Trump and Jesus

[Rychek4]

Also, why is a trade deficit bad? It could just mean that we're a well off country who likes to buy things. The only problem with one, in and of itself, is that "someone else" is getting money instead of US citizens (gasp).

I think Elvis has me on ignore.

 

[orangelvis]

As long as the evidence that there's reasonable suspicion passes the usual muster then sure. I don't think you have any evidence that this was done with any sort of political intent (if it was why not just say that they were investigating the campaign during the election and tank Trump?) I don't think there is anything improper at all about having someone report back what idiots in the campaign told him. If they'd actually planted a mole or something I assume they'd have needed warrants and such forth. If there was enough suspicion for a judge to sign off on a warrant for a Democrat's 2020 campaign then why would I be upset with that? Why would I even want that person's campaign to move forward?

Well, now we're getting to crux of the matter. I appreciate your calmness, candor and not resorting to name calling etc. All Rosenstein has to do is release the docs and then the whole world will know what kind of evidence was used, how it was vetted, whether proper protocol was followed, etc. So, if that is all that is needed, why isn't it happening?
Someone above stated that Gowdy read docs the other day at the meeting. That is not true. No one saw any docs. They were all "advised" by the DOJ.
The Clinton campaign was whelping about Trump and Russians before the election. The other "unusual" thing is this: The time line keeps changing as to when the investigation,(spying) actually started. That should be easy to denote. Another curiosity, is how a known, long time CIA asset, Halper, suddenly is working for the FBI. You know, it's illegal, I think, for the CIA to spy on citizens. Even Mifsud is a known 5 Eyes asset, and has never worked for the Russians.

 

[FLaw47]

Well, now we're getting to crux of the matter. I appreciate your calmness, candor and not resorting to name calling etc. All Rosenstein has to do is release the docs and then the whole world will know what kind of evidence was used, how it was vetted, whether proper protocol was followed, etc. So, if that is all that is needed, why isn't it happening?
Someone above stated that Gowdy read docs the other day at the meeting. That is not true. No one saw any docs. They were all "advised" by the DOJ.
The Clinton campaign was whelping about Trump and Russians before the election. The other "unusual" thing is this: The time line keeps changing as to when the investigation,(spying) actually started. That should be easy to denote. Another curiosity, is how a known, long time CIA asset, Halper, suddenly is working for the FBI. You know, it's illegal, I think, for the CIA to spy on citizens. Even Mifsud is a known 5 Eyes asset, and has never worked for the Russians.

The simple question is this. If there was political intent to undermine Donald Trump, why didn't they release unseamly information during the campaign. You didn't source any of the other stuff so I can't really respond. I'd also need to know what constitutes "illegal spying" with regards to the CIA to respond (even if the guy hasn't worked for the CIA in decades). I imagine Rosentein is reluctant to release information to Nunez because he has a history of selectively leaking information that can't be countered because it's all classified. I'm also not certain the FBI has an obligation to do so but I may be wrong. Perhaps you can source that

 

[orangelvis]

I think Elvis has me on ignore.

Well, We'll have to see what happens with the Tariffs. Too soon to tell. If it doesn't work out, I'll pitch a fit over it as well. I've already admitted that I'm philosophically opposed to tariffs because I believe in free trade economics. I really don't think Trump believes in tariffs either. I think he is willing to go to the mattresses on getting concessions from people who he thinks are not playing fair. We'll see.
I've heard, but can't confirm, that the military is concerned about our lack of internal steel manufacturing in case of serious conflict. China, for instance could just cut us off from imports if we ever got crossways in a situation.

PS. I never ignore anyone. Thinks it's pretty stupid, actually. I'd like to do away with the ignore button and add a dislike post function to go along with the "like" function.

 

[orangelvis]

The simple question is this. If there was political intent to undermine Donald Trump, why didn't they release unseamly information during the campaign. You didn't source any of the other stuff so I can't really respond. I'd also need to know what constitutes "illegal spying" with regards to the CIA to respond (even if the guy hasn't worked for the CIA in decades). I imagine Rosentein is reluctant to release information to Nunez because he has a history of selectively leaking information that can't be countered because it's all classified. I'm also not certain the FBI has an obligation to do so but I may be wrong. Perhaps you can source that

The DOJ/FBI are not a Fourth Branch of government. The Congress has oversight responsibility over them. Part of the checks and balances. The Congress; both houses, not only have the right, but they have a duty to provide oversight. House Intel Committee has subpoenaed these documents many, many months ago. They have threatened Rosenstein with Contempt and Impeachment, which they have the power to do.
To your first point. Could it be that they didn't find any unseamly information during the campaign? If you believe Gowdy, then not only did they have any unseamly info, they have never even been investigating Trump! You and I both know that's not true. (Comey's presser, Dossier, etc). Also, there is the questions raised by the Strzok/Page texts. They thought Hillary would win! In fact, they had a plan to help her win; code name, "Mid-Term Exam". In that event, none of this would even be a thing! When it started looking like Trump might have a chance, then they were texting about an insurance policy. Look, some of this could be clarified by the next IG report, which will be dealing with the Clinton Email investigation. We'll all know more soon. Next week, I think.
Don't think I'm wrong, but if I am, I have NO DOUBT, it will be pointed out by someone. The CIA was created for foreign intelligence and it is illegal for the CIA to target or spy on our citizens. Evidence of this, is the fact that the 5 Eyes agreement states that the 5 Eyes members agree not to spy on each other's citizens.
I'd like to see some proof that Nunes is responsible for leaking. A Senate staffer was arrested today for leaking.
One last mention of something to watch: McCabe is asking for an immunity deal. I'm extremely interested in how this is handled. McCabe, Comey, Brennan and Clapper seem to be forming a "circular firing squad", and Comey and Clapper are all over TV saying things that could be used against them.

 

[FLaw47]

The DOJ/FBI are not a Fourth Branch of government. The Congress has oversight responsibility over them. Part of the checks and balances. The Congress; both houses, not only have the right, but they have a duty to provide oversight. House Intel Committee has subpoenaed these documents many, many months ago. They have threatened Rosenstein with Contempt and Impeachment, which they have the power to do.
To your first point. Could it be that they didn't find any unseamly information during the campaign? If you believe Gowdy, then not only did they have any unseamly info, they have never even been investigating Trump! You and I both know that's not true. (Comey's presser, Dossier, etc). Also, there is the questions raised by the Strzok/Page texts. They thought Hillary would win! In fact, they had a plan to help her win; code name, "Mid-Term Exam". In that event, none of this would even be a thing! When it started looking like Trump might have a chance, then they were texting about an insurance policy. Look, some of this could be clarified by the next IG report, which will be dealing with the Clinton Email investigation. We'll all know more soon. Next week, I think.
Don't think I'm wrong, but if I am, I have NO DOUBT, it will be pointed out by someone. The CIA was created for foreign intelligence and it is illegal for the CIA to target or spy on our citizens. Evidence of this, is the fact that the 5 Eyes agreement states that the 5 Eyes members agree not to spy on each other's citizens.
I'd like to see some proof that Nunes is responsible for leaking. A Senate staffer was arrested today for leaking.
One last mention of something to watch: McCabe is asking for an immunity deal. I'm extremely interested in how this is handled. McCabe, Comey, Brennan and Clapper seem to be forming a "circular firing squad", and Comey and Clapper are all over TV saying things that could be used against them.

I need links from credible sources. I can't just trust your statements on all of it. Also, I think you misunderstand the CIA's restriction. They are banned from spying on domestic activities. All of this stuff happened in the UK (and didn't even involve the CIA so why are we talking about this?) From their website:

By law, the CIA is specifically prohibited from collecting foreign intelligence concerning the domestic activities of US citizens. Its mission is to collect information related to foreign intelligence and foreign counterintelligence. By direction of the president in Executive Order 12333 of 1981 and in accordance with procedures approved by the Attorney General, the CIA is restricted in the collection of intelligence information directed against US citizens. Collection is allowed only for an authorized intelligence purpose; for example, if there is a reason to believe that an individual is involved in espionage or international terrorist activities. The CIA's procedures require senior approval for any such collection that is allowed, and, depending on the collection technique employed, the sanction of the Director of National Intelligence and Attorney General may be required. These restrictions on the CIA have been in effect since the 1970s.

Source

 

[Rychek4]

I think he is willing to go to the mattresses on getting concessions from people who he thinks are not playing fair.

That's the irony, in most of our trade deal WE are the ones not playing fair. We have constantly leveraged our economic might to swing deals in our favor.

The U.S. basically wrote TPP. Though I was happy when Trump killed it for Copyright and intellectual property reasons.

 

[orangelvis]

That's the irony, in most of our trade deal WE are the ones not playing fair. We have constantly leveraged our economic might to swing deals in our favor.

The U.S. basically wrote TPP. Though I was happy when Trump killed it for Copyright and intellectual property reasons.

Fair enough. Like I said, we'll see how it turns out.

 

[orangelvis]

I need links from credible sources. I can't just trust your statements on all of it. Also, I think you misunderstand the CIA's restriction. They are banned from spying on domestic activities. All of this stuff happened in the UK (and didn't even involve the CIA so why are we talking about this?) From their website:


The reason I'm talking about it, there is a credible reason to believe that Pappadop was set up. Mifsud is a foreign, 5Eyes asset who planted the idea to Pappadop that the Russians had Clinton's Emails. Halper, a former CIA asset, then contacts Pappadop; out of the blue, and entices him to come to London to write a paper on energy problems. Paid his way and paid him 3K for the paper. During their time together, Halpern asks Pappadop if he remembered hearing anything about Clinton's emails. A little while after, Halpern sets up an informal meeting with the Australian ambassador to England and Pappadop to have drinks. All Pappadop said at meeting was that he had heard somewhere that the Russians had dirt on Clinton. Now, all I've heard from msm types is that the dossier wasn't the main thing in obtaining FISA warrants. It was Pappadop. If the situation that I just described turns out to be true, do you think this constitutes a reasonable basis? Not asking you to believe it. Just putting forth the idea that things we've all been hearing for 1.5 years seem to be falling apart every time a little more information comes forth. You seem very logical in your thinking process and at least willing to be open minded. Let's see what happens. The IG report on the Hillary email investigation is suppose to come out next week. This is tied to the Russian investigation; in my view because it involves the same actors. We'll see soon enough.
Notice no one else is commenting on the fact that McCabe has a lawyer and is asking for full immunity to testify. If not, lawyer says he'll plead the 5th.
Also, there are reports that as many as 28 rank and file DOJ/FBI employees are askin to be subpoenaed to give testimony. They are looking for congressional protections against retaliation from their respective agencies. Again we'll see.

 

[FLaw47]

Hey man, I appreciate your sincerity. I cannot, however, rely on it. If you want to provide credible sources for your claims we can have a real conversation but I'm going to try to not waste both of our time otherwise.