Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Turkey fans BOO during pre-match minute's silence for the victims of Paris attacks an

Collapse
X
  •  
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Attorney General Jeff Sessions had worked on the Trump campaign, he recused himself from the matter, and so the deputy — Rod Rosenstein — took the decision to appoint a special counsel. The regulations require that such an appointment recite the facts justifying the conclusion that a federal crime was committed, and specify the crime. However, the initial appointment of Robert Mueller did neither, referring instead to a national security investigation that a special counsel has no authority to pursue.

    Although Rosenstein apparently tried to correct his mistake in a new appointment memo, he has thus far refused to disclose, even to a federal judge, a complete copy of it. In other investigations supposedly implicating a president — Watergate and Whitewater come to mind — we were told what the crime was and what facts justified the investigation. Not here.

    Nor have any of the charges filed in the Mueller investigation disclosed the Trump campaign’s criminal acceptance or solicitation of help from the Russians. The one indictment that relates to Russian criminality charges that the Russians hacked Democratic Party computers and committed other social media abuse, but says specifically that if the Trump campaign got the benefit of it, that was “unwitting” — i.e., without criminal intent.

    Since then, although the White House has produced documents in the tens of thousands, the investigation has gotten further from anything suggesting Trump campaign criminality involving Russian influence, not closer. Michael Cohen and Stormy Daniels, however fascinating, have nothing to do with Russian campaign influence.


    - Michael B. Mukasey, a former federal judge, was attorney general in the George W. Bush administration.

    https://www.usatoday.com/story/opini...ates/35157745/

    Comment


      Will the Fervor to Impeach Donald Trump Start a Democratic Civil War?

      A push to remove the President from office may lead to disaster in the midterms.

      By Jeffrey Toobin

      https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2...atic-civil-war

      Comment


        Rod Rosenstein asks DOJ inspector general to review possible Trump campaign infiltration

        https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/n...n-infiltration

        Comment


          How come TMan is no longer posting #WINNING?

          Comment


            Originally posted by Unregistered View Post
            And the last 12 posts by the Nutter were within 3 hours. Does this guy have a job? Is being a Russian troll a job?
            ^^ Word salad.

            "Dang it, stumped again. I guess I'll go with the Russian slander and go back under the covers. When they call me out on how accurate it is, again, I'll just say they obsess over me. #Winning"

            Comment


              Originally posted by Unregistered View Post
              How come TMan is no longer posting #WINNING?
              Because....

              Approval of Russia investigation slips

              http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-n...s=mcnewsletter

              According to a CBS News poll conducted this month 53% said the case is politically motivated, up from 48% in December.

              The poll was conducted a week ago before the FBI informant/spy was exposed.

              Who's winning, TMan?

              Comment


                “The regulations require that such an appointment recite the facts justifying the conclusion that a federal crime was committed, and specify the crime.”


                Here is the Code of Regulations that governs the appointment/powers of a Special Counsel. Please copy and paste the portion of the regulations that you referred to above.


                https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/retriev...T&n=pt28.2.600

                Comment


                  Originally posted by Unregistered View Post
                  And while we're on the subject......

                  It has now been confirmed that the Trump campaign was subjected to spying tactics under counterintelligence law — FISA surveillance, national-security letters, and covert intelligence operatives who work with the CIA and allied intelligence services. It made no difference, apparently, that there was an ongoing election campaign, which the FBI is supposed to avoid affecting; nor did it matter that the spy targets were American citizens, as to whom there is supposed to be evidence of purposeful, clandestine, criminal activity on behalf of a foreign power before counterintelligence powers are invoked.

                  But what was the rationale for using these spying authorities?

                  The fons et origo of the counterintelligence investigation was the suspicion — which our intelligence agencies assure us is a fact — that the Democratic National Committee’s server was hacked by covert Russian operatives. Without this cyber-espionage attack, there would be no investigation. But how do we know it really happened? The Obama Justice Department never took custody of the server — no subpoena, no search warrant. The server was thus never subjected to analysis by the FBI’s renowned forensics lab, and its evidentiary integrity was never preserved for courtroom presentation to a jury.

                  How come? Well, you see, there was an ongoing election campaign, so the Obama Justice Department figured it would be a terrible imposition to pry into the Democrats’ communications. So, yes, the entire “Russia hacked the election” narrative the nation has endured for nearly two years hinges on the say-so of CrowdStrike, a private DNC contractor with significant financial ties to the Clinton campaign.

                  In Investigations 101, using foreign-intelligence authorities to spy on Americans is extraordinary, while taking custody of essential physical evidence is basic. By the way, the government’s failure to ensure the evidentiary integrity of the DNC server by taking possession of it and performing its own rigorous testing on it makes it practically impossible to prosecute anyone for “colluding” in Russia’s cyber-espionage. It’s tough to prove that anyone conspired in something unless you can prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the something actually happened the way you say it happened. To do that in a courtroom, you need evidence — a confident probability analysis by your intelligence agencies won’t do.
                  The DNC server was hacked by Wasserman Shultz's Pakistani friends. You'll be hearing that news soon.

                  Comment


                    Originally posted by Unregistered View Post
                    “The regulations require that such an appointment recite the facts justifying the conclusion that a federal crime was committed, and specify the crime.”


                    Here is the Code of Regulations that governs the appointment/powers of a Special Counsel. Please copy and paste the portion of the regulations that you referred to above.


                    https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/retriev...T&n=pt28.2.600
                    You'll have to ask the Judge Mukasey or former prosecutor Andrew McCarthy to point you in that direction.


                    Or you can simply read his opinion

                    Comment


                      https://i2.wp.com/www.nationalreview...87%2C576&ssl=1

                      Comment


                        Originally posted by Unregistered View Post
                        You'll have to ask the Judge Mukasey or former prosecutor Andrew McCarthy to point you in that direction.


                        Or you can simply read his opinion
                        The regulations are right there. How come you can’t point it out?

                        Comment


                          https://www.boston.com/culture/enter...michelle-obama

                          Have to give them credit, both the Clintons and now the Obamas certainly seem to know how to sell themselves. Liberals will eat up anything they say.

                          Comment


                            Originally posted by Unregistered View Post
                            Rod Rosenstein asks DOJ inspector general to review possible Trump campaign infiltration

                            https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/n...n-infiltration
                            Smart move by Rosenstein to shut the whiny baby up. Trump was hoping he wouldn’t do it so that he would have a flimsy pretext for firing him.

                            Comment


                              Hey Cons, where did all your excitement about the upcoming IG report go? Lol

                              Comment


                                People are saying that the indictment and arrest of Trump’s long time friend and advisor, Roger Stone, is imminent. What do you think? This week? Next week?

                                I’ll guess Thursday of this week.

                                Comment

                                Previously entered content was automatically saved. Restore or Discard.
                                Auto-Saved
                                x
                                Insert: Thumbnail Small Medium Large Fullsize Remove  
                                x
                                Working...
                                X