• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Apple informed former White House counsel Don McGahn and wife that their records were sought by DOJ in 2018 (1 Viewer)

Mycroft said:
Yes. The ends justify any means...no matter how immoral, unethical or illegal.
Click to expand...
The best thing about this post is the fact you didn't even blink making it.
Last four years of trump and Mitch and you attempt to talk about ethics.

But since there are no consequences for your words and dishonesty you don't care.
 
Trump as y'all should be aware by now was only interested in himself and actually was planning on declaring himself fascist dictator. In this attempt he made attempts to politicize the DOJ in particular and used the DOJ for his own personal gain. It is most unfortunate especially with Bill Barr acting as his personal lawyer.
 
Mycroft said:
Yes. The ends justify any means...no matter how immoral, unethical or illegal.
Click to expand...
What justification did they have for spying on another branch of the government?
 
Mycroft said:
Everyone acts as if this is stuff that was ordered by Trump. I doubt the DOJ even told him what they were doing.

In any case, we know this was all done in an effort to track down leakers. I guess McGahn was a suspect, too. I'm sure he had access to a lot of the stuff that was leaked.

So...does anyone think the DOJ should NOT have been looking for leakers?
Click to expand...
This now seems to be relatively very current and important again. Oh the irony! Little did Barr know then that Kamala would end up becoming Vice President. Think Barr might have to start thinking about lawyering up. Looks as though he could soon be some problems coming his way.

 
Mycroft said:
Actually, you bring up an interesting point.

Since all those people in the DOJ knew nothing about this, who does that leave left? Who else had enormous power in the FBI and DOJ? Let's say it WAS someone doing something corrupt...who could that be? Who would benefit from information about McGahn?

I have my own suspicion, but I'll wait till you tell me yours.

(And don't say Trump. Trump would have had to go through one of those three who say they knew nothing about it.)
Click to expand...
In other words, you've got nothing. You were upset when Trump was the target. Now, not so much.
 
Stealers Wheel said:
In other words, you've got nothing. You were upset when Trump was the target. Now, not so much.
Click to expand...
So...you have no guesses?

I mean, you can't think of ANYONE is the DOJ...other than Sessions, Barr and Rosenstein...who could have benefited from getting phone records of McGahn, congressmen and media people?

Okay. No problem. You are obviously of too low a caliber intellect for me to continue conversing with you.

You are dismissed.
 
The subpoenas were clearly to figure out who within the WH and Congress talked to the media, as well what information top Democrats had on the Trump, and what they intended to investigate. The subpoena on McGahn speaks to that clear truth.

Ironic that the people who babbled about "spying" and a "deep state" weaponized subpoena power to wage war on the stories about written about them in the media.

I have no faith in Horowitz. He's done nothing but investigate Republican wish lists, while the most politicized DOJ was in plain view for him to see. Hell, we're still waiting on that probe into the leaks to Rudy from the FBI's NY office, as well the investigation into the Barr letter, which he'll be giving Dems between now and the middle of never. I'd like to be proven wrong, but I don't believe I will be.

Dems better run their own probe to get answers, cuz Garland's DOJ has been unimpressive thus far.
 
tres borrachos said:
Don McGahn was Trump's enemy?
Click to expand...
I don't know. Maybe someone thought so.

Or...maybe someone used the leak investigation as an excuse to find out information about a Trump supporter.
 
Mycroft said:
I don't know. Maybe someone thought so.

Or...maybe someone used the leak investigation as an excuse to find out information about a Trump supporter.
Click to expand...

Or maybe your post trying to excuse this was stupid. Yes, the smart people will go with that.
 
tres borrachos said:
Or maybe your post trying to excuse this was stupid. Yes, the smart people will go with that.
Click to expand...
My posts are not any more stupid than all the posts trying to say Trump engaged in anything corrupt.
 
So Barr, Sessions and Rosenstein all say they knew nothing about this. I find that highly unlikely especially given the fact that Barr brought in a special prosecutor to handle the investigation. There is nothing wrong with doing an investigation into leaks however one would assume when members of Congress, especially these two who were favourite targets of Trump, and their families that the prosecutor in evolved would at least brief the AG or Deputy AG. This smells to high heaven. My bet is Barr does not comply with a subpoena to testify before Congress.
 
This is Watergate where the DOJ ordered the break-in.
 
W_Heisenberg said:
www.cnn.com

Apple informed former White House counsel Don McGahn and wife that their records were sought by DOJ in 2018

Former Trump White House counsel Don McGahn and his wife received disclosures from Apple last month that their account records were sought by the Justice Department in February 2018, while McGahn was still the top lawyer representing the presidency, according to a person familiar.
www.cnn.com www.cnn.com



Whoa. This is quickly becoming a very big deal. Who wasn't Trump spying on?
Click to expand...
I'm not sure? Is it possible it's retaliation for when trump's wires were tapped by obama? This will not end well for several folks in the trump administration.
 
Callen said:
So Barr, Sessions and Rosenstein all say they knew nothing about this. I find that highly unlikely especially given the fact that Barr brought in a special prosecutor to handle the investigation. There is nothing wrong with doing an investigation into leaks however one would assume when members of Congress, especially these two who were favourite targets of Trump, and their families that the prosecutor in evolved would at least brief the AG or Deputy AG. This smells to high heaven. My bet is Barr does not comply with a subpoena to testify before Congress.
Click to expand...
If he does, he'll ponder the meaning of every question to see if he can recall anything.
 
W_Heisenberg said:
www.cnn.com

Apple informed former White House counsel Don McGahn and wife that their records were sought by DOJ in 2018

Former Trump White House counsel Don McGahn and his wife received disclosures from Apple last month that their account records were sought by the Justice Department in February 2018, while McGahn was still the top lawyer representing the presidency, according to a person familiar.
www.cnn.com www.cnn.com



Whoa. This is quickly becoming a very big deal. Who wasn't Trump spying on?
Click to expand...

It was an investigation. That's how an investigation occurs-- gather information, maybe talk to people., ect ect ect
 
Callen said:
So Barr, Sessions and Rosenstein all say they knew nothing about this. I find that highly unlikely especially given the fact that Barr brought in a special prosecutor to handle the investigation. There is nothing wrong with doing an investigation into leaks however one would assume when members of Congress, especially these two who were favourite targets of Trump, and their families that the prosecutor in evolved would at least brief the AG or Deputy AG. This smells to high heaven. My bet is Barr does not comply with a subpoena to testify before Congress.
Click to expand...

Its fair enough to suggest that the AG should be aware of any investigations into a sitting member of Congress. The AG should probably have to sign off upon it.
But then again-- we already know that in 2016 Obama's AG saw no evidence of any conspiracy involving the Trump campaign and Russia, yet we of course know Trump was investigated for this. Barr issued a directive requiring the AG to approve any investigation into a major presidential candidate. I doubt Garland or Biden have rescinded it.
So perhaps there is a systemic issue within the DOJ.

Or maybe the Congressmen were in fact breaking the law.
 
bongsaway said:
If he does, he'll ponder the meaning of every question to see if he can recall anything.
Click to expand...
He's not the AG anymore, he's not free to ignore a subpoena on claims to it being some violation of separation of powers or whatever.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Back
Top Bottom