Since The National Enquirer is now cooperating with prosecutors, will it be able to lend its usual support to Trump’s war against his own Attorney General?
“Department of Justice will not be improperly influenced by political considerations.” Jeff, this is GREAT, what everyone wants, so look into all of the corruption on the “other side” including deleted Emails, Comey lies & leaks, Mueller conflicts, McCabe, Strzok, Page, Ohr……
Or with The National Enquirer sidelined, will The Cult have to rely solely on Hannity and Dear Leader himself for direction?
….FISA abuse, Christopher Steele & his phony and corrupt Dossier, the Clinton Foundation, illegal surveillance of Trump Campaign, Russian collusion by Dems – and so much more. Open up the papers & documents without redaction? Come on Jeff, you can do it, the country is waiting!
All the “but so and so….” in the world doesn’t change the fact that you still get a speeding ticket or a detention. And Trump runs a corrupt admin which needs to be cleaned meanwhile Hilary is no longer driving.
In reference to my previous links, Trump could shoot someone on Fifth Ave and some right wing blog would say but Hilary and emails.
As you can see above, Ricky’s just throwing crap against the wall and hoping something sticks.
But for people that actually require evidence, there’s tons in the RealClear link above. Not crimes that might be, could be, or may be, like alleged by the totally unbiased NYT. And the National Inquirer Editor isn’t the source.
This stuff actually happened.
——————————-
This is what perjury looks like.
“Comey later told Congress that “thanks to the wizardry of our technology,” the FBI was able to eliminate the vast majority of messages as “duplicates” of emails they’d previously seen. Tireless agents, he claimed, then worked “night after night after night” to scrutinize the remaining material.
But virtually none of his account was true, a growing body of evidence reveals.
In fact, a technical glitch prevented FBI technicians from accurately comparing the new emails with the old emails. Only 3,077 of the 694,000 emails were directly reviewed for classified or incriminating information. Three FBI officials completed that work in a single 12-hour spurt the day before Comey again cleared Clinton of criminal charges.
“Most of the emails were never examined, even though they made up potentially 10 times the evidence” of what was reviewed in the original year-long case that Comey closed in July 2016, said a law enforcement official with direct knowledge of the investigation.
Yet even the “extremely narrow” search that was finally conducted, after more than a month of delay, uncovered more classified material sent and/or received by Clinton through her unauthorized basement server, the official said. Contradicting Comey’s testimony, this included highly sensitive information dealing with Israel and the U.S.-designated terrorist group Hamas. The former secretary of state, however, was never confronted with the sensitive new information and it was never analyzed for damage to national security.”
————————-
This is what collusion to favor one candidate over another looks like…
“One career FBI special agent involved in the case complained to New York colleagues that officials in Washington tried to “bury” the new trove of evidence, which he believed contained the full archive of Clinton’s emails — including long-sought missing messages from her first months at the State Department.
RealClearInvestigations pieced together the FBI’s handling of the massive new email discovery from the “Weiner laptop.” This months-long investigation included a review of federal court records and affidavits, cellphone text messages, and emails sent by key FBI personnel, along with internal bureau memos, reviews and meeting notes documented in government reports. Information also was gleaned through interviews with FBI agents and supervisors, prosecutors and other law enforcement officials, as well as congressional investigators and public-interest lawyers.
If the FBI “soft-pedaled” the original investigation of Clinton’s emails, as some critics have said, it out-and-out suppressed the follow-up probe related to the laptop, sources for this article said.
“There was no real investigation and no real search,” said Michael Biasello, a 27-year veteran of the FBI. “It was all just show — eyewash — to make it look like there was an investigation before the election.”
————————
This is what dereliction of duty looks like….
“Although the FBI’s New York office first pointed headquarters to the large new volume of evidence on Sept. 28, 2016, supervising agent Peter Strzok, who was fired on Aug. 10 for sending anti-Trump texts and other misconduct, did not try to obtain a warrant to search the huge cache of emails until Oct. 30, 2016. Violating department policy, he edited the warrant affidavit on his home email account, bypassing the FBI system for recording such government business. He also began drafting a second exoneration statement before conducting the search.
The search warrant was so limited in scope that it excluded more than half the emails New York agents considered relevant to the case. The cache of Clinton-Abedin communications dated back to 2007. But the warrant to search the laptop excluded any messages exchanged before or after Clinton’s 2009-2013 tenure as secretary of state, key early periods when Clinton initially set up her unauthorized private server and later periods when she deleted thousands of emails sought by investigators.
Far from investigating and clearing Abedin and Weiner, the FBI did not interview them, according to other FBI sources who say Comey closed the case prematurely. The machine was not authorized for classified material, and Weiner did not have classified security clearance to receive such information, which he did on at least two occasions through his Yahoo! email account – which he also used to email snapshots of his penis.
Many Clinton supporters believe Comey’s 11th hour reopening of a case that had shadowed her campaign was a form of sabotage that cost her the election. But the evidence shows Comey and his inner circle acted only after worried agents and prosecutors in New York forced their hand. At the prodding of Attorney General Lynch, they then worked to reduce and rush through, rather than carefully examine, potentially damaging new evidence.
Comey later admitted in his memoir “A Higher Loyalty,” that political calculations shaped his decisions during this period. But, he wrote, they were calibrated to help Clinton: “Assuming, as nearly everyone did, that Hillary Clinton would be elected president of the United States in less than two weeks, what would happen to the FBI, the Justice Department or her own presidency if it later was revealed, after the fact, that she still was the subject of an FBI investigation?””
======================
And Ricky supports it all. He’s been their biggest cheerleader here. Because, well, Trump…..
These are serious matters. If you were at all interested in justice and truth, it would matter to you too. Honestly, I could care less what Clinton did. But I do care about our justice system and it’s integrity, which have been ruined by partisan criminals like Comey, Clapper, Strzok and the rest.
But like Ricky, you downplay it because you know it is true. You just don’t have the decency to admit it. Hillary is a proven criminal. Zero has been proven about the allegations against Trump. But you don’t really care about truth.
The Republican party and its supporters resemble the boy who cried wolf. They’ve been trying to convict Hilary for decades and nothing. Its hard to take them seriously anymore for example the first 5 or 6 paragraphs in your link is based on an anonymous source…..
In the meantime, the Republicans have also begun to resemble the man who with a stick in his eye is more concerned with the man with sawdust in his/her eyes.
HRW, Now we know that if we get our information from reputable sources, we “lack decency”. Let us endeavor to blindly follow and support the confessed sexual predator who cavorts with porn stars and Playboy bunnies so that we again may be regarded as “decent”.
“Recently, an interesting debate erupted on Twitter between Donald Trump (the 45th President of the United States) and his subordinate Attorney General Jeff Sessions. Trump, who is the head of the executive branch and the boss of Sessions, publicly criticized the Department of Justice, which is not only his right as president, but also his responsibility as the only thin connection tying the ballot box to the DOJ. We should fear a world in which the DOJ, which has the vast power of the FBI and a monopoly over federal prosecutorial authority, does not listen to the voice of its elected master.”
———————
“Sessions also borrowed a line so often articulated by his Deputy Attorney General, that he is proud of his DOJ for “advancing the rule of law,” which has become code for “resisting the president’s directions.”
Several have observed that the rule of law appears to mean the “rule of two laws,” one for those who oppose Trump and another for those who support him. Paul Manafort might be guilty as sin. But would he have been prosecuted but for his efforts to help Trump? No, according to a very thoughtful piece by K.S. Bruce in Real Clear Life. And the next Manafort trial appears to involve precisely the same thing that Tony Podesta did with no consequence.
As I pointed out in the Federalist, the prosecution against Cohen for “campaign finance violations” appears to be the exact mirror image of what was done on behalf of the Clinton Campaign when Lisa Bloom, the daughter of a Clinton campaign official, arranged or attempted to arrange payments from Clinton donors to women to incentivize them to accuse candidate Trump of sexual misdeeds.
It’s worth revisiting Bre Payton’s list of 16 examples of the left using criminal prosecutions to punish or harass critics and political opponents. While the left repeatedly warns that Trump will prosecute his political enemies, she astutely points out that nearly every prosecution of a political figure in America appears be of an enemy of the left, not Donald Trump.
The DOJ is simply too powerful to allow it to disregard its constitutional master, the president. We should all be concerned when we hear Sessions and others dismiss any need to feel influenced by “political considerations.” When Caesar stopped following the “political considerations” of the Senate, the Roman representative democracy died immediately. Those “political considerations” keep us free.”
Apparently the commentator in the federalist doesn’t approve of rule of law rather he would like to see rule by law ie the rule by Trump. I wonder if the commentator will be consistent in three years under a Democratic president….perhaps Sanders-Warren admin. Again think of the golden rule
The president is the boss, not subordinate, of the Attorney General and the Justice Department. Like the CEO of a company, he tells them what to do, not the other way around.
Rule of law, where the president is concerned, is enforced by Congress (through impeachment) or by the people through the courts and eventually the ballot, not by the Justice Department.
That said, I think it’s poor policy for the CEO and his staff to air their dirty laundry in public. It would be better if they keep their debates internal, until the CEO is ready to fire someone. Then he ought to explain it.
“The way for President Trump to handle the newly energized collusion investigation is by massive retaliation…
1. Trump should advocate in public, and then if necessary assert through his authority, that the investigation of the election by Mueller is to be expanded to include all participants and all activities in the campaign without limit.
Mueller’s new charge would be “to determine whether there were any irregularities of any nature whatsoever in the 2016 campaign from any source whatsoever,” with a special focus and separate report on the violence at Trump rallies. This separate report will include a description of the participants in the violence; their method of organization and transportation; their leadership – including the roles of Robert Creamer and Scott Foval, if any – and how, by how much, and from whom they were financed.
The point is that Trump doesn’t fire Mueller, but rather, in the interest of justice, expands his remit.
2. Then the second thing Trump does is to get a special counsel appointed to investigate whether the use by Hillary Clinton as secretary of state of unsecured communications did any damage to the national security and national interests of the United States in any way whatsoever and to prosecute any violations of the law found in the course of that investigation, including any irregularities in past investigations.
Also investigate how, if at all, the joint income of Hillary and Bill Clinton of $85 million during Hillary Clinton’s tenure as secretary of state was related to her official duties and to prosecute any illegalities therefrom.
3. Then the third thing Trump does is to get a special counsel appointed to investigate whether the payoffs by Congress to persons charging sexual misconduct by congresspeople were in-kind contributions to their campaigns at any point in time and whether they covered up any crimes by congresspeople and to prosecute those crimes. Also investigate any possible involvement by their associates and families, and prosecute them if involved.”
———————-
Wandering Views 
We have finally figured out THE CRIME that President Trump committed – he was ELECTED. He must face due punishment for that…
Author: Democrats (and certain NTs)
LikeLiked by 5 people
https://twitter.com/orangeblood2012/status/1032817302742487040?s=21
LikeLike
LikeLike
LikeLike
LikeLike
LikeLike
Since The National Enquirer is now cooperating with prosecutors, will it be able to lend its usual support to Trump’s war against his own Attorney General?
LikeLike
Or with The National Enquirer sidelined, will The Cult have to rely solely on Hannity and Dear Leader himself for direction?
LikeLike
I was amused
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/aug/23/trump-michael-cohen-broad-daylight
LikeLiked by 1 person
Ricky,
So you’re still spouting nonsense, but have nothing to say about the real crimes here?
Would you trust a supposed “Justice” Dept. that operated like these criminals?
You’d be a fool if you did.
https://www.realclearinvestigations.com/articles/2018/08/22/despite_comey_assurance_vast_bulk_of_weiner_laptop_emails_never_examined.html
LikeLike
“But but Hilary….but emails…..”
But officer I’m not the only one speeding…….
But teacher Johnny did it too……
All the “but so and so….” in the world doesn’t change the fact that you still get a speeding ticket or a detention. And Trump runs a corrupt admin which needs to be cleaned meanwhile Hilary is no longer driving.
In reference to my previous links, Trump could shoot someone on Fifth Ave and some right wing blog would say but Hilary and emails.
LikeLike
As you can see above, Ricky’s just throwing crap against the wall and hoping something sticks.
But for people that actually require evidence, there’s tons in the RealClear link above. Not crimes that might be, could be, or may be, like alleged by the totally unbiased NYT. And the National Inquirer Editor isn’t the source.
This stuff actually happened.
——————————-
This is what perjury looks like.
“Comey later told Congress that “thanks to the wizardry of our technology,” the FBI was able to eliminate the vast majority of messages as “duplicates” of emails they’d previously seen. Tireless agents, he claimed, then worked “night after night after night” to scrutinize the remaining material.
But virtually none of his account was true, a growing body of evidence reveals.
In fact, a technical glitch prevented FBI technicians from accurately comparing the new emails with the old emails. Only 3,077 of the 694,000 emails were directly reviewed for classified or incriminating information. Three FBI officials completed that work in a single 12-hour spurt the day before Comey again cleared Clinton of criminal charges.
“Most of the emails were never examined, even though they made up potentially 10 times the evidence” of what was reviewed in the original year-long case that Comey closed in July 2016, said a law enforcement official with direct knowledge of the investigation.
Yet even the “extremely narrow” search that was finally conducted, after more than a month of delay, uncovered more classified material sent and/or received by Clinton through her unauthorized basement server, the official said. Contradicting Comey’s testimony, this included highly sensitive information dealing with Israel and the U.S.-designated terrorist group Hamas. The former secretary of state, however, was never confronted with the sensitive new information and it was never analyzed for damage to national security.”
————————-
This is what collusion to favor one candidate over another looks like…
“One career FBI special agent involved in the case complained to New York colleagues that officials in Washington tried to “bury” the new trove of evidence, which he believed contained the full archive of Clinton’s emails — including long-sought missing messages from her first months at the State Department.
RealClearInvestigations pieced together the FBI’s handling of the massive new email discovery from the “Weiner laptop.” This months-long investigation included a review of federal court records and affidavits, cellphone text messages, and emails sent by key FBI personnel, along with internal bureau memos, reviews and meeting notes documented in government reports. Information also was gleaned through interviews with FBI agents and supervisors, prosecutors and other law enforcement officials, as well as congressional investigators and public-interest lawyers.
If the FBI “soft-pedaled” the original investigation of Clinton’s emails, as some critics have said, it out-and-out suppressed the follow-up probe related to the laptop, sources for this article said.
“There was no real investigation and no real search,” said Michael Biasello, a 27-year veteran of the FBI. “It was all just show — eyewash — to make it look like there was an investigation before the election.”
————————
This is what dereliction of duty looks like….
“Although the FBI’s New York office first pointed headquarters to the large new volume of evidence on Sept. 28, 2016, supervising agent Peter Strzok, who was fired on Aug. 10 for sending anti-Trump texts and other misconduct, did not try to obtain a warrant to search the huge cache of emails until Oct. 30, 2016. Violating department policy, he edited the warrant affidavit on his home email account, bypassing the FBI system for recording such government business. He also began drafting a second exoneration statement before conducting the search.
The search warrant was so limited in scope that it excluded more than half the emails New York agents considered relevant to the case. The cache of Clinton-Abedin communications dated back to 2007. But the warrant to search the laptop excluded any messages exchanged before or after Clinton’s 2009-2013 tenure as secretary of state, key early periods when Clinton initially set up her unauthorized private server and later periods when she deleted thousands of emails sought by investigators.
Far from investigating and clearing Abedin and Weiner, the FBI did not interview them, according to other FBI sources who say Comey closed the case prematurely. The machine was not authorized for classified material, and Weiner did not have classified security clearance to receive such information, which he did on at least two occasions through his Yahoo! email account – which he also used to email snapshots of his penis.
Many Clinton supporters believe Comey’s 11th hour reopening of a case that had shadowed her campaign was a form of sabotage that cost her the election. But the evidence shows Comey and his inner circle acted only after worried agents and prosecutors in New York forced their hand. At the prodding of Attorney General Lynch, they then worked to reduce and rush through, rather than carefully examine, potentially damaging new evidence.
Comey later admitted in his memoir “A Higher Loyalty,” that political calculations shaped his decisions during this period. But, he wrote, they were calibrated to help Clinton: “Assuming, as nearly everyone did, that Hillary Clinton would be elected president of the United States in less than two weeks, what would happen to the FBI, the Justice Department or her own presidency if it later was revealed, after the fact, that she still was the subject of an FBI investigation?””
======================
And Ricky supports it all. He’s been their biggest cheerleader here. Because, well, Trump…..
LikeLike
HRW,
These are serious matters. If you were at all interested in justice and truth, it would matter to you too. Honestly, I could care less what Clinton did. But I do care about our justice system and it’s integrity, which have been ruined by partisan criminals like Comey, Clapper, Strzok and the rest.
But like Ricky, you downplay it because you know it is true. You just don’t have the decency to admit it. Hillary is a proven criminal. Zero has been proven about the allegations against Trump. But you don’t really care about truth.
LikeLike
The Republican party and its supporters resemble the boy who cried wolf. They’ve been trying to convict Hilary for decades and nothing. Its hard to take them seriously anymore for example the first 5 or 6 paragraphs in your link is based on an anonymous source…..
In the meantime, the Republicans have also begun to resemble the man who with a stick in his eye is more concerned with the man with sawdust in his/her eyes.
I’m full of analogies today
LikeLiked by 1 person
HRW, Now we know that if we get our information from reputable sources, we “lack decency”. Let us endeavor to blindly follow and support the confessed sexual predator who cavorts with porn stars and Playboy bunnies so that we again may be regarded as “decent”.
LikeLike
Once again, the Times is wrong.
http://thefederalist.com/2018/08/24/trump-is-not-only-right-to-criticize-jeff-sessions-its-his-duty/
“Recently, an interesting debate erupted on Twitter between Donald Trump (the 45th President of the United States) and his subordinate Attorney General Jeff Sessions. Trump, who is the head of the executive branch and the boss of Sessions, publicly criticized the Department of Justice, which is not only his right as president, but also his responsibility as the only thin connection tying the ballot box to the DOJ. We should fear a world in which the DOJ, which has the vast power of the FBI and a monopoly over federal prosecutorial authority, does not listen to the voice of its elected master.”
———————
“Sessions also borrowed a line so often articulated by his Deputy Attorney General, that he is proud of his DOJ for “advancing the rule of law,” which has become code for “resisting the president’s directions.”
Several have observed that the rule of law appears to mean the “rule of two laws,” one for those who oppose Trump and another for those who support him. Paul Manafort might be guilty as sin. But would he have been prosecuted but for his efforts to help Trump? No, according to a very thoughtful piece by K.S. Bruce in Real Clear Life. And the next Manafort trial appears to involve precisely the same thing that Tony Podesta did with no consequence.
As I pointed out in the Federalist, the prosecution against Cohen for “campaign finance violations” appears to be the exact mirror image of what was done on behalf of the Clinton Campaign when Lisa Bloom, the daughter of a Clinton campaign official, arranged or attempted to arrange payments from Clinton donors to women to incentivize them to accuse candidate Trump of sexual misdeeds.
It’s worth revisiting Bre Payton’s list of 16 examples of the left using criminal prosecutions to punish or harass critics and political opponents. While the left repeatedly warns that Trump will prosecute his political enemies, she astutely points out that nearly every prosecution of a political figure in America appears be of an enemy of the left, not Donald Trump.
The DOJ is simply too powerful to allow it to disregard its constitutional master, the president. We should all be concerned when we hear Sessions and others dismiss any need to feel influenced by “political considerations.” When Caesar stopped following the “political considerations” of the Senate, the Roman representative democracy died immediately. Those “political considerations” keep us free.”
LikeLike
The longtime CFO of The Trump Organization has now been granted immunity.
https://twitter.com/ewerickson/status/1033071526885642240
LikeLike
Apparently the commentator in the federalist doesn’t approve of rule of law rather he would like to see rule by law ie the rule by Trump. I wonder if the commentator will be consistent in three years under a Democratic president….perhaps Sanders-Warren admin. Again think of the golden rule
LikeLike
The president is the boss, not subordinate, of the Attorney General and the Justice Department. Like the CEO of a company, he tells them what to do, not the other way around.
Rule of law, where the president is concerned, is enforced by Congress (through impeachment) or by the people through the courts and eventually the ballot, not by the Justice Department.
That said, I think it’s poor policy for the CEO and his staff to air their dirty laundry in public. It would be better if they keep their debates internal, until the CEO is ready to fire someone. Then he ought to explain it.
LikeLiked by 3 people
Like Kevin said, he is The Boss, so it’s time for massive retaliation.
Let’s get it all out in the open.
https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2018/08/massive_retaliation.html
“The way for President Trump to handle the newly energized collusion investigation is by massive retaliation…
1. Trump should advocate in public, and then if necessary assert through his authority, that the investigation of the election by Mueller is to be expanded to include all participants and all activities in the campaign without limit.
Mueller’s new charge would be “to determine whether there were any irregularities of any nature whatsoever in the 2016 campaign from any source whatsoever,” with a special focus and separate report on the violence at Trump rallies. This separate report will include a description of the participants in the violence; their method of organization and transportation; their leadership – including the roles of Robert Creamer and Scott Foval, if any – and how, by how much, and from whom they were financed.
The point is that Trump doesn’t fire Mueller, but rather, in the interest of justice, expands his remit.
2. Then the second thing Trump does is to get a special counsel appointed to investigate whether the use by Hillary Clinton as secretary of state of unsecured communications did any damage to the national security and national interests of the United States in any way whatsoever and to prosecute any violations of the law found in the course of that investigation, including any irregularities in past investigations.
Also investigate how, if at all, the joint income of Hillary and Bill Clinton of $85 million during Hillary Clinton’s tenure as secretary of state was related to her official duties and to prosecute any illegalities therefrom.
3. Then the third thing Trump does is to get a special counsel appointed to investigate whether the payoffs by Congress to persons charging sexual misconduct by congresspeople were in-kind contributions to their campaigns at any point in time and whether they covered up any crimes by congresspeople and to prosecute those crimes. Also investigate any possible involvement by their associates and families, and prosecute them if involved.”
———————-
Do it. Expose it all.
LikeLike