know the truth. The enemy of the country is him, Trump said of President Biden.

The accusations came in response to Biden, who in a speech earlier this week warned against Donald Trump and the far-right Republican Party, which he called dangerous to the country's democracy.

- Republicans and the Maga movement (Make America Great Again, Donald Trump's 2016 campaign slogan, ed.) are not the ones trying to undermine democracy.

- It is us who are trying to save our democracy, plain and simple. The danger to democracy comes from the far left, not the right, Trump continued.

"The FBI threatens freedom"

The controversial former president also lashed out at Joe Biden's administration after the US Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) raided Trump's home in the state of Florida a few weeks ago.

This is despite the fact that the work of the US Department of Justice and the FBI is not linked to who is in the White House, writes the AFP news agency.

But Trump calls the search an abuse of power.

- There can be no clearer example of the enormously serious threats to American freedom than just a few weeks ago, when you witnessed one of the worst abuses of power by a government in American history, Trump said.

Although an election for the US presidency is not imminent, campaigning has begun in the US.

The midterm elections will get underway in November. Here, Americans will elect a portion of the country's parliamentarians for the next four years.

Democrats currently hold a majority in the House of Representatives, while they narrowly hold power in Congress's other chamber, the Senate, where they typically get the support of two independents and Vice President Kamala Harris's deciding vote.

Translated with www.DeepL.com/Translator (free version)

Markus

[MaDef]

This is despite the fact that the work of the US Department of Justice and the FBI is not linked to who is in the White House, writes the AFP news agency. I call BS on that one. Who do you think Appoints the Director of the FBI & the Attorney General (Department of Justice)?

[em2nought]

After having read this article I fear that America has come one big step close to a civil war-Yes maybe it's me who interpreter things wrong-I hope so

Danish TV2News writes:



Markus
Ah, journalists just can't or won't hide their politics.
from within the article The controversial former president

Like the Big Guy currently occupying the oval office isn't controversial? :har:

[mapuc]

Ah, journalists just can't or won't hide their politics.
from within the article

Like the Big Guy currently occupying the oval office isn't controversial? :har:

It's not only strong and harsh words from Trump and his supporters-Biden and his supporters are also using strong and harsh words.

Now I write- I haven't seen anything similar in US-politisk where both side-Left and Right are so divided-I then expect some of you will tell me it's not uncommon near an election.

Markus

[mapuc]

My worries wasn't all that wrong

Two in five Americans say a civil war is at least somewhat likely in the next decade

Two-thirds of Americans (66%) believe that political divisions in this country have gotten worse since the beginning of 2021, compared to only 8% who say the country has grown less divided. Few see things improving in the coming years: 62% expect an increase in political divisions.

https://today.yougov.com/topics/politics/articles-reports/2022/08/26/two-in-five-americans-civil-war-somewhat-likely

Markus

[AVGWarhawk]

My worries wasn't all that wrong





https://today.yougov.com/topics/politics/articles-reports/2022/08/26/two-in-five-americans-civil-war-somewhat-likely

Markus

I believe we can impart some fault of this division to the news media. The media is nothing short of awful.

[Rockstar]

BORDER WALL CONSTRUCTION RESUMES UNDER PRESIDENT JOE BIDEN
The Biden administration laid out its plans to rev up work on completing Donald Trump’s signature project.

https://theintercept.com/2022/09/18/biden-trump-border-wall/

Ryan DevereauxRyan Devereaux
September 18 2022, 6:30 a.m.

MYLES TRAPHAGEN DIDN’T need a government presentation to tell him that border wall construction was kicking back up. He saw everything he needed on a recent visit to the Buenos Aires National Wildlife Refuge and the Coronado National Forest, near the town of Sasabe in southern Arizona.

As the borderlands coordinator for the Wildlands Network, Traphagen had visited the area many times before. It was among the sites he examined in an extensive report published in July documenting the environmental impact of the border wall expansion under President Donald Trump — President Joe Biden paused the construction shortly after his inauguration.

“It’s feeling like it felt during border wall construction with Trump.”
Traphagen spotted a new staging area and water holding tanks under construction. Fixed to the wall were new signs citing an Arizona trespassing law. A security guard at the scene told him construction was resuming. Later, a Border Patrol agent ordered him to leave the area.

“It’s feeling like it felt during border wall construction with Trump,” Traphagen told The Intercept. “I hadn’t felt that on the border in a year and a half, and now it’s like, oh, ****, here we go again.”

Six days after Traphagen’s visit, U.S. Customs and Border Protection confirmed that work on the border wall that began under Trump is revving back up under Biden. In an online presentation Wednesday, CBP — the largest division of the Department of Homeland Security and home to the Border Patrol — detailed plans to address environmental damage brought on by the former president’s signature campaign promise and confirmed that the wall will remain a permanent fixture of the Southwest for generations to come.

The resumed operations will range from repairing gates and roads to filling gaps in the wall that were left following the pause on construction that Biden initiated in January 2021. The wall’s environmental harms have been particularly acute in southern Arizona, where CBP used explosives to blast through large swaths of protected land — including sacred Native American burial grounds and one-of-a-kind wildlife habitats — in service of Trump’s most expansive border wall extensions.

Starting next month, contractors will return to the Sonoran Desert in Arizona to resume work on the wall, senior CBP officials said in a public webinar. In the months since Biden’s pause began, DHS Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas approved several so-called remediation projects related to the border wall. The first plan that CBP presented for public comment was in the Tucson sector, the Border Patrol’s largest area of operations and site of Trump’s most dramatic and controversial border wall construction.

IN EARLY 2020, the press was invited to watch as Border Patrol and Department of Defense officials blew apart chunks of the Organ Pipe Cactus National Monument, south of Tucson, to make way for Trump’s wall. The display followed months of protests, as the administration tapped into a rare desert aquifer that feeds Quitobaquito Springs, an oasis that the Hia-Ced O’odham people have held sacred for thousands of years.

Two Hia-Ced O’odham women were later arrested, strip-searched, and held incommunicado after praying and protesting at the construction site. Earlier this year, one of the two women, Amber Ortega, was found not guilty of the charges after a federal judge ruled that the prosecution violated her rights under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act.

The controversial work, which included construction on federally designated wilderness, was permitted under the Real ID Act. Created in the wake of the September 11 attacks, the act grants DHS the authority to waive any law, including bedrock statutes meant to safeguard the environment and areas of cultural significance, to build border barriers in the name of national security.

When CBP collected public comment on its proposed plans earlier this year, the vast majority were focused on Arizona, with most addressing the wall’s impact on wildlife migration and its exacerbation of flooding dangers. “Many comments specifically noted impacts to the Mexican gray wolf, jaguar, Sonoran Desert pronghorn, bighorn sheep, ocelot, javelina, mountain lion, bear, and other wildlife,” CBP noted in a summary report on its Tucson Sector feedback. “Some commenters suggested removing barrier and leaving flood gates open to address potential impacts.”

In the plans laid out last week, CBP said it would finish drainages and low-water crossings in southern Arizona and in some cases reengineer border wall designs to allow for water flow. Two contracts have already been awarded for work in the state, the agency said, adding that the work in Arizona would include filling “small gaps” in the border wall that remained following Biden’s pause. CBP described similar operations along the border in other states.

When asked if CBP envisioned a day when the barriers might be removed, the agency said it did not.

“At this point in time,” said Shelly Barnes, the environmental planning lead for the Border Patrol’s infrastructure portfolio, “there are no current plans to remove sections of the barrier.”

[mapuc]

...and from the Bidens supporter front there's nothing but....silence

Markus

[Rockstar]

...and from the Bidens supporter front there's nothing but....silence

Markus

It’s weird, those that are against the wall and think it’s a bad idea are from states or countries that all ready have one.

[mapuc]

It’s weird, those that are against the wall and think it’s a bad idea are from states or countries that all ready have one.

I think we all remember how the discussion went when Trump mentioned his plan on building the wall.

I have friends on social media who can't stand his guts-From them there's nothing but silence and it make me wanna puke-This double morale.

Markus

[Rockstar]

Personally I don’t give a hoot who starts it, just so long as it gets finished.

[mapuc]

I don't know who scare me most Putin or Biden

https://twitter.com/realDailyWire/status/1572698287974776832

Markus

[Dowly]

So, Trump's pick for a Special Master in the Mar-a-Lago case didn't go as he obviously hoped. :)

Judge Raymond Dearie repeatedly challenged Trump’s lawyers for refusing to back up the former president’s claim that he declassified the highly sensitive national security-related records discovered in his residence.
[..]

Without evidence from Trump, Dearie said his only basis to judge the classification level of the records was the fact that they all bear markings designating them as highly sensitive national security secrets — including some that indicate they contain intelligence derived from human sources and foreign intercepts.
https://www.politico.com/news/2022/09/20/trump-special-master-judge-mar-a-lago-00057805


---


The 11th circuit was not having any of it, either.


A three-judge appeals court panel has granted the Justice Department’s request to block aspects of U.S. District Court Judge Aileen Cannon’s ruling that delayed a criminal investigation into highly sensitive documents seized from former President Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago estate.

The panel ruled that Cannon, a Trump appointee, erred when she temporarily prevented federal prosecutors from using the roughly 100 documents — marked as classified – recovered from Trump’s estate as part of a criminal inquiry.
[..]

Throughout their ruling, the three judges made clear they had little patience for Trump’s freewheeling claims about the status of the 100 documents, noting that he had presented no evidence to support those public assertions. And they noted drily that there’s a common sense reason for documents to include classified markings.

“Classified documents are marked to show they are classified, for instance, with their classification level,” the panel observed.

The timing of the appeals court’s decision, coming less than 24 hours after the parties’ completed legal briefing on the issue, also signaled that the panel viewed the question as straightforward.


https://www.politico.com/news/2022/09/21/donald-trump-special-master-00058176


---


And lastly, thanks to Trump not being able to keep his mouth shut, the Special Master is now demanding evidence of FBI planting documents at Mar-a-Lago. :haha:


The special master assigned to review the documents taken during the August search of Mar-a-Lago is asking former President Trump to back up his claim that the FBI planted evidence on his Florida property.

Judge Raymond Dearie, the special master selected after being out forth by Trump, told his attorneys they would need to submit a sworn declaration that details “a list of any specific items set forth in the [FBI’s] detailed property inventory that plaintiff asserts were not seized from the premises.”

Trump made the insinuation just two days after his home was searched.
https://thehill.com/policy/national-security/3656739-special-master-asks-trump-team-to-back-up-claim-fbi-planted-evidence/

[Buddahaid]

When this is all over the scenario will become a Kobayashi Maru test for new law students.

[Rockstar]

When this is all over the scenario will become a Kobayashi Maru test for new law students.

:har: :yeah:

[August]

When this is all over the scenario will become a Kobayashi Maru test for new law students.


Or at least a study in how many tries it takes to eliminate a political opponent. What's this one, Attempt # 10 or 12?

[Rockstar]

Or at least a study in how many tries it takes to eliminate a political opponent. What's this one, Attempt # 10 or 12?

No doubt, true. Like him or not. Things have I think gotten out of hand and made a mockery of justice, the constitution and deeply divided a nation. All which only serves those in power.

Anyway I thought the article below was interesting hopefully we can get an idea what the arguments might really be. It doesn’t seem as cut and dry as some would like you to believe. Personally with what little experience I have had with classified material. The originator can change it and if the President is the originator then it’s good enough for me. However if he had intentions that went against his oath of office then I’d have big problem with that.

In the wake of the execution of the search warrant at Mar-a-Lago, two issues that have received attention are the scope of a president’s declassification authority and the relevance of the classification of the documents recovered in the search. Former president Trump claims he had a standing order to declassify documents as soon as they left the oval office. Several experts have pointed out the absurdity of such a claim, describing it as “preposterous,” “idiotic and dumb,” and “utter baloney.” A recent New York Times article attempted to explain the parameters of a president’s declassification authority, but the explanation and the news coverage of that issue to date gloss over important nuances worth analyzing further. In addition, that same New York Times article described the classification status as “legally irrelevant,” which is not quite accurate, at least when it comes to the inclusion of 18 U.S.C. § 793 in the search warrant.

Let’s start with the relevance of classification to 18 U.S.C. § 793. It’s true that the statute refers to “information relating to the national defense,” not classified information. But according to two consequential cases that interpreted the phrase “information relating to the national defense” in the Espionage Act—one a Supreme Court opinion, Gorin v. United States, and the other a Second Circuit opinion by Judge Learned Hand, United States v. Heine—“information relating to the national defense” is a broad term encompassing activities relating to national preparedness, but it must also be information for which the government has taken some steps to keep it secret. (Since the classification system currently in place had yet to be invented at the time of these cases, this wasn’t meant to refer to information formally classified as “secret.”) Later cases—see here and here, for example—have interpreted this “secrecy” aspect to require that the information be “closely held,” a phrase frequently used in jury instructions for cases involving 18 U.S.C. § 793.

In addition, the same cases have also interpreted the secrecy requirement from Gorin and Heine to mean that disclosure of the information at issue must be potentially damaging to the United States or useful to an enemy of the United States. As Judge Ellis stated in United States v. Rosen (citing Gorin), “the statute only applies to information for which there is an ‘occasion for secrecy,’ and there is no ‘occasion for secrecy’ unless disclosure of the information the government seeks to protect implicates an important government interest such as the national security.” Therefore, under case law, information relating to national defense must be information that is both closely held and potentially damaging to the United States or useful to an enemy of the United States if disclosed. These judicially imposed limitations on the term have saved it from vagueness challenges. The continued classification of the information is how the government usually proves that it meets both of these requirements.

While it is possible, though rare, for certain unclassified information to be both “closely held” and potentially damaging to the United States (therefore meeting both judicially imposed requirements), the declassification of information that had previously been classified would suggest the information no longer merits being closely held and would not be damaging to the United States if disclosed. Although the public does not know all the facts regarding what is in the documents recovered from Mar-a-Lago or what, if any, formal steps may have actually been taken for declassification, the classification status of the information is relevant to a discussion of potential charges under 18 U.S.C. § 793 and certainly would be considered by prosecutors evaluating the matter.

Having covered the relevance of the classification status, let’s turn to the declassification issue. Do presidents have blanket authority to declassify anything they want, any time they want, in any manner they want? Could President Trump just say (or have someone say for him) that while he was still president, he waved his magic declassification wand over any information labeled as classified that was ultimately stored at Mar-a-Lago, and presto, no one could do anything about it? Three sources to use in answering that question are Executive Order 13526 (the executive order governing classified national security information), Article II of the Constitution (which sets forth the broad authority of the executive), and a Supreme Court case, Department of Navy v. Egan.

Executive Order 13526

Executive Order 13526 (EO 13526) is the most recent in a series of executive orders promulgated by U.S. presidents to govern the handling of classified information, put forth by President Barack Obama in 2009. With respect to the authority to designate information as classified, in Section 1.3(a)(1), EO 13526 explicitly states that the president is an “original classification authority,” meaning he can decide on his own whether information should be classified.

With respect to declassification, the EO’s wording is a little different. Rather than explicitly listing the president as having declassification authority, EO 13526 states:

Sec. 3.1. Authority for Declassification.

Information shall be declassified as soon as it no longer meets the standards for classification under this order.
Information shall be declassified or downgraded by:
the official who authorized the original classification, if that official is still serving in the same position and has original classification authority
the originator’s current successor in function, if that individual has original classification authority;
a supervisory official of either the originator or his or her successor in function, if the supervisory official has original classification authority; or
officials delegated declassification authority in writing by the agency head or the senior agency official of the originating agency.
So, the EO does not specifically list a president as someone who can declassify information, even though it does list the president as someone who can classify information. A president could hold the declassification authority listed in Section 3.1(b)(1) of EO 13526 if he were the one who had authorized an original classification, as long as he was still serving as president. (Namely, President Trump could have declassified information pursuant to EO 13526 for documents brought to Mar-a-Lago up until January 20, 2021 at 11:59 a.m. as long as he was the one who had originally classified the classified information in the boxes.) But if a president was not the one who had originally classified the information (and it is probably unlikely President Trump was the one who classified the information), any authority he might have to declassify that information would not come from Section 3.1(b)(1) of EO 13526.

A better fit might instead be the declassification authority listed in Section 3.1(b)(3), which designates declassification authorities for a supervisory official of an individual who had original classification authority. (For instance, the president could be a supervisory official of the CIA Director or other officials referenced in Section 1.3 of the EO who might have been the original classification authority for certain classified information found during the search.) A president’s ability to declassify under that provision of the EO would expire as soon as he lost his supervisory official status: as soon as he was no longer president. But the question remains: what if he had affirmatively exercised such powers over the Mar-a-Lago documents prior to expiration of his presidency? Would that be consistent with EO 13526, regardless of whether such an action was recorded?

The EO does not shed much light on this point since it does not even refer to presidential declassification, let alone set forth whether any process for such declassification is required. It describes processes for automatic declassification, systematic declassification review, mandatory declassification review, and processing of requests—but none of those address whether a sitting president has any blanket “magic wand” declassification authority. The EO does reference in a number of places the need for agencies with equities in the classified information at issue to have an opportunity to weigh in on declassification (see Sections 3.1(c) and (d) as well as Section 3.3(b)). And, for whatever it is worth, there is no public information indicating that any such consultation with equity holders took place with respect to declassification of the classified information found at Mar-a-Lago.

EO 13526 also has an additional provision regarding declassification where, in exceptional cases, an agency head or a senior agency official can determine that the public interest in disclosure outweighs the need to protect the information. Again, however, there is no public information that the former president ever made such a determination about the documents seized at Mar-a-Lago, and the documents obviously have not been made public at this time.

In summary, EO 13526 gives the president broad classification authority and suggests a possibility for broad presidential declassification authority under certain circumstances, but it doesn’t explicitly provide for such authority—and in a number of places, it incorporates the idea that equity holders should have an opportunity to review proposed declassifications. Overall, EO 13526 doesn’t provide a completely satisfying answer to the presidential declassification question. And, importantly, there is also a separate issue regarding whether an Executive Order would even be binding on a sitting president.

This may be a good place for a quick note about the potential recovery during the search of classified material not governed by EO 13526. The Washington Post reported that classified documents relating to nuclear weapons were among the documents the FBI sought in the search at Mar-a-Lago. Certain nuclear-related information receives a special classification as “Restricted Data” under the Atomic Energy Act. Although the list of items seized did not refer to material classified as Restricted Data, it is worth mentioning that if such material was recovered, the classification of Restricted Data falls under an entirely different classification (and therefore declassification) system. It is not subject to EO 13526. Rather, it is governed exclusively by the Atomic Energy Act. If the Mar-a-Lago documents included Restricted Data, no public information suggests that the relevant “declassification” provisions of that statute have been followed. In fact, under the statute, a president cannot declassify such information on his own. Therefore, such information would remain classified regardless of any attempts made by the former president to declassify it.

The Constitution’s Article II Authority and Department of Navy v. Egan

Stepping back from EO 13526’s narrower mandate, let’s look at a much broader authority that might shed light on presidential declassification: the Constitution. The president’s ultimate authority to classify information and control access to such information stems from his Article II authority under the Constitution (U.S. Constitution, Art II, Section 2), which says the president shall be commander-in-chief of the U.S. army and navy. A heavily cited Supreme Court case from the 1980s, Department of Navy v. Egan, reviewed the Executive Branch’s authority to grant and deny security clearances, and delineated a broad view of the president’s classifying authorities as commander-in-chief: “[The President’s] authority to classify and control access to information bearing on national security and to determine whether an individual is sufficiently trustworthy to occupy a position in the Executive Branch that will give that person access to such information flows primarily from this constitutional investment of power in the President and exists quite apart from any explicit congressional grant.”

The language sounds pretty broad and, at first blush, may seem to give the president authority to do as he wishes with any classified information. But does it? The Article II language presupposes, as Egan holds, that the president has ultimate authority to control access to national security information. This may mean that if a president decides, on the fly, that he wants to convey highly classified information to Russian officials—as President Trump apparently did in 2017—that could be consistent with authorities given to him by the Constitution. (Note, though, that Article II’s conference of authority was likely granted under the assumption that the president would make any such decision in the interest of the national security of the United States and not for personal reasons.)

But does the language of Article II go beyond that ostensibly principled national security decision-making to allow a president to remove classified information to an unsecure location and purportedly attempt to declassify it, for no apparent national security reason and with no documented process or consultation with the information’s equity holders? On the one hand, one might try to argue that the language in Egan regarding the president’s breadth of authority to “control access” would include moving materials to a location that would be his home once he left office. But on the other hand, would such a reading really be consistent with Article II, without any additional national security basis for the removal of the documents? One could argue the oral disclosure by a president to a foreign official might be consistent with what the founders had in mind when they designated the president as the commander-in-chief, but the removal and attempted declassification of a seemingly wide array of classified documents as in this instance—as a president was leaving office after a lost election, without any stated reason or documentation for the removal and attempted declassification—seems quite far afield from the founders’ intentions. At least one recent court opinion from 2020 (New York Times v. CIA) articulated the point that the reading of the president’s broad Article II power in Egan does have its limits: “ ... declassification, even by the president, must follow established procedures ...”

After President Trump’s disclosure of classified information to the Russian ambassador and the Russian foreign minister in 2017, some said the president had done nothing wrong: that he had every right to share whatever he wanted with whomever he wanted, classification of the information be damned. Even some who lamented the disclosures for their potential harm to national security conceded that the president had the authority to make them. Others questioned the President’s authority to make the disclosure but accepted that no criminal consequences would follow. A small number of commentators maintained that his actions could have violated federal law, but the overall consensus back then was that it was not a matter that merited legal consequences, and no legal consequences followed.

The situation this time contains at least three differences that may alter the analysis:

This was not an oral disclosure by a president of a specific item of classified information to identified individuals. Rather, it appears to have involved removal and retention of multiple classified documents to an unauthorized location. In the absence of any information about what was removed, and why, and what any basis may have been for an attempt at declassification, it is difficult to presume these were actions in the interest of national security and consistent with a president’s Article II authorities.
Assuming the documents were removed to Mar-a-Lago sometime between December 2020 and 11:59 a.m. on Jan. 20, 2021, the president had been defeated in an election and was on his way out of office at the time the documents were removed. While he remained commander-in-chief through 11:59 a.m. on Jan. 20, 2021 and retained full Article II authorities through that moment, the timing does seem relevant to his motive and intent—especially in the absence, as indicated above, of any information about what was removed and why, and what any basis may have been for an attempted declassification. What possible reason, consistent with Article II, would an outgoing president have for taking these actions during that time?
The documents were discovered and recovered after Trump was no longer president. His Article II authority had expired by then. If he can’t prove that he declassified them before 11:59 a.m. on Jan. 20, 2021, he lacked the power to do so.
Incidentally, these differences also illustrate how the issue with the Mar-a-Lago documents can be distinguished from a seemingly similar issue that arose in the United States v. Libby case in 2006. In that case, President Bush had, without going through any formal process, authorized disclosure of parts of a classified National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) to a reporter, and that disclosure was purported to be a presidential declassification of the material. As with the incident with President Trump and the Russians in 2017, one could argue this sort of declassification fits within the broad powers of a president’s declassification authorities. And the NIE disclosure had a more obvious connection with a president’s Article II authorities—whatever one thought about the merits of the war in Iraq, the decision to declassify a specific piece of intelligence that supported the administration’s justifications for war is on point with those authorities.

Of note in the Libby case is that, at the time the president had purportedly declassified the information in the NIE for disclosure to a reporter, other senior officials—including cabinet-level officials—were not made aware of the declassification and in fact embarked on separate efforts to get the document declassified through normal agency channels. Libby, who disclosed the information to the reporter after the purported presidential declassification but prior to the formal declassification through regular agency channels, was not charged with disclosing classified information. Some might try to argue those facts illustrate that presidential declassification can occur without others knowing and without a formal process. But charging decisions are quite fact-specific and are subject to prosecutorial discretion, so just because the government did not charge Libby for the disclosure (and thus did not have an occasion to challenge the presidential declassification in that case) is not proof that presidential declassification without formal process and without others knowing is entirely legitimate. And, as indicated above, there are a number of factors just from what is publicly known that distinguish the purported presidential declassification of the Mar-a-Lago documents from what happened in the Libby case and suggest it may be further removed from a president’s authority under Article II.

Final Thoughts on the President’s Declassification Powers

On the issue of what, if any, process is or should be required for a president to declassify information, EO 13526 may not provide definitive answers, but it does suggest the prudence of some process, when possible, that factors in equities and expertise that specific agencies may have regarding the information at issue. In fact, in other instances during the Trump presidency, officials engaged in and showed awareness of the necessity of some sort of declassification process. See, for example, the declassification ordered for the Carter Page FISA Application and other FBI documents.

The Constitution’s broad brush in Article II and cases interpreting Article II may fail to suggest specific requirements the president might have to follow regarding declassification, but one can put forth a common-sense view that the broad power allotted to the president under Article II does have a limitation; it presumes an intent to act in the interest of the national security of the United States. And such a limitation would mean that if a president acts contrary to that interest, the founders would not have intended such actions to receive broad protection under Article II. Without any documentation or articulated reason for declassification of the documents at Mar-a-Lago, it seems hard to claim that such declassification comports with national security of the United States and with the president’s duties to protect national security.

Much remains unknown to the public regarding the Mar-a-Lago documents, and prosecution decisions on cases such as these are extremely fact-specific, so it is hard to speculate on where this matter is heading. Recovery of the classified material for national security reasons was without a doubt the priority. But, as concerns a potential for charges under 18 U.S.C. § 793, the DOJ would certainly consider the classification status of the documents and evaluate potential arguments regarding their declassification.

[Dowly]

If the POTUS declassifies documents without anyone knowing, how does anyone know they are declassified? The answer is: They don't and those documents will continue being handled as if they were classified, making them in all intent and purpose classified.


The system simply doesn't and cannot work that way.

[Rockstar]

If the POTUS declassifies documents without anyone knowing, how does anyone know they are declassified? The answer is: They don't and those documents will continue being handled as if they were classified, making them in all intent and purpose classified.


The system simply doesn't and cannot work that way.

Thing is nobody much cares for your opinion especially when nether you or I or anyone here has a clue what the hell the documents actually contained. That’s the nice thing about this ‘investigation’ it can mean anything they want to mean run with any headline they want. And what factchecker did you look up this time that says nobody else knew? Have a nice day.

[Skybird]

Declassification is a formalised process that gets documented. The modus vivendi is obligatory.

Just claiming AFTERWARDS! one had declassified something while not having handed the according object into that process (else there would be records of it), means nothing, because it is no declassification, but pure arbitary claim born out of opportunistic interest. Personal hear-say. Opinion. Lying.

Not a documented fact.

Declassified is what is proven by according records to have been correctly declassified in the correct formal process.

You may not care for Dowly's view of it, but you should care for the laws of your country which are also binding for ex presidents, even if they are as cheating lying basterds as this one was.

As long as you do not want to submit to the law of the jungle, I mean. Which then wpouzld turn the Ununited States of America into the Anarchistic States of America. Which nevertheless maybe indeed still is just the logical consequence, in the long run.

[Buddahaid]

Declassified or not has no bearing on what the DOJ is pursuing.

[Rockstar]

Declassification is a formalised process that gets documented. The modus vivendi is obligatory.

Just claiming AFTERWARDS! one had declassified something while not having handed the according object into that process (else there would be records of it), means nothing, because it is no declassification, but pure arbitary claim born out of opportunistic interest. Personal hear-say. Opinion. Lying.

Not a documented fact.

Declassified is what is proven by according records to have been correctly declassified in the correct formal process.

You may not care for Dowly's view of it, but you should care for the laws of your country which are also binding for ex presidents, even if they are as cheating lying basterds as this one was.

As long as you do not want to submit to the law of the jungle, I mean. Which then wpouzld turn the Ununited States of America into the Anarchistic States of America. Which nevertheless maybe indeed still is just the logical consequence, in the long run.


With regard to possession of classified material and the law.

Aldridge Ames, John Walker. You know the big difference between them and a political dog and pony show?

After only a six month investigation they were arrested, everyone knows what they were accused of, we know who was involved, and generally speaking what was leaked and the harm it caused to our national security.

Whereas in a political dog and pony show we get over five years of accusations, the public still doesn’t have the slightest clue because “it’s classified” or would “disclose sources or methods” and the show goes on.

[Rockstar]

Declassified or not has no bearing on what the DOJ is pursuing.


What is the DOJ pursuing? My understanding it concerns the mishandling of classified material. But then the article I pasted goes into some tuff questions which might arise. Like ya said: Kobayashi Maru. But IMO it’s a good choice because they can play this out til hell freezes over if they want. Or at least until midterms and the next presidential election.

[Buddahaid]

What is the DOJ pursuing? My understanding it concerns the mishandling of classified material. But then the article I pasted goes into some tuff questions which might arise. Like ya said: Kobayashi Maru. But IMO it’s a good choice because they can play this out til hell freezes over if they want. Or at least until midterms and the next presidential election.

Illegal possesion of national defense documents. Calssification does not matter.

[Rockstar]

Illegal possesion of national defense documents. Calssification does not matter.

You might want to read the warrant then, particularly Attachment B ‘property to be seized’ paragraphs (a.),(b.),(c.) and (d.). It was pretty much the basis for the entire search.

https://fm.cnbc.com/applications/cnbc.com/resources/editorialfiles/2022/08/12/govuscourtsflsd617854170_12.pdf

And just an FYI the term “National Defense Information” is a classification for certain information, like FOUO or UNCLASS.


ATTACHMENT B

Property to be seized

All physical documents and records constituting evidence, contraband, fruits of crime, or other items illegally possessed in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 793, 2071, or 1519, including the following:

(18 U.S. Code § 793 - Gathering, transmitting or losing defense information
18 U.S. Code § 2071 - Concealment, removal, or mutilation generally
18 U.S. Code § 1519 - Destruction, alteration, or falsification of records in Federal investigations and bankruptcy)

a. Any physical documents with classification markings, along with any containers/boxes (including any other contents) in which such documents are located, as well as any other containers/boxes that are collectively stored or found together with the aforementioned documents and containers/boxes;

b. Information, including communications in any form, regarding the retrieval, storage, or transmission of national defense information or classified material;

c. Any government and/or Presidential Records created between January 20, 2017, and January 20, 2021; or

d. Anyevidenceoftheknowingalteration,destruction,orco ncealmentof any government and/or Presidential Records, or of any documents with classification markings.

The questions in the article I posted earlier are quite relevant. I also could not find anything on the DOJ website of them doing anything about this unprecedented seizure by the FBI, nothing but headlines and gossip. Of course I must admit my searches have been limited.

[Dowly]

..Why would the DOJ do something about the seizure? The DOJ is leading the investigation.


Also, just because something is unprecedented, doesn't mean it's somehow wrong or shouldn't be done.


The FBI went in to look for any remaining documents that were not for Trump to keep, they found them. Trump is quilty of that, there's no question about it. Thanks to Trump's big mouth, we know he was aware of them. That there turned out to be highly/classified information is just adding to the pile.


Btw, Trump's lawyers are asking for security clearance to be able to have a look at the documents. Strange, considering Trump says they're declassified. :hmmm:

[Rockstar]

we all know Trump is a blow hard, I’d say most if not all politicians are. Some are arrogant. Some are narcissists. Some are old East German Soviet sympathizers colluding with Putin to hold Europe hostage and some are just ditzy two timing drunken whores.

As for declassifying information he has a point IF it was done while he held office. But that doesn’t seem to be the case.

After reading this article linked below there doesn’t appear to have been a sensational surprise raid of armed FBI agents storming the palace. In reality it seems everyone and their mother knew what documents were in that vault/safe and after several legalese letters between lawyers and government agencies. NARA eventually provided the FBI access to the records and the FBI was accompanied by a Trump representative when they retrieved them. As for the warrant it doesn’t prove guilt it’s not what it’s for. It’s there to cover the investigators arse and protect the rights of every citizen in our country as it puts restrictions on what our government can search for and retrieve. Namely the documents listed in the warrant.

And so the show goes on.

https://lawandcrime.com/trump/national-archives-letter-says-trumps-lawyers-tried-to-delay-fbi-involvement-in-recovery-of-documents-at-the-highest-levels-of-classification-from-mar-a-lago/

[Buddahaid]

Right and if he would have just spent an hour or two collecting and returning them we wouldn't be talking about it. He's an idiot.

[Rockstar]

Right and if he would have just spent an hour or two collecting and returning them we wouldn't be talking about it. He's an idiot.

True he may be an idiot but I’m not so sure those ‘believers’ in all of the headlines and accusations against him are much different than he is. What I mean is, if they took the time to actually think for themselves we most likely wouldn’t be talking about any of this to begin with, it shouldn’t have even been a blip on the RADAR. Unfortunately Blue Anon thinks it’s everyone but they who are conspiracy theorists.

[Buddahaid]

True he may be an idiot but I’m not so sure those ‘believers’ in all of the headlines and accusations against him are much different than he is. If they took the time to actually think for themselves you’re right we wouldn’t be talking about this.

Except they aren't the ones holding onto national defense documents. If he were the patriot he likens himself to be he would have helped find and turn them in right away. An idiot and security risk.

[Rockstar]

Except they aren't the ones holding onto national defense documents. If he were the patriot he likens himself to be he would have helped find and turn them in right away. An idiot and security risk.

Well, I don’t know what to tell ya other than I’m not defending him and if believing what you said helps you sleep better night have at it. Let me know how the indictment watch goes.

[em2nought]

Spot on! :D
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BNYQ1fvn33o

[Gorpet]

..Why would the DOJ do something about the seizure? The DOJ is leading the investigation.


Also, just because something is unprecedented, doesn't mean it's somehow wrong or shouldn't be done.


The FBI went in to look for any remaining documents that were not for Trump to keep, they found them. Trump is quilty of that, there's no question about it. Thanks to Trump's big mouth, we know he was aware of them. That there turned out to be highly/classified information is just adding to the pile.


Btw, Trump's lawyers are asking for security clearance to be able to have a look at the documents. Strange, considering Trump says they're declassified. :hmmm:

Dowly,Hillary Clinton had your politician's ball's in her hand.She was able to destroy that information and save their Careers.Your Country shall always kneel and follow the instructions of the Democratic party Of America never forget that.We will see how your politicians take your country in the future.Remember this America will not go to war for Finland. But if can we will stick missiles on your soil.We will do this and you must accept them NATO Partner.Someone must absorbed and be sacrificed for the good of the Planet. Welcome to the Collective.

[ET2SN]

More from Deep Goat:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eqqTjan9Ses

Notice the box on the shelf labeled "not secret". :haha:

What Beau is talking about:



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n9adLsXTpZQ


:hmmm:

[Reece]

What's the news about Illinois passing a law ending cash bail? Gives references to a movie "The Purge". :hmmm:

https://www.nbcchicago.com/news/local/senator-proposes-changes-to-illinois-safe-t-act-amid-purge-rumors/2951264/

https://news.yahoo.com/illinois-becomes-first-state-pass-121500362.html?fr=sycsrp_catchall

https://nypost.com/2022/09/17/illinois-no-cash-bail-law-will-turn-the-state-into-the-purge/

Doesn't sound good! :k_confused:

[Gorpet]

What's the news about Illinois passing a law ending cash bail? Gives references to a movie "The Purge". :hmmm:

https://www.nbcchicago.com/news/local/senator-proposes-changes-to-illinois-safe-t-act-amid-purge-rumors/2951264/

https://news.yahoo.com/illinois-becomes-first-state-pass-121500362.html?fr=sycsrp_catchall

https://nypost.com/2022/09/17/illinois-no-cash-bail-law-will-turn-the-state-into-the-purge/

Doesn't sound good! :k_confused:

Well hell it's,Illinois they have a rich history.

[Buddahaid]

What's the news about Illinois passing a law ending cash bail? Gives references to a movie "The Purge". :hmmm:

https://www.nbcchicago.com/news/local/senator-proposes-changes-to-illinois-safe-t-act-amid-purge-rumors/2951264/

https://news.yahoo.com/illinois-becomes-first-state-pass-121500362.html?fr=sycsrp_catchall

https://nypost.com/2022/09/17/illinois-no-cash-bail-law-will-turn-the-state-into-the-purge/

Doesn't sound good! :k_confused:

Try this explanation on for size.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jf2r5OFTJpY

[Rockstar]

Let’s talk about that looney kool aide drinking blue anon headline chasing conspiracy theorist and all who follow him that don’t have a clue what they’re talking about because they listen too idiots like that clown.
The argument doesn’t have jack squat to with excessive bail or rich republicans & conservative trumpets tearing down the 8th amendment oppressing the poor. One of the problems among others for some is that there is NO bail, zero, zilch, nada for certain criminal acts. They are just released on the own recognizance.

Here are the actual REAL arguments being filed.

https://news.wttw.com/sites/default/files/article/file-attachments/Kankakee%20HB3653%20Lawsuit%20PR%20091622%20Jim%20 Rowe%20Safety%20Act%20Lawsuit.pdf

https://news.wttw.com/sites/default/files/article/file-attachments/McHenry%20SAFE-T%20lawsuit%20ComplaintHB3653.pdf

https://news.wttw.com/sites/default/files/article/file-attachments/Will%20County%20SAFE-T%20Complaint-Public-Act-101-652-min.pdf

[mapuc]

Who's in charge in USA who is the boss in the White House ?

A video clip showing the President asking for a woman named Jackie who had died some month earlier at some press meeting. Which Biden knew he ordered flag on half that day she died.

Biden seems to have had many of these "black-outs" sign of dementia

This made me wonder-Who is the real boss in the White House. Who's in charge behind Bidens back ??

Markus

[Catfish]

Like in every good democracy they are and always were, in the best hands money can buy :D

[MaDef]

Who's in charge in USA who is the boss in the White House ?

A video clip showing the President asking for a woman named Jackie who had died some month earlier at some press meeting. Which Biden knew he ordered flag on half that day she died.

Biden seems to have had many of these "black-outs" sign of dementia

This made me wonder-Who is the real boss in the White House. Who's in charge behind Bidens back ??

Markus

The guy running the teleprompter :D

[Rockstar]

The guy running the teleprompter :D

:har::har::har::har::o:wah:

[mapuc]

Danish TV2News Writes:


ANALYSIS: We have to talk about Joe Biden

As an analyst, you shouldn't make remote diagnoses, but you can't ignore the obvious: The ravages of time are eating away at the world's most powerful man.

Let's start with the conclusion:

I'm not going to make remote diagnoses about Joe Biden's alleged or possible mental state. That would be frivolous. But that doesn't mean that analysts can refrain from stating the obvious:

We have to talk about Joe Biden.

Yesterday's seance, in which the 79-year-old Biden asked during a White House conference where the late Congressman Jackie Walorski was among the audience, obviously cannot be ignored.

- Jackie, are you here? Where's Jackie? She's obviously not here," the US President said of Walorski, who died on 3 August this year.

- I thought she would be here to help make this a reality, continued the world's most powerful man. I wonder if the Walorskis would have wanted the same thing, but she was tragically killed in a car accident just two months ago.

Comic Ali's cousin
It was not helped by the fact that White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre, at a subsequent press briefing, kept replying that the president had had Walorski "in mind" and, moreover, affectation that the president was confused.

With a twinkle in one's eye, one can of course note that Comic Ali has got a cousin. After all, anyone and everyone can see from the viral video clips that Biden not only had Walorski on his mind, but repeatedly inquired as to the late congressman's whereabouts.

Or, as one member of the press corps so eloquently replied to the press secretary, "I think about John Lennon almost every day, but I'm not looking for him."

Aging
The concern of the American public has long been there. Biden has made himself significantly less available to the press and spoken significantly less to the nation than his predecessors, even though we live in tumultuous times with plenty to talk about.

A poll in late February showed that a majority of Americans do not believe Biden "has the mental acuity to be an effective president". Last month, 59 percent of respondents also said they were "concerned" about Biden's mental health. Concerns about Biden's age are also slowly being voiced in quotes by fellow partisans. Democratic voters keep saying in polls that they don't want Biden to run again in 2024.

In order to navigate this minefield analytically, I myself prefer the formulation that Biden is ageist. It's a more neutral and less loaded term, though it may not be accurate.

Stories
I was at a voter rally with Joe Biden in Nevada in February 2020. Here Biden came on stage and began by saying he was glad to be in California. Potatos, potatoes.

Tales like this have been many in Biden's long career in American politics. Often, the statements are explained away or affectation is that Biden stuttered as a child, or "that's the way Joe Biden has always been."

That may be true. But it is also undeniably the case that these slanders have increased over the years. That said, yesterday's episode obviously can't be categorized as just another slander.

An impossible task
At the same time, of course, it is easy to understand that the White House press secretary has an impossible task. If she finds out the obvious, she will be bombarded with questions about Biden's mental state. If she steps into the role of Comic Ali's cousin - as she did - she is laughed at, and no one buys her excuses.

I have to be honest and admit that it's hard as an analyst, too. It was, by the way - just in a different way - when Donald Trump sat in the White House and behaved - diplomatically put - unusually.

On the one hand, one has to be careful not to be hitched to a party political bandwagon and pass on spin and propaganda. It didn't get any easier, to say the least, after Donald Trump and the Republicans began attacking Biden's mental health, making claims about alleged dementia and that Biden should be out the window.

On the other hand, you have to itemize what everyone can see and hear and put it into a larger analytical context. Especially in such a tense situation as the world is currently in, and when the 79-year-old Biden continues to express his intention to run for re-election in the upcoming presidential elections in 2024.

But here we are back at the beginning: that as an analyst, in my world, one must refrain from making remote diagnoses, while at the same time having to italicize that the ravages of time are clearly gnawing at the world's most powerful man.


Translated with www.DeepL.com/Translator (free version)


Markus

[em2nought]

So, Paypal recently "accidentally" released a new policy stating that they would fine you $2500 if they thought you were spreading misinformation. Paypal has a link to your bank account by the way, so they could just go in and suck it right out. They said it the policy release was an accident, but what was it doing there in the first place? Deleted my banking info and closed my paypal. Bye, Bye.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CDsdmdZ5aDw

[VipertheSniper]

So, Paypal recently "accidentally" released a new policy stating that they would fine you $2500 if they thought you were spreading misinformation. Paypal has a link to your bank account by the way, so they could just go in and suck it right out. They said it the policy release was an accident, but what was it doing there in the first place? Deleted my banking info and closed my paypal. Bye, Bye.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CDsdmdZ5aDw

That's kinda old news and there's nothing accidental about it. That's in their TOS since June 2020, and also only applies to businesses.
The part about spreading misinformation being a violation of their TOS? The oldest full TOS I could find was from Oct. 2019 and that was in there already back then. in the archived changes to the TOS going to 2014 there was no mention of this being added or changed in the list of forbidden activities, so I guess that's in the TOS since atleast 2014. Just to make sure I went back as far as 2013 with the waybackmachine, and it's already in there.

[August]

That's kinda old news and there's nothing accidental about it. That's in their TOS since June 2020, and also only applies to businesses.
The part about spreading misinformation being a violation of their TOS? The oldest full TOS I could find was from Oct. 2019 and that was in there already back then. in the archived changes to the TOS going to 2014 there was no mention of this being added or changed in the list of forbidden activities, so I guess that's in the TOS since atleast 2014. Just to make sure I went back as far as 2013 with the waybackmachine, and it's already in there.


If that is so then why did the company issue this statement?:

“An Acceptable Use Policy (AUP) notice recently went out in error that included incorrect information. PayPal is not fining people for misinformation and this language was never intended to be inserted in our policy. We’re sorry for the confusion this has caused,” a PayPal spokesperson said in a statement.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/2022/10/13/paypal-misinformation-policy-sparks-backlash-many-users-delete-app/10486413002/

[Skybird]

How Paypal shares your data (click on nodes):
https://rebecca-ricks.com/paypal-data/

[VipertheSniper]

If that is so then why did the company issue this statement?:

“An Acceptable Use Policy (AUP) notice recently went out in error that included incorrect information. PayPal is not fining people for misinformation and this language was never intended to be inserted in our policy. We’re sorry for the confusion this has caused,” a PayPal spokesperson said in a statement.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/2022/10/13/paypal-misinformation-policy-sparks-backlash-many-users-delete-app/10486413002/

ok, but then... that's still in the TOS in the US atleast, written like it applies to all sellers who receive funds through PayPal, when in violation of the AUP, so they didn't walk it back? Now I really wonder how that was worded before...

Edit: and I tried to fiddle it out of the wayback machine, but no dice

[mapuc]

Regarding Paypal.

I have only used it once and never again-This Paypal is made for the seller not the buyer. Bought once a lot of model building material and paid via Paypal. Sellers pal paid my money to them-And I was waiting....waiting...waiting..nothing.

Send Paypal a mail and got my money return-Send Paypal a second mail where I said-It looks like you are pal for the sellers and not us the buyer.

Back to discuss American politics

Markus

[August]

ok, but then... that's still in the TOS in the US atleast, written like it applies to all sellers who receive funds through PayPal, when in violation of the AUP, so they didn't walk it back? Now I really wonder how that was worded before...


Me too. Not sure it would be legal even if it just applied to businesses, but the biggest question in my mind would be who makes the determination as to what is misinformation or not?

[Otto Harkaman]

who makes the determination as to what is misinformation or not?

that is the question, the answer is voluminous

[VipertheSniper]

Me too. Not sure it would be legal even if it just applied to businesses, but the biggest question in my mind would be who makes the determination as to what is misinformation or not?

I mean if you make an account as a seller, or not terminate it, you're bound by the agreement/contract, so I guess in that sense it is legal, since you agreed to it.
As to the determination what is and what isn't misinformation, since I don't think they'll go around themselves looking for these specific violations, they will have to rely on user reports about it and follow up on that.
I guess you'd have to fight that in court if you can prove you were wrongfully charged the 2500$ for providing false, inaccurate or misleading information as it is termed. And Paypal would probably be on the hook for a good chunk more than that, since they'd also suspend your account and you can't receive payments, so they better be damn sure a report about this to them is accurate, even if they have big pockets.
Even if corps aren't our friends, they're definitely friends of their bottom line, so I don't think they'll go around suspending accounts and charging people over that willy-nilly.

[August]

I mean if you make an account as a seller, or not terminate it, you're bound by the agreement/contract, so I guess in that sense it is legal, since you agreed to it.
As to the determination what is and what isn't misinformation, since I don't think they'll go around themselves looking for these specific violations, they will have to rely on user reports about it and follow up on that.
I guess you'd have to fight that in court if you can prove you were wrongfully charged the 2500$ for providing false, inaccurate or misleading information as it is termed. And Paypal would probably be on the hook for a good chunk more than that, since they'd also suspend your account and you can't receive payments, so they better be damn sure a report about this to them is accurate, even if they have big pockets.
Even if corps aren't our friends, they're definitely friends of their bottom line, so I don't think they'll go around suspending accounts and charging people over that willy-nilly.


Maybe but their definitions are pretty vague and I think of all the people on facebook and other social media platforms that have been banned for saying what eventually turned out to be true so I don't have much confidence in their fidelity.

[Buddahaid]

I'm trying to figure out how PP is involved in misinformation other than stopping fraudulent transactions. My BS meter is pegging on this.

Trump's legal woes are going from bad to worse lately and I'm beiginning to believe he's blabbed himself into corners he's not getting out of.

Here's a new twist for the Jan6 Commitee.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n698WKkBdyk

[Rockstar]

I'm trying to figure out how PP is involved in misinformation other than stopping fraudulent transactions. My BS meter is pegging on this.

Trump's legal woes are going from bad to worse lately and I'm beiginning to believe he's blabbed himself into corners he's not getting out of.

Here's a new twist for the Jan6 Commitee.


:yawn: :zzz:

[Buddahaid]

:yawn: :zzz:

Boring it may be to you, but I think Trump is going to fall and at least be barred from office based on the 14th amendment in the next twelve months.

[Rockstar]

Big whoop, nobody cares, it’s gotten boring and old for a lot more people than you think. :roll:

[Rockstar]

Democrats ready for midterm blame game.

https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/3695023-democrats-ready-for-midterm-blame-game/


Three weeks out from a midterm election that is beginning to look more and more like a big victory for Republicans, Democrats are starting to play the blame game.

Former President Obama stepped into the spotlight over the weekend by warning fellow Democrats and progressives not to be a “buzzkill” by constantly scolding people for being politically incorrect.

Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), who is eyeing a potential run for president in 2024, says the party is spending too much time talking about abortion rights and not enough talking about economic inequality and that it didn’t go big enough in passing legislation to help Americans struggling to afford health care, prescription drugs and other basic needs.

Meanwhile, younger House Democrats who are scrambling to keep their seats in Congress, including Rep. Elissa Slotkin (Mich.), argue the party leadership has fallen out of touch with many voters and have called for “a new generation” and “new blood” in charge of the party.

And many Democratic lawmakers have pointed to President Biden’s low approval rating as a drag on their own prospects.

It all comes as recent polling has shown a Republican resurgence in key Senate and House races and left Democrats worrying they peaked too soon.

Obama and Sanders both expressed a concern that’s becoming more and more widespread across the party: Did Democrats err in focusing on cultural fights and issues like abortion while ceding the stage to Republicans on inflation?

“When we’re talking about putting together … durable majorities, we have to be able to speak to everybody about their common interests,” Obama said in an interview with “Pod Save America.” “Where we get into trouble sometimes is when we try to suggest that some groups are more — because they historically have been victimized more, that somehow they have a status that’s different than other people.

And that we’re going around scolding folks if they don’t use exactly the right phrase, or that identity politics becomes the principal lens through which we view our various political challenges,” he said.

“Sometimes Democrats are [a buzzkill],” Obama observed.

Obama’s first major interview of the midterm campaign season immediately generated media buzz at a time when party strategists are trying to put Republicans on the defensive instead of reflecting on the divisions of their own party.

Mike Lux, a Democratic strategist and Clinton White House adviser, said, “I don’t disagree with the former president.”

“I think the language police stuff gets a little silly, but I would also say that in the focus groups that I have done and the polling that I have been working on … voters are not mostly focused on that stuff. That’s what Twitter is focused on,” he said. “My sense of what voters are focused on is economic issues, abortion, stuff that really matters to them and their lives.”

One senior Republican strategist said Obama is getting out ahead of what is likely to be an intense debate within the Democratic Party if it loses control of the House and possibly the Senate as well.

If Democrats get wiped out, you’ll probably see a lot of people in their party pointing back to that message as a way to find renewal,” the strategist said.

“I think he’s doing it because they’re expecting huge losses in the election and he wants to take a leadership role in guiding the party after the losses. It basically sets him up as the smart guy who understood why Democrats were about to lose but people didn’t necessarily listen to him,” the source added. “It empowers him to be a powerbroker heading into 2024.”

After Democrats lost nine seats and control of the Senate in the 2014 election, Sen. Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) said his party was wrong to focus too much on health care reform in the midst of the Great Recession.

“We were in the middle of a recession and people were hurting and said, ‘What about me? I’m losing my job. It’s not health care that bothers me. What about me? My income is declining and I can’t do the things I used to do. It’s not my health care at issue,’ ” Schumer told reporters at the National Press Club in late November of 2014, before he ascended to become Senate Democratic leader.
Democratic strategists say they’re still optimistic about keeping control of Congress.

Jonathan Kott, a Democratic strategist and former Senate aide, argued that Herschel Walker, the Republican Senate candidate in Georgia, is “imploding,” while the Senate race in Ohio — a state that has trended Republican in recent election cycles — “is now on the table,” and that incumbent Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) is ahead of his Democratic opponent by only 3 points in one recent poll.
Yet Kott said “there always is” a reevaluation of strategy after an election, especially when a party loses, and advised “Democrats should take a lesson from President Obama — he spoke to the entire country, he didn’t speak to one group on Monday, [another] group on Tuesday.”

“President Obama is absolutely correct. We need to start talking to the entire country, all the voters, and say here’s all the things we done,” said Kott, who advised centrist Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.).

Manchin, a Democrat who represents a state former President Trump won by large margins in 2016 and 2020, has urged his Democratic Senate colleagues for more than a year to pay more attention to voters’ concerns about inflation — on which Kott said Manchin was “absolutely right” to focus.

One of the reasons he was right is he talks to his constituents every day, multiple times a day, and hearing directly from people is probably [a better] indicator than any economic forecast you can get,” he said.

The political picture has gotten worse for Senate and House Democrats since they left Washington three weeks ago still feeling confident in their chances, buoyed by getting a bold new tax reform and climate bill signed into law and hopeful there would be a voter backlash against the conservative Supreme Court and “MAGA” Republicans.

But a New York Times-Siena College poll published Monday showed that independents and women are shifting to the Republican Party despite the spotlight Democrats have put on abortion rights and that Biden’s low approval rating is a major headwind for Democrats.

The survey found that 49 percent of registered voters nationwide said they would vote for a Republican to represent them in Congress, while 45 percent said they would vote for a Democrat. It was conducted from Oct. 9 to Oct. 12.

It showed that 24 percent of registered voters think the nation is on the right track, while 62 percent think it’s moving in the wrong direction. Twenty-six percent of respondents said the economy is the most important problem facing the country right now, and 19 percent said inflation is the biggest problem. Only 4 percent said they saw abortion as the most pressing issue.

Sanders — Manchin’s rival in setting policy priorities within the Senate Democratic Caucus — said recently that Democrats are putting too much emphasis on abortion rights when many voters are more worried about the economy.
“I don’t believe it can be the only issue,” Sanders told “CNN Tonight with Jake Tapper” in a recent interview.

“At a time when we have an economy in which the wealthiest people, the billionaire class, are getting much, much richer while working people are struggling to put food on the table, it goes without saying that we have to focus on the economy,” he said.

Faiz Shakir, a Democratic strategist and senior adviser to Sanders, argued that Democrats have a potent economic message to use against Republicans but need to employ it more regularly to overcome the political headwinds facing them this fall.

“When the country is at two-thirds wrong track and by most accounts Republicans are up by 15 to 20 points on the economy … we got to change that,” he said. “We got to at least make the compelling economic argument about what [Republicans] want to do to Social Security, what they want to do to Medicare, what they want to do to student debt relief and prescription drug costs.”

“It doesn’t feel like — when you look at the ads on air by Democrats — they’re fighting aggressively on the economic contrasts,” he said.

He said polls also show Latino voters and young voters are worried about inflation and the economy and added that “you got to get out there and talk about it.”
Not all Democrats are buying into Sanders’s advice and are instead sticking with an abortion-first strategy.

Biden delivered a speech at Howard Theatre in Washington, D.C., that put the spotlight once again on the abortion issue and promised that if Democrats keep their Senate and House majorities, the first bill he will send them would codify the Supreme Court decision in Roe v. Wade, which established the right to an abortion.

“We’ve got work to do,” Shakir said when asked about Biden’s abortion-focused speech.

Lux, the Democratic strategist, said there would be a careful review of party strategy after the election, no matter how Democratic candidates perform.
“There’s always discussion after you lose an election and there should be discussion if we win the election,” he said. “Just because you win doesn’t mean you did everything right. The party will have good discussions in either scenario and go forward from there.”

[Rockstar]

What it boils down too. Food prices going through the roof, gas prices going through the roof, rent prices going through the roof, national debt goi g through the roof. People in need of hurricane relief, Mandate Nazis from the Joseph Mengele school of medicine forcing experimental vaccines on children. War in Eastern Europe, threat of nuclear war, fear of recession. Plus all the BS Obama just called out in the above article.

Frankly I don’t think anyone really gives of rats arse about some new drama and plot twist on the Jan. 6th committee except the most dedicated Blue anon fanboys and girls.

[Reece]

Off topic, didn't know where else to post it, but what is the story about the Bonfire Memorial located in Tharaldson Texas?Looks rather weird!! :hmmm:

[ET2SN]

I'm guessing it has something to do with this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BDeJDtkS39s


You may scoff, but how do you explain those odd tiny chunks of "meat" in Hormel Chili??? :o

[Reece]

:har::har: Wow this is great stuff!! This could explain a lot of other things as well!! :D

[Skybird]

https://birdsarentreal.com/pages/the-history

[Jimbuna]

How Paypal shares your data (click on nodes):
https://rebecca-ricks.com/paypal-data/

Never doubted it.

[August]

Off topic, didn't know where else to post it, but what is the story about the Bonfire Memorial located in Tharaldson Texas?Looks rather weird!! :hmmm:


It's a Texas Aggie thang. They're weird. Just ask any Texas Longhorn!

[Jimbuna]

It's a Texas Aggie thang. They're weird. Just ask any Texas Longhorn!

Yeah, I've met a few :O:

[Buddahaid]

Oops! Red states with newly restricted access to abortion are seeing just what the DOD thinks of it when it comes to impacting readiness.

https://www.militarytimes.com/news/your-military/2022/10/20/military-to-provide-leave-travel-expenses-for-troops-seeking-abortion/

[mapuc]

In the news here today I think it was in the news at 3 they discussed this:

https://www.amazon.com/Divider-Trump-White-House-2017-2021/dp/038554653X

When hearing one of their expert-Who is not what I would call neutral when it comes to Trump. I thought Couldn't they have picked someone else one who's truly neutral.

I also thought What is my American friends comment to this book-is it bullock or not ?

Markus

[Buddahaid]

I won't be buying, or reading it, so no opinion about the book.

[August]

In the news here today I think it was in the news at 3 they discussed this:

https://www.amazon.com/Divider-Trump-White-House-2017-2021/dp/038554653X

When hearing one of their expert-Who is not what I would call neutral when it comes to Trump. I thought Couldn't they have picked someone else one who's truly neutral.

I also thought What is my American friends comment to this book-is it bullock or not ?

Markus


Never heard of him or his book but I don't see any value in reading anything from anyone associated with NBC. Like asking me my opinion on the latest issue of Pravda, given the agenda of the source it doesn't really matter what it says.

[mapuc]

Never heard of him or his book but I don't see any value in reading anything from anyone associated with NBC. Like asking me my opinion on the latest issue of Pravda, given the agenda of the source it doesn't really matter what it says.


Thank you for your answer-It didn't surprise me a bit about your standpoint.

Furthermore-The title the Divider-Trump did NOT divide the country the fraction was already there and it was big/huge/massive, when he entered the Oval Office.

What you can discuss is whether he tried to fix this fraction or not.

Markus

[Jimbuna]

I won't be buying, or reading it, so no opinion about the book.

Ditto

[em2nought]

Furthermore-The title the Divider-Trump did NOT divide the country the fraction was already there and it was big/huge/massive, when he entered the Oval Office.

Markus


President Trump should become the "Beef, it's what's for dinner!" spokesman. That should cause all sorts of problems at home and at the polls for democrats. :D
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nZoyE1B7HHA

[Rockstar]

Democrats are dangerous! :o :har::har:

Liz Cheney predicts rise of ‘new conservative party,’ says Republicans ‘more dangerous’ than Dems

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2022/oct/23/liz-cheney-predicts-rise-new-conservative-party-sa/

…Ms. Cheney, vice chair of the House panel investigating the riot at the U.S. Capitol, accused Republican nominees who are backed by Mr. Trump of being “more dangerous right now” than their Democratic opponents.

[Buddahaid]

Pretty much the whole MAGA crowd are dangerous to my view. I really don't want to live in an authoritarian theocracy, or idiocracy for that matter.

[Rockstar]

Pretty much the whole MAGA crowd are dangerous to my view. I really don't want to live in an authoritarian theocracy, or idiocracy for that matter.

Hmm, seems like you already do. Face it what you said is very much like what Putin said before he invaded Ukraine. How many people were beaten just for wearing a hat with a campaign slogan on it? It is just a simple campaign slogan you know, no different than Yes We Can, Time For Greatness, or Build Back Better.

https://www.lawenforcementtoday.com/attacks-trump-supporters-maga-hats/

The propagandist's purpose is to make one set of people forget that certain other sets of people are human.

[MaDef]

Hmm, seems like you already do. Face it what you are said is much what Putin said before he invaded Ukraine. How many people were beaten just for wearing a hat with a campaign slogan on it? It is just a simple campaign slogan you know, no different than Yes We Can, Time For Greatness, or Build Back Better.

The propagandist's purpose is to make one set of people forget that certain other sets of people are human. That's been part and parcel of society since... well, forever.

[mapuc]

There's no excuse whatsoever to use violence against an opponent or their love ones.

A spokesman for Ms. Pelosi, Drew Hammill, said in a statement that “an assailant broke into the Pelosi residence in San Francisco and violently assaulted Mr. Pelosi” on Friday morning. Mr. Pelosi, 82, was hospitalized but was expected to make a full recovery, Mr. Hammill said.

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/10/28/us/politics/nancy-pelosi-husband-assaulted.html

Markus

[August]

There's no excuse whatsoever to use violence against an opponent or their love ones.



https://www.nytimes.com/2022/10/28/us/politics/nancy-pelosi-husband-assaulted.html

Markus




So excuse to blame this on Trump either. From what I have read this guy was equal opportunity crazy.

[mapuc]

So excuse to blame this on Trump either. From what I have read this guy was equal opportunity crazy.

Even if this man should be part of this maga movement(or what you call it)
I would not generalize. I'm convinced he acted on his own

I'm pretty sure 99,99 % of these maga people are nice people-Like 99,99% of the Dems supporters are nice people.

Markus

[August]

Even if this man should be part of this maga movement(or what you call it)

Not so sure he is part of any movement other than the Berkley version of Bat Crap Crazy.

[MaDef]

Not so sure he is part of any movement other than the Berkley version of Bat Crap Crazy.

That's what happens when you legalize recreational drug use.

[August]

That's what happens when you legalize recreational drug use.


Don't blame pot for that that kind of violence dude. If anything it acted as a deterrent. Might as well try to blame it on the hammer.

[Rockstar]

According the NYT… :roll:

A motive for the attack was not immediately clear.

The motive for the attack on Mr. Pelosi was not clear on Friday morning, but the assailant was in search of Ms. Pelosi, according to a person briefed on the attack. Before the assault occurred, the intruder confronted Mr. Pelosi in their home shouting, “Where is Nancy, where is Nancy?”

Since the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol, members of Congress from both parties have experienced a surge in threats and confrontations, including stalking, armed visits to their homes and assaults.


In the below article it appears there was actual investigative journalism involved and the motive seems to be IMO that David Depape is just simply batsheet crazy.

An older picture of Depape, a Canadian-born resident of Berkeley, California, emerged alongside a prominent Berkeley nudist activist with whom he has children.

On a WordPress blog, Depape ranted about censorship by the “elites” and “ruling class.” He also appears to have a website that reads “da Jews.” Sixteen hours ago, he posted the headline, “Why Colleges are becoming Cults.” He ranted about movies, writing, “The critics are ********** commie gate keepers. They love the sh******* movies ever as long as those movies are sh**** because they where…” You can read more about the suspect’s writings later in this article.

Some of his posts referred to former President Donald Trump. “Either Q is Trump himself or Q is the deepstate moles within Trumps inner circle. So Q/Trump sabotaged their child trafficking operations. #2 self inflicted wound. Trumps covert id or a Deep state mole? Was Q refering to this? Did Q do this? another video,” he wrote, referring to QAnon.

In another post, he wrote, “The more Ukrainians die NEEDLESSLY the cheaper the land will be for Jews to buy up.” His website has posts on pedophiles, aliens, COVID, Communism, Kanye West, Derek Chauvin, what he called “climate hysteria” and more. It is filled with conspiracy theories and other ramblings. He also had a Facebook page, but it was taken down.

https://heavy.com/news/david-depape/


I would like to know how the hell he got through security, was there any security to begin with?

[Skybird]

Attacks and events like these are the result of the public zeitgeist that favors polarization, division and hatred over unity, cooperation and respect, and works with lies and deceit instead of truth and facts. This hostile atmosphere, which is opening deep rifts even within families, has been deliberately incited by a certain person who wants to benefit from it for his own selfish interests, and it is clear that this person has no desire to stop the destruction.

Things will get worse, not better. Get used to it - and a nation with so much experience and routine in grieving after school shootings should find it easy.

:stare:

[les green01]

Pelusi hubby can't say i feel sorry for him wasn't too long ago he was driving all lit up couldn't pass sobriety field test and cause an accident with injuries honest he got what he deserves

[August]

This hostile atmosphere, which is opening deep rifts even within families, has been deliberately incited by a certain person who wants to benefit from it for his own selfish interests, and it is clear that this person has no desire to stop the destruction.

:stare:




:roll:

[mapuc]

I truly hope he's a loner. I can foresee what main talks would be in US and the world.

Trump supporters are dangerous and should be put away.

Media a.s.o. will generalize

Markus

[Rockstar]

Pelusi hubby can't say i feel sorry for him wasn't too long ago he was driving all lit up couldn't pass sobriety field test and cause an accident with injuries honest he got what he deserves

Ya you don’t have to feel sorry for him. But nobody in this country deserves to have their home broken into and then be beaten with a hammer.

Wtf? :k_confused:

[Torvald Von Mansee]

Pelusi hubby can't say i feel sorry for him wasn't too long ago he was driving all lit up couldn't pass sobriety field test and cause an accident with injuries honest he got what he deserves

Where in the law code of California is a hammer to the head a punishment for anything?

[August]

I truly hope he's a loner. I can foresee what main talks would be in US and the world.

Trump supporters are dangerous and should be put away.

Media a.s.o. will generalize

Markus


I think he's an example of the mental health challenge that we face in this country.

[Buddahaid]

Don't blame pot for that that kind of violence dude. If anything it acted as a deterrent. Might as well try to blame it on the hammer.

Exactly. While I agree the suspect is a broken person, I can't help thinking the endless MAGA rhetoric has played it's part. I know we don't agree on politics much of the time but I appreciate how you have commented about this news.

[August]

Exactly. While I agree the suspect is a broken person, I can't help thinking the endless MAGA rhetoric has played it's part. I know we don't agree on politics much of the time but I appreciate how you have commented about this news.


Well thanks. In a similar vein I can't help but think that the endless Democrat rhetoric played a part in getting that Congressional softball game shot up.

Maybe the truth is just that crazy people just naturally gravitate to strong opinions whatever they are and in their insanity decide that they require radical actions that were never wanted or intended by the opinions originator. It doesn't invalidate the opinion itself though.

[Rockstar]

endless rhetoric from who though?

Since its popularization in the 2010s, the slogan has been considered a loaded phrase. Multiple journalists, scholars, and commentators have called the slogan racist, regarding it as dog-whistle politics and coded language. Barry Goldwater, Ronald Reagan, Bill Clinton used it.

Some have rejected the racist characterization, saying that the slogan is instead patriotic or American nationalist.

The slogan was also at the center of two events, the Jussie Smollett hate crime hoax and the January 2019 Lincoln Memorial confrontation.

The rhetoric of MAGA has been determined by a lot of groups, politicians, political rivals, a sitting president, hate groups, other countries, basically it boils down to who you listen too and what paper you read.

Rally organizers told the National Park Service they anticipated 30,000 people would attend. Law enforcement said the crowd size ahead of the protest was possibly as much as 80,000, according to then-Army Secretary Ryan McCarthy.

So let’s say just 30,000 people attended. The events as I understand them Trump spoke the protest ended. People were either going home or already went home. It was only after the event ended at current count 880 people (2.9 percent) went batsheet crazy eventually we’re found and charged various crimes related to Jan 6th. Unlike the headlines that might rally people to believe, still no insurrection.

https://www.justice.gov/usao-dc/21-months-jan-6-attack-capitol

Yet a whopping 29,000 to 79,000 law abiding citizens have been labeled as extremists and some beaten because they wore a red hat. That IMO is the problem, the majority of people in this country have absolutely nothing to with the headlines.

[les green01]

Where in the law code of California is a hammer to the head a punishment for anything?

and what would have happened he would have killed a person while lit up bet the same thing that happen with ted kennedy in 69 when he let that girl drown nothing there two laws in this country the one for the rich one for the poor now the guy with the hammer got a whole mess of screws missing or didn't take his meds for awhile like one member ask where was security i can't see pelusi having her house unprotected that guy shouldn't even got that close something seems kinda of fishy but now i bet her hubby sure wish they had a firearm in the house or one he could have reach

[Rockstar]

and what would have happened he would have killed a person while lit up bet the same thing that happen with ted kennedy in 69 when he let that girl drown nothing there two laws in this country the one for the rich one for the poor now the guy with the hammer got a whole mess of screws missing or didn't take his meds for awhile like one member ask where was security i can't see pelusi having her house unprotected that guy shouldn't even got that close something seems kinda of fishy but now i bet her hubby sure wish they had a firearm in the house or one he could have reach

Dude, you’re not helping yourself.

https://thumbs.gfycat.com/VigilantRashAss-size_restricted.gif
https://media1.tenor.com/images/2a48185b97665aa28323bf29a8e0745f/tenor.gif

[Buddahaid]

and what would have happened he would have killed a person while lit up bet the same thing that happen with ted kennedy in 69 when he let that girl drown nothing there two laws in this country the one for the rich one for the poor now the guy with the hammer got a whole mess of screws missing or didn't take his meds for awhile like one member ask where was security i can't see pelusi having her house unprotected that guy shouldn't even got that close something seems kinda of fishy but now i bet her hubby sure wish they had a firearm in the house or one he could have reach

At 81 that firearm could just as well ended up in the hands of the nut job so I doubt it. The gun makes the man attitude is a pipe dream.

[Buddahaid]

endless rhetoric from who though?



The rhetoric of MAGA has been determined by a lot of groups, politicians, political rivals, a sitting president, hate groups, other countries, basically it boils down to who you listen too and what paper you read.

Rally organizers told the National Park Service they anticipated 30,000 people would attend. Law enforcement said the crowd size ahead of the protest was possibly as much as 80,000, according to then-Army Secretary Ryan McCarthy.

So let’s say just 30,000 people attended. The events as I understand them Trump spoke the protest ended. People were either going home or already went home. It was only after the event ended at current count 880 people (2.9 percent) went batsheet crazy eventually we’re found and charged various crimes related to Jan 6th. Unlike the headlines that might rally people to believe, still no insurrection.

https://www.justice.gov/usao-dc/21-months-jan-6-attack-capitol

Yet a whopping 29,000 to 79,000 law abiding citizens have been labeled as extremists and some beaten because they wore a red hat. That IMO is the problem, the majority of people in this country have absolutely nothing to with the headlines.

I'm not about to say otherwise but that shoe also fits the other foot. I'm pretty tired of being labelled a communist just because I don't agree with the MAGA party, at least the MAGA party I see at Trump rallies who think he's another messiah.

[MaDef]

Don't blame pot for that that kind of violence dude. If anything it acted as a deterrent. Might as well try to blame it on the hammer. Not to derail the thread, but studies are starting to show a correlation between chronic pot use and mental health issues. (don't take my word for it, look it up.)

At 81 that firearm could just as well ended up in the hands of the nut job so I doubt it. The gun makes the man attitude is a pipe dream. Really, I have an 82 yr old Uncle that would have killed the guy as soon as he entered the house. some of those "older" guys are Vets of Korea or Vietnam and are a little more resilient then most people realize.

[Buddahaid]

Not to derail the thread, but studies are starting to show a correlation between chronic pot use and mental health issues. (don't take my word for it, look it up.)

Really, I have an 82 yr old Uncle that would have killed the guy as soon as he entered the house. some of those "older" guys are Vets of Korea or Vietnam and are a little more resilient then most people realize.

Having been around pot most of my life with most all of my friends being regular users I have to believe there is a bit more involved than simply using pot.

And sure, there are 81 year olds that are tough and competent, most likely aren't.

[les green01]

At 81 that firearm could just as well ended up in the hands of the nut job so I doubt it. The gun makes the man attitude is a pipe dream. consider my dad 80 and vietnam vet he has no problems handling a firearm matter fact he still hunts and cc the fellows i grew up that was in ww2 that was in their 70's and 80's matter fact one did the bandnet drill didn't have np with them and was just has fast has a teen if not faster course all these guys i knew was hunters but then has i posted earlier we know how i feel no skin off my nose if her hubby has a firearm or gets one

[Skybird]

Attacks and events like these are the result of the public zeitgeist that favors polarization, division and hatred over unity, cooperation and respect, and works with lies and deceit instead of truth and facts. This hostile atmosphere, which is opening deep rifts even within families, has been deliberately incited by a certain person who wants to benefit from it for his own selfish interests, and it is clear that this person has no desire to stop the destruction.

Things will get worse, not better. Get used to it - and a nation with so much experience and routine in grieving after school shootings should find it easy.

:stare:

Well...

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-63434960

The violent attack on Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi's husband comes with just over a week to go before the US midterm elections - a moment when political tensions are coming to the boil.

As if to emphasise this point, just a few hours after news of the assault on Paul Pelosi on Friday, the US government distributed a bulletin to law enforcement across the nation. It warned of a "heightened threat" of domestic violent extremism against candidates and election workers driven by individuals with "ideological grievances".

Also on Friday, the US Department of Justice announced that a man from Pennsylvania had pleaded guilty to making multiple phoned death threats against an unnamed congressman - reported to be Democrat Eric Swalwell of California. The threats included telling a staff member in the congressman's Washington office that he was going to come to the US Capitol with a firearm.Add to this this hyperaggressive viper from i think Georgia repeatdly implying that she would nto acceopt a defeat at the votes.

Many orange politicians simply are aiming at destroyinbg any democratric order and want to estalbiosh their own tyranny, plain and simple. One only wonder about one thing: has Trump learned from Putin or Putin from Trump?

One thing I am sure of. In the over twenty years I am in this foirum now, the polticla mood in the USA for this outside observer has grown constantly more aggressive and violent and hatefilled. After 20 years I would say that historical trend marks a clear direction where this society is shifting at.

And its increasingly a problem for the whole West. If America falls to the likes of religious fanatics, the woke crowd, or Trump, then we all can pack our things and leave the stage of this world and history. And the world will suffer dearly from this.


Sometimes I just feel like an observer on an alien planet, or a chronicler of fall and doom.

[Rockstar]

Well...

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-63434960
Add to this this hyperaggressive viper from i think Georgia repeatdly implying that she would nto acceopt a defeat at the votes.

Many orange politicians simply are aiming at destroyinbg any democratric order and want to estalbiosh their own tyranny, plain and simple. One only wonder about one thing: has Trump learned from Putin or Putin from Trump?

One thing I am sure of. In the over twenty years I am in this foirum now, the polticla mood in the USA for this outside observer has grown constantly more aggressive and violent and hatefilled. After 20 years I would say that historical trend marks a clear direction where this society is shifting at.

And its increasingly a problem for the whole West. If America falls to the likes of religious fanatics, the woke crowd, or Trump, then we all can pack our things and leave the stage of this world and history. And the world will suffer dearly from this.


Sometimes I just feel like an observer on an alien planet, or a chronicler of fall and doom.


Look carefully and you can easily see the beginning of all the nonsense seems to start and is perpetuated by those at the top and it’s from both parties in one form or another. And all they seem to accomplish is too attract all of the mentally ill and psychopaths unto themselves. And that’s what is making the headlines. “The chickens have come home to roost” certainly applies.

While those clowns were pointing fingers, ducking for cover, and stirring up more sheet. I was surf fishing today, caught a couple of good sized Ladyfish and I’m gonna make fish fritters. Have fun ;)

[Rockstar]

‘It’s like everyone smelling their own farts.” :har:

https://youtu.be/gXtT0WlvHjg

[Gorpet]

Well...

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-63434960
Add to this this hyperaggressive viper from i think Georgia repeatdly implying that she would nto acceopt a defeat at the votes.

Many orange politicians simply are aiming at destroyinbg any democratric order and want to estalbiosh their own tyranny, plain and simple. One only wonder about one thing: has Trump learned from Putin or Putin from Trump?

One thing I am sure of. In the over twenty years I am in this foirum now, the polticla mood in the USA for this outside observer has grown constantly more aggressive and violent and hatefilled. After 20 years I would say that historical trend marks a clear direction where this society is shifting at.

And its increasingly a problem for the whole West. If America falls to the likes of religious fanatics, the woke crowd, or Trump, then we all can pack our things and leave the stage of this world and history. And the world will suffer dearly from this.


Sometimes I just feel like an observer on an alien planet, or a chronicler of fall and doom.

Well ya know, The world is suffering because of the American Democrat Party. And the rest of the worlds elite who want to be the Lords of this planet.So we have to face a collapse of political parties and our entire economies.The only people who can save us are the ones who are creating the chaos. And they will save us right Skybird ? Will you have a place in this new world order? There must be a place for a Psychologist right.Even though they're a dime a dozen in Washington DC .Get your plane ticket and get to America, I would not want you to miss out. The sooner you get here the closer you get to the conclusion of every thing in life you have wanted to experience.

[em2nought]

Many orange politicians simply are aiming at destroyinbg any democratric order and want to estalbiosh their own tyranny, plain and simple. One only wonder about one thing: has Trump learned from Putin or Putin from Trump?


And its increasingly a problem for the whole West. If America falls to the likes of religious fanatics, the woke crowd, or Trump, then we all can pack our things and leave the stage of this world and history. And the world will suffer dearly from this.


So the people who would right now have the USA producing all the fuel it needs and then some are the bad guys? The people who'd have close to zero inflation right now are the bad guys? The people who want voter ID so we only count "real" votes, unlike last time, are the real danger? The people who would have a secure border, and actually check out who they're letting into the country are the bad guys? The people who would make sure illegal aliens don't bring diseases that we've almost eradicated back into our country are the bad guys? The people who want freedom of speech are the bad guys? The people who don't want a man dressed in girls underwear reading stories to their children are the bad guys?

...and the good guys are those Martha's Vineyard folks who preach inclusion, but ship illegal aliens arriving on their shore off to anywhere else in a matter of minutes? I think all your sources of information are corrupt. :hmmm:

[Buddahaid]

https://thumbs.dreamstime.com/z/old-silo-southern-wisconsin-metal-top-ladder-fill-tube-111890374.jpg

[les green01]

if memory serves me 2016 clinton and dems was saying the election was stolen and telling people to protest and keep protesting and didn't say anything at that for several days which including blocking major interstates and roads and all the rioting let go to Jan 6 i heard trump speech he didn't tell the Crowd to go attack the capital he did tell them to go down and let their voices be heard so everyone here can put in anything they want in that so a few hot heads fire up the crowd i seen videos of the cops moving barricades aside letting people though and opening doors for them most of the crowd that enter the capital wasn't saying nothing walking around looking around in awe not damaging nothing so let go to where the lady gets the cap busted on her in the video i say less than 10 people and there is one cop there,there is some loud talking and damage so they fire up a little bit seconds after the cap is busted on her there cops all around her working on her.i don't buy the woke bs or have two national anthems tear down statues or change a image on a bottle of syrup,biggest problems of the new generation kids not getting their backside paddle when they do wrong,being baby

[Dowly]

I think all your sources of information are corrupt. :hmmm:
He says, with a straight face.

[Rockstar]

Hate to say it but something is starting to stink.

Can anyone explain how Paul Pelosi was able to go to the bathroom during this home invasion, call the police, and tell them that he doesn’t know the intruder but the dispatcher said Paul told them:

“His name is David and he is a friend”

Or can anyone explain who this “unknown” third person was who was there and who was apparently able to let the police in during an active home invasion?

[les green01]

Hate to say it but something is starting to stink.

Can anyone explain how Paul Pelosi was able to go to the bathroom during this home invasion, call the police, and tell them that he doesn’t know the intruder but the dispatcher said Paul told them:

“His name is David and he is a friend”

Or can anyone explain who this “unknown” third person was who was there and who was apparently able to let the police in during an active home invasion?

what i have read Paul was on the phone though the attack i wouldn't have let him stay on the phone i would speed up and finish and get out almost makes you think of an actor in Chicago

[em2nought]

He says, with a straight face.

My source of information is my own two eyes, unless you think I forget what prices were two years ago on almost everything? :03: ...or what dinero was in my annuity then as compared to now. :wah: I don't remember seeing Russian tanks in Ukraine two years ago either.

Brandon can say the price of gas was $5.00 when he took office all day long, but it doesn't make it true.

Even the democrat controlled press couldn't put a positive spin on Brandon's boondoggle in Afghanistan.

Unfortunately democrats will do almost anything to retain/get power so if the mules don't pull it off for them this November I'm afraid what they might unleash on the world this time.

[les green01]

last i heard we have 50 states not 54 like brandon said but how many times has he said harris was president

[Rockstar]

https://youtu.be/ZAAKPJEq1Ew

[em2nought]

Just dropped off my ballot. Go Ron! :up:

[Buddahaid]

Ron the human trafficker?

[u crank]

Ron the human trafficker?

I think you are reaching. If Ron is a human trafficker what do you call Joe? A few bus loads vs millions entering illegally.

[August]

I think you are reaching. If Ron is a human trafficker what do you call Joe? A few bus loads vs millions entering illegally.


Let's not forget Biden's Ghost flights too.