Justice Department preparing for Mueller report as early as next week (1 Viewer)

[pamak]

Thanks in all fairness I did NOT get so detailed.

With that trying to read fairly and be as NON bias as possible. Its hard to corrolate the 2 cases.

1) There are 2 defaults that rely on judgement from 1917 which maintain classified material likely did NOT take into account of how in 2016 documentation is NOW handled. (BUT that is all for interpretation) Similar to how the 2nd Amendment is interpreted by "arms". But lets just play semantics for a second.... and sustain it. " Gross Negligence" must suggest Deliberate intention, criminally reckless. The intent to CREATE, Make, design, hold, maintain a private server. Separate from the established norms set for by the security standards. SEEMS to imply INTENT. to intentionally Maintain a separate housing OF Sight. I could see if it was within here state department office. THIS was completely separate with the INTENT to be completely separate?

2) Knowing Removal.....At an Unauthorized location. A private server from the Get go is it NOT in fact an "unauthorized location" from the get go? NOW I cannot say that HRC intended to remove it knowingly. But she KNOWING knew it was to be stored at an UNAUTHORIZED LOCATION. Now this goes back to the "Whataboutism" That I was inferring before Future situations will do the " What about Petraesu, What about Powell and now What about HRC.... This is NO way sets good policies. SO then the next question is. IF we leave HRC to how it ended up. HAVE WE MODIFIED policies and statues to make up for this BS crap???? I doubt it and that is TERRIBLE POLICY

3) Gonzales case to me, by statues is Apples and Oranges. Gonzales himself MADE ample attempts to maintain opsec. Marking the files TC eyes only AG. Storing it ON sight in the west wing. WHILE all these actions are STILL NOT an authorized method. His intent was to MAINTAIN the continuity of the info. HRC on the other hand. DID NOTHING to maintain opsec. Secondly INTENTIONALLY had an OFFSITE facility to store and maintain the info. Neither self classifying to protect it NOR reporting it to those that actually sent it in error to her personal server account. FINALLY the biggest thing that I have YET seen actually address. Those that LACK the security clearance that HAD FULL access to the communications as well as the server. the IT people that handled the server. Huma Abedein as well as her convicted husband all had unintentional Access to material NOT allowed by their clearance.


So why I am an absolutely NOBODY, zero jurisdiction, zero qualifications. I interpret things that just did NOT make sense. HENCE the reason why HRC did NOT win the Presidency and likely NOW forever a cloud cast upon her......

Well, if you want to disagree with the prosecutor's interpretations of the statute, it is fine with me. You may also want to disagree regarding if their justification of not prosecuting Gonzalez case is similar to their justification of not prosecuting Clinton's. Personally, I find the Gonzalez case very relevant, but in the end, both of us make arguments which are irrelevant to the legal system. The prosecutors and the IG thought that the Gonzalez case was relevant to the one of Clinton's, and this is what matters legally.

The prosecutors thought that in both cases a crime did not exist despite the obvious mishandling of information and did not press charges. Again, this is the only thing that matters legally. In the eyes of law, regardless what you and I believe, both Gonzalez and Clinton are not guilty. The same will be true if the prosecutors refuse to press charges for the Russian collusion. People may disagree with the rationale of the decision but this will be irrelevant from a legal perspective. Still, as I said earlier, the political perspective matters too! And people should be aware of questionable (from a political point) behavior. To me, people who arrange meetings with people who claim that they offer help from a foreign government to influence an election are committing treason in political terms. Perhaps, such behavior is not legally relevant but it is politically.

 

[Exactice]

Well, if you want to disagree with the prosecutor's interpretations of the statute, it is fine with me. You may also want to disagree regarding if their justification of not prosecuting Gonzalez case is similar to their justification of not prosecuting Clinton's. Personally, I find the Gonzalez case very relevant, but in the end, both of us make arguments which are irrelevant to the legal system. The prosecutors and the IG thought that the Gonzalez case was relevant to the one of Clinton's, and this is what matters legally.

The prosecutors thought that in both cases a crime did not exist despite the obvious mishandling of information and did not press charges. Again, this is the only thing that matters legally. In the eyes of law, regardless what you and I believe, both Gonzalez and Clinton are not guilty. The same will be true if the prosecutors refuse to press charges for the Russian collusion. People may disagree with the rationale of the decision but this will be irrelevant from a legal perspective. Still, as I said earlier, the political perspective matters too! And people should be aware of questionable (from a political point) behavior. To me, people who arrange meetings with people who claim that they offer help from a foreign government to influence an election are committing treason in political terms. Perhaps, such behavior is not legally relevant but it is politically.

Fair points just a couple of points.

1) I need to double check, HRC was never prosecuted so she was neither found guilty or NOT guilty. There is a chance that an AG would be willing to Prosecute....and the LAW would be applied. AGAIN perspective of the law, there was NO lawful judgement just the lack of either evidence to prosecute a crime or just the lack of WILL to prosecute. Again I would like to ensure continuity, Was Gonzalez prosecuted and then found NOT guilty. or NOT prosecuted at all.

2) I caution you on your specified sentence " To me, people who arrange meetings with people who claim that they offer help from a foreign government to influence an election are committing treason in political terms. Perhaps, such behavior is not legally relevant but it is politically." Only reason I say that is the DNC and HRC did in fact enlist in a foreign government, That being an Mi6 Agent whom was already dismissed from the FBI as a source for leaking info. Had to use HUMIT (Human intelligence) from Russian sources to build his dossier. This again by all legal research was "Opo-Research" Just the Trumps did it in a NOT so snazy smart way bud did it in a mere amateur way. More so the Dossier was used for a Factual FISA warrant which we still do NOT know the full relevance if it was the main source for the FISA or was it a small part.

Its really been Dirty on both ends...... Just seems Trumps did their dirty work not so SMART. NOT illegal just not covering their bases.

HRC on the other had had billions and major backing and did everything seemingly by the book.

Ultimately they were trying to accomplish the exact same goal discredit their opponent in the worst way. Trump won as the Server destroyed HRC's Hopes. HRC sowed discord by de-legitimizing the election and assuming, she/DNC was some what of the source of the allegations that Trump Colluded with Russia...(Complete utter opinion and in no way factual just a talking point) But I assume you know what I mean.

reiteration I want to read up If Gonzales was prosecuted and Found Guilty or was NEVER prosecuted at all.

HRC was never prosecuted at all so she is neither not guilty or guilty at this point

 

[braindrain]

The only way we'll know that everything is legit is if the report concludes impeachable offenses.

Thank you for demonstrating why no one should take you seriously.

 

[pamak]

Fair points just a couple of points.

1) I need to double check, HRC was never prosecuted so she was neither found guilty or NOT guilty. There is a chance that an AG would be willing to Prosecute....and the LAW would be applied. AGAIN perspective of the law, there was NO lawful judgement just the lack of either evidence to prosecute a crime or just the lack of WILL to prosecute. Again I would like to ensure continuity, Was Gonzalez prosecuted and then found NOT guilty. or NOT prosecuted at all.

2) I caution you on your specified sentence " To me, people who arrange meetings with people who claim that they offer help from a foreign government to influence an election are committing treason in political terms. Perhaps, such behavior is not legally relevant but it is politically." Only reason I say that is the DNC and HRC did in fact enlist in a foreign government, That being an Mi6 Agent whom was already dismissed from the FBI as a source for leaking info. Had to use HUMIT (Human intelligence) from Russian sources to build his dossier. This again by all legal research was "Opo-Research" Just the Trumps did it in a NOT so snazy smart way bud did it in a mere amateur way. More so the Dossier was used for a Factual FISA warrant which we still do NOT know the full relevance if it was the main source for the FISA or was it a small part.

Its really been Dirty on both ends...... Just seems Trumps did their dirty work not so SMART. NOT illegal just not covering their bases.

HRC on the other had had billions and major backing and did everything seemingly by the book.

Ultimately they were trying to accomplish the exact same goal discredit their opponent in the worst way. Trump won as the Server destroyed HRC's Hopes. HRC sowed discord by de-legitimizing the election and assuming, she/DNC was some what of the source of the allegations that Trump Colluded with Russia...(Complete utter opinion and in no way factual just a talking point) But I assume you know what I mean.

reiteration I want to read up If Gonzales was prosecuted and Found Guilty or was NEVER prosecuted at all.

HRC was never prosecuted at all so she is neither not guilty or guilty at this point

Steele was a former MI6. H was hired by a private foreign company which is different. Recall also that Cambridge Analytical which was used by the Trump Campaign was a foreign (British) company. Simply hiring foreign firms or getting information from foreign citizens (including Russians) would not be a problem. Right now, most probably some CIA agent in Moscow may get information from Russians. The problem is when one is willing to get information from people who act (or say they act) on behalf of a foreign government.

 

[RealityNow]

There should be no clause, memo, policy or construct o !!!!!! Base principle is. NO MAN IS ABOVE THE LAW".

We need to grasp the principle and stand firm behind it. Otherwise, we give over the power to the Presiding Administrator of our Executive Branch, the accessibility to engage "Tyranny".... and conduct acts of malice of any sort, thus placing them "Above The Law"...

Any documents, memo, clause, policy, or proposal of such that tries to propose and enforce such a violation, by any act to support or promote or install such a policy, is itself "UN-Constitutional" and VIOLATES our Constitutional sanctioned Judicial Systems Integrity.

Society of Today is of a higher investment in literacy of intellect than at the time such a policy was enacted upon and against the Constitution and the Sanctity of the American Citizens and this Nations National Integrity.
This is akin to the conduct engaged for the 100 yrs of Jim Crow Systems of White Nationalist White Male Dominance Agenda , and how it USURPED The Law for the sake of protecting "white men" who created atrocities in the name and backing of racism. Our Justice System WAS NEVER of original design to make ANY "escape clause's" for ANY Man, to be placed above the law.

This policy seek, promotes and pursue to give the "Rich and Powerful" who enter into our office of the Presidency, an unconstitutional premise of "Being Above The Law"....

If we succumb to this madness, we invite Tyranny and give ourselves over into the hands of Plutocracy, who installs the devastation's of Autocratic Principles upon and within our Democracy. It does not matter if one is of claim to be Republican or Democrat, this is the allowance of acts against the people of America, the Governance of America and Against the Declaration of Independents and against The Constitution that Administers the Principles of the Declaration's Core Principles.

People, stop waffling and learn what is the Declaration of Independent and The Constitution that Facilitates the Goals, and Principles set forth in the Declarations core and principled stipulations and mandates that supports its initial and enduring ratification.

 

[RealityNow]

There should be no clause, memo, policy or construct o !!!!!! Base principle is. NO MAN IS ABOVE THE LAW".



Society of Today is of a higher investment in literacy of intellect than at the time such a policy was enacted upon and against the Constitution and the Sanctity of the American Citizens and this Nations National Integrity.
This is akin to the conduct engaged for the 100 yrs of Jim Crow Systems of White Nationalist White Male Dominance Agenda , and how it USURPED The Law for the sake of protecting "white men" who created atrocities in the name and backing of racism. Our Justice System WAS NEVER of original design to make ANY "escape clause's" for ANY Man, to be placed above the law.

This policy seek, promotes and pursue to give the "Rich and Powerful" who enter into our office of the Presidency, an unconstitutional premise of "Being Above The Law"....



People, stop waffling and learn what is the Declaration of Independent and The Constitution that Facilitates the Goals, and Principles set forth in the Declarations core and principled stipulations and mandates that supports its initial and enduring ratification.

THE CONSTITUTION is GREATER THAN any political party, be it Republican or Democratic !!!!!! Let not party ignorance promote such a disgrace and disregard of The Constitution.

Any who choose to push "any" party above The Constitution... will as a whole of the people... Live to Regret It.... as it erodes the Constitution and Insults the separation of Powers and render's Our Collective Congress as being Null.

play self deception games and deflection and any act of denial, and it shall be to the extent to violate your claim and stand as a citizen of the United States. Thus so, one needs to understand "what is a citizen", in order to respect the Constitution that backs the principles of citizenship.

THINK... let not partisan bigotry and partisan ignorance make one into what is the making of a fool.

Gloss over this and deflect as you desire and you simply make of yourself one who is running fast into the desperation's to be and of being a fool. " such ones will rue the day of such doings"

 

[Oborosen]

Well, ladies and gentlemen, combine that with Clapper's statement ( Mueller report may be ‘anti-climactic,' says ex-intelligence director | TheHill ) that



and what we have is a signal to prepare yourselves to either say "See ... there was nothing" or "He's guilty ... they just didn't have enough proof"

Round and round we'll still go ... but we already knew that, didn't we?

Either way, despite all that's happened. It's been one hell of a ride for the last few years.

 

[Cardinal]

Thank you for demonstrating why no one should take you seriously.

I can only assume then that if Hillary Clinton had been investigated by a Special Counsel and Bill Clinton had been appointed to supervise that investigation, you would have trusted either outcome.

 

[Exactice]

Steele was a former MI6. H was hired by a private foreign company which is different. Recall also that Cambridge Analytical which was used by the Trump Campaign was a foreign (British) company. Simply hiring foreign firms or getting information from foreign citizens (including Russians) would not be a problem. Right now, most probably some CIA agent in Moscow may get information from Russians. The problem is when one is willing to get information from people who act (or say they act) on behalf of a foreign government.

"Former" is key so again HE WAS NOT an active British Spy. He is a "Foriegn" National. WITH that he was dismissed Already by the FBI. So when you so solicit help from foreign government the Former MI6 agent was likely still using his prior life resources.

as for hiring through the law firm, YES as I stated. HRC/DNC used methods that was within the realms of legality and obscurity. TRUMP's campaign did the EXACT same thing by context. JUST not through some what safe covering your bases means....

The way that steel sourced his info? Is that not similar to how the "Russian" lawyer tricked Jr in the tower meeting. I mean it was solicited to THEM not the other way around? Did HRC/DNC through the lawfirm the Fusion actually solicit the info from Steele? Thus Steel Solicit the info from Russians or Russian contacts?

I really would hate to play semantics and games. Let me say this again.

1) Was the method that HRC/DNC obtain the Dossier Illegal? No doesnt seem like it
2) was the method that Jr/Kushner being contacted to have a Trump tower meeting illegal to gain "dirt" on HRC illegal? NO, as no charges have been filed
2a) Caveat, the disclosure OF the meeting is the question at hand about lying about it... BUT the meeting itself was in NO way illegal NOR factualization of "collusion"

 

[pamak]

"Former" is key so again HE WAS NOT an active British Spy. He is a "Foriegn" National. WITH that he was dismissed Already by the FBI. So when you so solicit help from foreign government the Former MI6 agent was likely still using his prior life resources.

as for hiring through the law firm, YES as I stated. HRC/DNC used methods that was within the realms of legality and obscurity. TRUMP's campaign did the EXACT same thing by context. JUST not through some what safe covering your bases means....

The way that steel sourced his info? Is that not similar to how the "Russian" lawyer tricked Jr in the tower meeting. I mean it was solicited to THEM not the other way around? Did HRC/DNC through the lawfirm the Fusion actually solicit the info from Steele? Thus Steel Solicit the info from Russians or Russian contacts?

I really would hate to play semantics and games. Let me say this again.

1) Was the method that HRC/DNC obtain the Dossier Illegal? No doesnt seem like it
2) was the method that Jr/Kushner being contacted to have a Trump tower meeting illegal to gain "dirt" on HRC illegal? NO, as no charges have been filed
2a) Caveat, the disclosure OF the meeting is the question at hand about lying about it... BUT the meeting itself was in NO way illegal NOR factualization of "collusion"

When a CIA agent is using a Russian with connections to the Russian government (he may be even an active employee) to get information, we do not talk about "collusion" of the CIA with the Russians! I see a BIG difference between using a retired officer who works for private interests and an officer (retired or not) who works for a government's interests. Also, Clinton did not hire Steele. The Clinton hired Fusion which was a British private company, and it was Fusion which hired Steele.

The connection between Clinton and Steele was non existent, and this is shown by the fact that Clinton was not able to use information from Steele to try to change the situation against her BEFORE the elections, when she needed something to distract the public away from the revelations against her. Recall also that Fusion was hired by Republicans for opposition research during the Republican primaries , and as I said earlier, recall that Cambridge Analytical (another British company) was hired by the Trump Campaign.

Personally, I find as a weak defense the fact that Trump Jr as the one who accepted an offer. If I accept an offer fro somebody who is promising me contraband, it does not make me look good. And if the guy fails to deliver such contraband, I will be fine legally, but from the political and social perspective, I will still look like a crook, just like Hillary and the DNC looked like crooks when it was revealed that they were using perfectly legal tactics to undermine Sanders. And such behavior is of public interest. Finally, do not forget the public calls by a presidential candidate for the Russians to find Hillary's emails. .

 

[Exactice]

When a CIA agent is using a Russian with connections to the Russian government (he may be even an active employee) to get information, we do not talk about "collusion" of the CIA with the Russians! I see a BIG difference between using a retired officer who works for private interests and an officer (retired or not) who works for a government's interests. Also, Clinton did not hire Steele. The Clinton hired Fusion which was a British private company, and it was Fusion which hired Steele.

The connection between Clinton and Steele was non existent, and this is shown by the fact that Clinton was not able to use information from Steele to try to change the situation against her BEFORE the elections, when she needed something to distract the public away from the revelations against her. Recall also that Fusion was hired by Republicans for opposition research during the Republican primaries , and as I said earlier, recall that Cambridge Analytical (another British company) was hired by the Trump Campaign.

Personally, I find as a weak defense the fact that Trump Jr as the one who accepted an offer. If I accept an offer fro somebody who is promising me contraband, it does not make me look good. And if the guy fails to deliver such contraband, I will be fine legally, but from the political and social perspective, I will still look like a crook, just like Hillary and the DNC looked like crooks when it was revealed that they were using perfectly legal tactics to undermine Sanders. And such behavior is of public interest. Finally, do not forget the public calls by a presidential candidate for the Russians to find Hillary's emails. .

Yes, that is why I am trying to take context.

A Private Firm Fusion, Hired an Former MI6 Agent. This is NOT the CIA enlisting the help of a sanction asset. It is a private group making strong intelligence contacts to obtain information.

Jr/Kushner's Solicitation was brought on by rich connections with ties to a Russian lawyer that reached out to THEM......The question that I Ask is, DID Jr/Kusher, or Trump campaign, FACTUAL Solicit information? Yes or NO?

Next is your points of HRC/DNC ->Perkens Cuio ->Fusion GPS -> Steele ->Russina assets. YES there is a connection, there is NOT a direct hand to hand connection but there is vicarious point. WHO allowed or AUTHORIZED the Law Firm to make contact with Fusion GPS, What am im trying to illicit is that it was not BACKWARDS, that the Russian asset contacted Steele whom contacted Fusion so and and so on.

DNC/HRC contacted the LAW firm to initiated opposition research, HRC/DNC made the EFFORT and ATTEMPT to broker information.

JR/Kusher were provided information they did NOT source it out themselves or have someone source it out themselves from my reading of the reports.

BOTH SIDES LOOK HELLA Suspicious, YET NEITHER side broke actual LAWS. YET only TRUMP is being accused of collusion as well as his campaign being investigated for an accusation with NO predicate, witness or crime broken.

Next, let quantify something? in context. " I accept an offer from somebody who is promising me contraband, it does not make me look good. " The question is what do you DO with the contraband?

Someone offers me a Marijuana joint/a line of coke.
1) I can disregard and ignore it
2) Take it and then turn it into the authorities
3) Indulge in it
4) Sell it and make money off of it

We do NOT know the motive as to what Jr/Kushner would have done IF they received "such contraband" and we will NEVER know BECAUSE there was NEVER any FACTUAL contraband. IT was a setup up it was a lie. They are IDIOTS and FOOLS for getting tricked. BUT the fact remains is it illegal and did they break any laws?

YET they have been met with SUCH great scrutiny for being IDIOTS? The Trump tower meeting for a while was supposed to be the Bombshell... Yeah no..... not even close.

SKETCH and SHADY as hell NO less then the Fusion GPS issue... the GREAT problem is the FACT that the dossier generated by steel and Fusion was USED to obtain and maintain a FISA warrant..... that takes the dossier to a MORE sketchy level (NOTHING in essence to do with the DNC or HRC per say) But STILL Shady as hell no?

 

[pamak]

Yes, that is why I am trying to take context.

A Private Firm Fusion, Hired an Former MI6 Agent. This is NOT the CIA enlisting the help of a sanction asset. It is a private group making strong intelligence contacts to obtain information.

Jr/Kushner's Solicitation was brought on by rich connections with ties to a Russian lawyer that reached out to THEM......The question that I Ask is, DID Jr/Kusher, or Trump campaign, FACTUAL Solicit information? Yes or NO?

Next is your points of HRC/DNC ->Perkens Cuio ->Fusion GPS -> Steele ->Russina assets. YES there is a connection, there is NOT a direct hand to hand connection but there is vicarious point. WHO allowed or AUTHORIZED the Law Firm to make contact with Fusion GPS, What am im trying to illicit is that it was not BACKWARDS, that the Russian asset contacted Steele whom contacted Fusion so and and so on.

DNC/HRC contacted the LAW firm to initiated opposition research, HRC/DNC made the EFFORT and ATTEMPT to broker information.

JR/Kusher were provided information they did NOT source it out themselves or have someone source it out themselves from my reading of the reports.

BOTH SIDES LOOK HELLA Suspicious, YET NEITHER side broke actual LAWS. YET only TRUMP is being accused of collusion as well as his campaign being investigated for an accusation with NO predicate, witness or crime broken.

Next, let quantify something? in context. " I accept an offer from somebody who is promising me contraband, it does not make me look good. " The question is what do you DO with the contraband?

Someone offers me a Marijuana joint/a line of coke.
1) I can disregard and ignore it
2) Take it and then turn it into the authorities
3) Indulge in it
4) Sell it and make money off of it

We do NOT know the motive as to what Jr/Kushner would have done IF they received "such contraband" and we will NEVER know BECAUSE there was NEVER any FACTUAL contraband. IT was a setup up it was a lie. They are IDIOTS and FOOLS for getting tricked. BUT the fact remains is it illegal and did they break any laws?

YET they have been met with SUCH great scrutiny for being IDIOTS? The Trump tower meeting for a while was supposed to be the Bombshell... Yeah no..... not even close.

SKETCH and SHADY as hell NO less then the Fusion GPS issue... the GREAT problem is the FACT that the dossier generated by steel and Fusion was USED to obtain and maintain a FISA warrant..... that takes the dossier to a MORE sketchy level (NOTHING in essence to do with the DNC or HRC per say) But STILL Shady as hell no?

Ohh we can make a political judgment regarding the motives of Kushner and Manafort and Trump Jr about how they would use the the information that was offered to them. Trump Jr forwarded them the email exchanges he had with the people who were offering on behalf of the Russian government help. And at a time when there was already information about the links between the Russian government and the DNC hacking, it should have been obvious to all of them that any offer by people who were claiming that the were offering the help of the Russian government should have been forwarded to the FBI. But of course, their attitude at the time was "I love Wikileaks" and "Russia, if you hear me find Clinton's emails." Even much later, they did the best they could to discredit the investigation of the Russian hacking by refusing to accept the unanimous decision of the intelligence agencies that the Russian government was behind it.

I have no problem to say that it is probable that both sides did not break laws regarding the collusion (we will know more after the report.). But voters have the right to know if their leaders acted ethically when their country became a target of a foreign intelligence operations. Sometimes, a legal action is still unethical.This is why I am talking about the difference between law and politics, and this is why I also mentioned the perfectly legal behavior of the DNC when it undermined Sanders which gave legitimate reasons to politically criticize the Democrats even though they did not break any law. And if people re really honest and really want transparency, they should sing the same tune consistently. It does not make sense to believe that it was politically necessary to have transparency for Hillary and the DNC party and welcome even leaks which were products of an illegal action, but somehow it is not necessary to have transparency about the Trump Campaign and we should cover information that was obtained legally by the FBI.

 

[Exactice]

.........

We surely can and ultimately, the nation made the political judgement NOT to elect HRC.

Currently thats all we have is Political Judgement. as NO law was broken, we can armchair quarterback all we want, but the "what we thought they would do" didnt happen.

Its the same as the Kavannaugh, Currently Kavannaugh could be GUILTY as HELL for all we KNOW. but with out proof and only allegations that all it is. So instead of focusing on the non Corroborate allegations we should focus on the facts and merit at hand IS and will kavannaugh be a good SCOTUS Judge? out side of the questionable unknown his qualifications are sound.

This goes with Trump and his team currently they CAN maintain their innocents and other can accuse them ALL DAY... but without factual corroborating evidence its merely an accusation. ALL we can do now is either support Trumps policies or hope that the checks and balances built within the co-equally branches of government prevail.

As for Russian hacking. The reason why it was still under investigation, Intelligence is the discovery, Investigators are the fact finders and the Judges are those that apply the law. Ive state it in multiple post. I have dealt with intelligence. It is NOT end all be ALL. Intelligence is NOT Gods words, Intelligence is another tool in the tool box to make decision on how to act. FOR what ever UNKNOWN reason Trump is NOT taking the Intelligence as Gospel. Again...."Iraq and WMD" that was intelligence that TOOK us to WAR in which I participated my self and was there on the ACTUAL front lines (if that matters for credibility purposes)


With your Final point and in ALL fairness, the BEST part and most Relevant part to you and I as fact is..... likely no laws were broken, Trump porbably didnt collude ..... BUT.... Public opinion and secondly Political opinion is what sets the FINAL tone....

With that..... Trump has been maintaining his innocence while pushing form some drastic legislation. Repeal ACA, Tax Cuts, Border Wall, Etc etc....

as we Approach 2020 the only thing I hear from his opposition, Green New Deal and investigate Trump.

Politically for the next POTUS if not Trump.... Their Job is. by POTUS job description

1) Protect American Citizens
2) Enforce Existing Laws
3) Propose a budget
4) Propose new Laws
5) Command our Military.

This is HOW I vote? NOT if I personally like a person or not. Now help me....... If political opinion a driving factor. Trump wants to protect Americans. Cut taxes, in addition cutting a debt like ACA, build a wall and immigration reform. Scale back our Military operations and bring them HOME.


What or how is the DEMS or opposition party planning to address as such? That would RADICALLY change my vote to a Democrat?

 

[prometeus]

We surely can and ultimately, the nation made the political judgement NOT to elect HRC.

Has it? Is that because Trump won? That hardly amounts to the nation or its judgement.

out side of the questionable unknown his qualifications are sound.

What is the standard by which you make that qualification? I submit that there are countless other people out there with at least as good academic credentials and better temperament while remaining true conservatives. Fact remains that Kavanaugh was a political operative same way as Kagan and neither should be sitting on the bench.

Trump wants to protect Americans.

Is that because he wants to build a wall or because he casts aside the advice of competent people?

 

[Exactice]

Has it? Is that because Trump won? That hardly amounts to the nation or its judgement.

What is the standard by which you make that qualification? I submit that there are countless other people out there with at least as good academic credentials and better temperament while remaining true conservatives. Fact remains that Kavanaugh was a political operative same way as Kagan and neither should be sitting on the bench.

Is that because he wants to build a wall or because he casts aside the advice of competent people?

Well Winning the presidency in my judgement assumes that the will of the nation elected Trump? Not sure how else to quantify it. If HRC was the will of the nation then she should have won right?

My assumptions for Kavanaugh's qualifications are purely based on his Judge record, his opinions and his positions he has faithfully executed. With that the endorsements of the edify associations like the Bar association and his Alma Mater. So political operative, Well thats just tough... A Republican President will elect a conservative judge, a Democrat President will elect a Liberal judge? Kinda hard NOT to avoid that. IT would be a surprise in my book if a Republican POTUS selects a liberal judge and vice versa no?


NOT only for the wall. His first action was the Travel ban, this was focused around the Terrorist associated countries on Obamas watch list. Because they lacked the ability to vet their travelers Trump so NO bueno if we dont know or can verify who you are.

The Wall is yet a facet, But that includes the ZERO tolerance at the border. Also Incarceration legislation

ITs NOT all perfect he is but one man with many flaws just like myself. but to deny at least the basis of what he is doing does NOTHING for our country. HE is a MORAL scumbag.... But what benefits has he done for Russia? What policies that he has tried HAS NOT benefited AMERICANS? What policies benefits a MINORITY group ONLY. (Cough DACA....)

He is the Least charismatic, least bedside manners and scummy to say the least.. but again his policies have warrants. NOT perfect. BUT I choose to see what I can do for my country many, NOT what fits just my pockets..

 

[pamak]

We surely can and ultimately, the nation made the political judgement NOT to elect HRC.

Currently thats all we have is Political Judgement. as NO law was broken, we can armchair quarterback all we want, but the "what we thought they would do" didnt happen.

Its the same as the Kavannaugh, Currently Kavannaugh could be GUILTY as HELL for all we KNOW. but with out proof and only allegations that all it is. So instead of focusing on the non Corroborate allegations we should focus on the facts and merit at hand IS and will kavannaugh be a good SCOTUS Judge? out side of the questionable unknown his qualifications are sound.

This goes with Trump and his team currently they CAN maintain their innocents and other can accuse them ALL DAY... but without factual corroborating evidence its merely an accusation. ALL we can do now is either support Trumps policies or hope that the checks and balances built within the co-equally branches of government prevail.

As for Russian hacking. The reason why it was still under investigation, Intelligence is the discovery, Investigators are the fact finders and the Judges are those that apply the law. Ive state it in multiple post. I have dealt with intelligence. It is NOT end all be ALL. Intelligence is NOT Gods words, Intelligence is another tool in the tool box to make decision on how to act. FOR what ever UNKNOWN reason Trump is NOT taking the Intelligence as Gospel. Again...."Iraq and WMD" that was intelligence that TOOK us to WAR in which I participated my self and was there on the ACTUAL front lines (if that matters for credibility purposes)


With your Final point and in ALL fairness, the BEST part and most Relevant part to you and I as fact is..... likely no laws were broken, Trump porbably didnt collude ..... BUT.... Public opinion and secondly Political opinion is what sets the FINAL tone....

With that..... Trump has been maintaining his innocence while pushing form some drastic legislation. Repeal ACA, Tax Cuts, Border Wall, Etc etc....

as we Approach 2020 the only thing I hear from his opposition, Green New Deal and investigate Trump.

Politically for the next POTUS if not Trump.... Their Job is. by POTUS job description

1) Protect American Citizens
2) Enforce Existing Laws
3) Propose a budget
4) Propose new Laws
5) Command our Military.

This is HOW I vote? NOT if I personally like a person or not. Now help me....... If political opinion a driving factor. Trump wants to protect Americans. Cut taxes, in addition cutting a debt like ACA, build a wall and immigration reform. Scale back our Military operations and bring them HOME.


What or how is the DEMS or opposition party planning to address as such? That would RADICALLY change my vote to a Democrat?

But only because we learned Hillary's dirty laundry and not Trump's. Considering that Trump could not even get the popular vote, we do not know the result if voters knew about the dirty laundry of BOTH of the candidates!

So, I am saying that we should ask for more transparency for everybody so that informed voters can make meaningful political choices. And by the way, one can recall that some times even collaborators and traitors act on ideological reasons believing that their version of politics is good for the whole nation. So, just because one may agree with a candidate's political platform, it does not mean that he should give a pass to a candidate who behaves in a way which reveals his hope that a foreign government will help him win the election. This is not how America becomes "Great." This is how America becomes a Banana Republic!

 

[Atomic Kid]

"Former" is key so again HE WAS NOT an active British Spy. He is a "Foriegn" National. WITH that he was dismissed Already by the FBI. So when you so solicit help from foreign government the Former MI6 agent was likely still using his prior life resources.

as for hiring through the law firm, YES as I stated. HRC/DNC used methods that was within the realms of legality and obscurity. TRUMP's campaign did the EXACT same thing by context. JUST not through some what safe covering your bases means....

The way that steel sourced his info? Is that not similar to how the "Russian" lawyer tricked Jr in the tower meeting. I mean it was solicited to THEM not the other way around? Did HRC/DNC through the lawfirm the Fusion actually solicit the info from Steele? Thus Steel Solicit the info from Russians or Russian contacts?

I really would hate to play semantics and games. Let me say this again.

1) Was the method that HRC/DNC obtain the Dossier Illegal? No doesnt seem like it
2) was the method that Jr/Kushner being contacted to have a Trump tower meeting illegal to gain "dirt" on HRC illegal? NO, as no charges have been filed
2a) Caveat, the disclosure OF the meeting is the question at hand about lying about it... BUT the meeting itself was in NO way illegal NOR factualization of "collusion"

Where in the world do you come up with this nonsense? Passing that off as being "semantics" would actually be giving that pile of mish/mash more credit than it deserves.

 

[Exactice]

But only because we learned Hillary's dirty laundry and not Trump's. Considering that Trump could not even get the popular vote, we do not know the result if voters knew about the dirty laundry of BOTH of the candidates!

So, I am saying that we should ask for more transparency for everybody so that informed voters can make meaningful political choices. And by the way, one can recall that some times even collaborators and traitors act on ideological reasons believing that their version of politics is good for the whole nation. So, just because one may agree with a candidate's political platform, it does not mean that he should give a pass to a candidate who behaves in a way which reveals his hope that a foreign government will help him win the election. This is not how America becomes "Great." This is how America becomes a Banana Republic!

Actually you said it, in your last post and again cant disagree at all you are 100% This is political view and opinions. Comey screwed the pooch by his Dirty laundry release at the critical time. WAS that Trumps Fault?

Secondly, FBI was already watching Carter Page For years prior Now. The DNC/HRC HAD the Dossier released prior to the NOV election Date.

Enough dirty laundry for both sides where out there. I assume....... It was Trumps focus on political issues. In all honesty in many debates HRC argued morals and values. BUT limited discussion about policies. Trump Hit up Policies and a LOT (BUT negated to go into detail) But that was something voters attached too?

Popular vote conversation is NULL in my opinion as its been discussed in Great lengths (4.8mill Popular vote in California Alone) YET HRC's Net Popular Vote was 2.4mil nation wide. THIS was how and why the Electorate was designed. To prevent a LARGE single state to dictate the Elections. This just means that the MAJORITY of the Electorate (States) Voted in Favor of Trump less the popular individual votes.


As for informed Voters? Well That is NOT the Fault of the Candidates In all fairness. I DO NOT blame HRC nor TRUMP. There was a HUGE amount of mismanagement and TERRIBLE choices by those that Exercised their options.

1) We have KNOWN Russia, China, NK to attack our Elections process. PERIOD. 17 Agencies knew. YET could NOT act, or be Transparent with the people to make a PSA? (Announcement?)
2) HRC case was mismanaged SO bad and NOT HRC not even Repbs to blame. It was the FBI and DOJ. The AG Tarmac meeting was Terrible, that aint HRC's Fault and Repubs didnt put AG Lynch up to do it. Comey Releasing his statement 10 days prior to the election, That aint HRC, Repbs, or Trumps fault either. HORRIBLE mismanagement, that created Political questions more than answer.


As for your claim that yet AGIAIN Trump was hoping, wanting did get help from a foreign government. I think you are REACHING. Russian setup bots through Social media. If people were that ignorant to take that info as gospel and vote based on it thats on them.

Secondly The HACK of the DNC if prove by Russians. is a HACK on the DNC. Releasing 30,000 discerning emails while illegal is still the facts of Jon Podesta disdain and the issue within the DNC. Period. Is on Wiki leaks, Not on Trump.

LOTS of Terrible actions on ALL fronts PERIOD.... So AS an AMERICAN voter... if the WHOLE damn thing is shady... what should you factually fall on?

Policies that the Candidate is running on to forward the Political Purpose of the office of the President no?

 

[Exactice]

Where in the world do you come up with this nonsense? Passing that off as being "semantics" would actually be giving that pile of mish/mash more credit than it deserves.

? Instead of saying its nonsense please clarify why?

HRC & Trump Was BOTH looking for opposition research (dirt) how ever you want to CALL IT. IN CONTEXT its the SAME thing?

HRC did it through smart legitimate ways. BUT they SOUGHT OUT the info. through a law firm, through Fusion, through Steel and then Russians
TRUMP was Solicited by his Financial Ties, that was Contacted by a RUSSIAN lawyer. DID the Campaign, Kusher/Jr. ACTIVELY Seek this info? NO It was brought to them. HOW the had the meeting was Shady as hell BUT NOT illegal. What is in question is their disclosures of meeting with ALL russian which NONE are found to be illegal.

BOTH trying to obtain the same thing. YES semantics on what side of the isle you are on and how you want to tweek it.

WAS Trump method of obtaining Dirt on HRC illegal? YES OR NO? DID THEY ACTIVELY solicit it? YES OR NO?

HRC/DNC PAID a Firm to actively seek dirt.. YES OR NO?