US Politics Thread 2016-2020

[Mr Quatro]

Originally Posted by em2nought

Bernie Sanders makes noises about running in 2020 and look what happens to the markets. LMAO

Bernie would've done better than Hillary for sure in 2016, but that's in hindsight, uh?

As for the stock market going up and up during the Trump administration since he was elected has baffled many and now headed down appears to be to the undermining of the intelligence community with the GOP memo.

However i'm sure someone else will put a different spin on why the stock market has dropped so far (right now it was headed back up this morning).

[August]

Interesting comment in this article:

Democrats allege that, given Carter Page’s familiarity with Russians, it was logical for the Obama administration to use the dossier’s references to him to substantiate FISA warrants.

But is not the opposite more likely true? He was apparently known to intelligence agencies for years (supposedly under investigation variously by the FBI, the CIA, the NSA, the Director of National Intelligence, and the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network), and he may have been the object of a 2014 FISA warrant. But such intelligence agents were never able to bring charges against him, and it appears he even cooperated with American intelligence in gathering info against the Russians.

So why would the FBI and DOJ, suddenly in 2016, believe that mention of Page’s name in an unverified opposition-research dossier warranted four FISA warrants to find wrongdoing? After all, if he was so well known to the FBI for so many years, during which they never charged him with being a Russian agent, and if the FBI nonetheless still regarded him as suspicious in 2016, why not simply go to a regular court to obtain a warrant to wiretap him?

Such a court, of course, would be less secretive, not known for a 99 percent approval rate, subject to far more deliberation, and less useful for surveilling Trump associates. A more likely supposition is that it was not Page’s past flirtations with the Russians (who supposedly dubbed him an “idiot”) that abruptly brought him back into the sights of the DOJ and FBI in 2016. Instead, it was his brief and minor relationship with Trump, and his appearance in a bogus dossier, that offered useful pretexts for court-ordered surveillance sweeps and indirect targeting of possible Trump associates.

Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/articl...-hillary-obama

[Platapus]

Looks like Trump is envious of KJU and Putin as it seems he wants his very own military parade
http://thehill.com/homenews/administ...r-trump-report

The Pentagon has reportedly begun planning a military parade at the request of President Trump.
Trump repeatedly has expressed an interest in holding a display of America’s military might, and upped his calls for a parade after witnessing the Bastille Day celebrations on a trip to France last summer.
The Washington Post reported Monday that at recent meeting between Trump and top military officials, Trump’s wishes were “suddenly heard as a presidential directive.”
“The marching orders were: I want a parade like the one in France,” one military official told the Washington Post on the condition of anonymity. “This is being worked at the highest levels of the military.”
A White House official told the Post that the planning was still in the “brainstorming” stages, and that there is “no meat on the bones” as of yet.
White House chief of staff John Kelly is reportedly involved in the planning of the parade. Pentagon officials are pushing for the parade to be tied to Veteran’s Day, rather than Independence Day or Memorial Day, because it would appear to be less tied to Trump.
Officials told the Post that they do not yet know how they will cover the cost of the parade, which could reach millions of dollars.

I suppose he really doesn't care about the cost and the logistics involved.

[vienna]

So why would the FBI and DOJ, suddenly in 2016, believe that mention of Page’s name in an unverified opposition-research dossier warranted four FISA warrants to find wrongdoing? After all, if he was so well known to the FBI for so many years, during which they never charged him with being a Russian agent, and if the FBI nonetheless still regarded him as suspicious in 2016, why not simply go to a regular court to obtain a warrant to wiretap him?

The above from the National Review article cited by August is an interesting question; perhaps there is a really simple answer: context. What has happened, over the last couple of years, is a confluence of several individual factors making up a whole with ominous consequences. Individually, Flynn, Manafort, Page, Kushner, and others are simply unprincipled opportunists who were making shady backroom deals to line their own pockets. However, they have became part of the whole that was the Trump campaign, and, later, the Trump Administration and that is where the problem, and the larger criminality, sits. Page was on the FBI, and others, radar, but before his connection to the Trump campaign, he was just another suspected white collar criminal. Page became of interest to the extent it elevated to a FISA-level when it was noted by the FBI, CIA, and others, that he was now in the company of Flynn, Manafort, Kushner, et al, who also were individually suspect by investigators, some more than others, but all, nonetheless, suspect. There may not have been a formal 'conspiracy' by those individuals to commit illegalities collectively, but the effect has been for them to benefit from and also, in effect, assist each other in their criminal goals, sort of one hand washing the other. In addition to the known suspected criminal activities, these individuals, now grouped, were a perfect target for the exercise, by the Putin government, of an attempt to subvert and/or influence the US electoral process. It was a 'perfect storm' of suspect behavior and suspect intent, all wrapped up in the package known as the Trump Campaign and Administration. The Page FISA wiretaps warrants weren't sought until Page had been seen in the company of other persons of interest to the investigative agencies. It goes like this: if you're a cop and you see one guy you suspect of possible criminality within your purview, it is something you watch; if you see that guy and several other guys you suspect of criminality suddenly congregating in the the same place, then it is something to be seriously investigated, if only to make sure they are not actually conspiring to commit a more serious crime together than they could commit as individuals. You might also want to call in other agencies to assist in the investigation(s)...

BTW, I get the sense some persons may not really know about the actual composition and/or scope of the FISA Court; some seem to think it is some sort of "Star Chamber", dark and mysterious, a coven of sorts, working in the darkness; actually, it is, with the exception of the actual substance of the cases it hears, pretty much an open book; they even have their own website, with Annual Reports, Public Fillings, and other interesting information:

http://www.fisc.uscourts.gov/

Did you know the FISA Judges are appointed by the Chief Justice of The Supreme Court? Or that the Judges have fixed terms of seven (7) years? And that they only sit in session for one (1) week at a time (this last fact goes a long way towards explaining why there were several different Judges involved in the Page warrants: it was just the Judge who happened to be sitting for that particular week). Sometimes, what is 'sold' to the public by the tin hat crowd or the Trump apologists as dark and mysterious is simply mundane...

Here is a link to the FISA Court Rules of Procedure, as publicly posted on their website:

http://www.fisc.uscourts.gov/sites/d...0Procedure.pdf










<O>

[Rockstar]

Then again it could be as Senator Nunes alleges an abuse of power and police corruption.

[vienna]

My, my, what a sad, weak counter-argument...












<O>

[Rockstar]

Not really since it is what the Congressman (fixed) alleged in the memo.

[vienna]

Not really sure if you are aware, but Nunes is not a Senator: Nunes is a Congressman; it helps to keep facts straight when trying to make an argument. Also, it is as you said: Nunes alleges; as with many of the other matters he brings up, he is long on rhetoric and very, very short on giving any actual facts or proof of what he alleges. He kind of reminds me of Senator Joe McCarthy, who alleged all over the place in the press, ruined lives and reputations, created distrust, confusion, and obfuscation, and, in the end: bupkis. Just sound and fury signifying nothing, much like his idol, Trump...











<O>

[Rockstar]

Originally Posted by vienna

Not really sure if you are aware, but Nunes is not a Senator: Nunes is a Congressman; it helps to keep facts straight when trying to make an argument. Also, it is as you said: Nunes alleges; as with many of the other matters he brings up, he is long on rhetoric and very, very short on gibing any actual facts or proof of what he alleges. He kind of reminds me of Senator Joe McCarthy, who alleged all over the place in the press, ruined lives and reputations, created distrust, confusion, and obfuscation, and, in the end: bupkis. Just sound and fury signifying nothing, much like his idol, Trump...







<O>

Hmmm that sounds awfully familiar. Now where have I seen these walls of text containing baseless allegations spreading distrust, confusion, obfuscation.

By the way who is your idol?

[vienna]

Certainly not from me because I actually make an effort to provide actual cites and factual bases for what I present, you know, rather than make a weak attempt at wit or a snide remark that adds nothing to the conversation, like some others...

Just as I don't have any political party alliance, I also do not believe in idols, given so many of them very often are shown to have 'feet of clay'; but I do have a great respect for facts and truth...











<O>

[razark]

Originally Posted by Rockstar

Now where have I seen these walls of text containing baseless allegations spreading distrust, confusion, obfuscation.

Trump?

Edit:
Oops, sorry.
I saw the words "wall", "baseless allegations", "spreading distrust", and "confusion". My mind just automatically made the leap.

[Mr Quatro]

Originally Posted by vienna

Also, it is as you said: Nunes alleges; as with many of the other matters he brings up, he is long on rhetoric and very, very short on giving any actual facts or proof of what he alleges. He kind of reminds me of Senator Joe McCarthy, who alleged all over the place in the press, ruined lives and reputations, created distrust, confusion, and obfuscation, and, in the end: bupkis. Just sound and fury signifying nothing, much like his idol, Trump...

<O>

True

Originally Posted by Rockstar

Hmmm that sounds awfully familiar. Now where have I seen these walls of text containing baseless allegations spreading distrust, confusion, obfuscation.

By the way who is your idol?

True

Originally Posted by vienna

Certainly not from me because I actually make an effort to provide actual cites and factual bases for what I present, you know, rather than make a weak attempt at wit or a snide remark that adds nothing to the conversation, like some others...

Just as I don't have any political party alliance, I also do not believe in idols, given so many of them very often are shown to have 'feet of clay'; but I do have a great respect for facts and truth...

<O>

True

Originally Posted by razark

Trump?

Edit:
Oops, sorry.
I saw the words "wall", "baseless allegations", "spreading distrust", and "confusion". My mind just automatically made the leap.

Very true

[MaDef]

Originally Posted by Rockstar

By the way who is your idol?

I thought idols were forbidden by the 2nd commandment .

[u crank]

Although much has been made of the Nunes/GOP memo and the Democrats' rebuttal memo the real interest should be in the Department of Justice's inspector generals investigation that is ongoing. Without much attention, Michael Horowitz has been working away for a year on a sprawling probe of the FBI’s handling of the 2016 investigation into Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email server.

A political appointee in both the Bush and Obama administrations, Horowitz’s yearlong investigation already reportedly contributed to the early resignation of Deputy FBI Director Andrew McCabe. And his work has been felt in other ways.

Horowitz also uncovered a series of text messages between FBI officials Peter Strzok and Lisa Page that led special counsel Robert Mueller to remove Strzok from his team. Those texts have fueled accusations among GOP lawmakers that Mueller’s probe is tainted by partisanship.

http://thehill.com/policy/national-s...s-clinton-case

But there is greater significance—and uncertainty—attached to Horowitz’s examination of the F.B.I.’s pivotal role during the 2016 presidential campaign. “His report will be more credible than the Nunes memo,” says Benjamin Wittes, the co-founder of the blog Lawfare. “Let’s just say Michael Horowitz is not a clown. And you’re talking about a situation inherently less susceptible to the foolishness that gave rise to the Nunes memo.”

https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2018...pector-general

The real outcome of this is unsure but if Horowitz comes up with any severe criticisms of former F.B.I. director Comey and his handling of the Clinton probe it may effect any obstruction of justice charge that Robert Mueller may try to make on Trump. Things are getting interesting.

Jack Goldsmith, an assistant attorney general during the Bush administration and now Wittes’s Lawfare compatriot, says he believes the Horowitz report will be “a political boon to the president.” It’s easy to see how that would work: Trump’s allies will seize on any Horowitz criticism of Comey to justify the president’s firing of the F.B.I. director, just like deputy attorney general Rod Rosenstein wrote at the time. If Horowitz identifies any internal Justice Department dysfunction, the Trump team will use it to sow more distrust of the bureau’s leadership, then and now.

[Mr Quatro]

This qualifies as politics, right?


http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018...e-clinton.html

An FBI informant involved in the controversial Uranium One deal has told congressional committees that Moscow paid millions to a U.S. lobbying firm in a bid to influence then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton by helping former President Bill Clinton’s charities during the Obama administration.