Buffalo_Gal Posted May 17, 2019 Posted May 17, 2019 20 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said: Also, the radio link to the interview was listed earlier. Here's a link to a youtube of the full 15 min interview: Hemmer: Democrats would charge that you are the president's attorney now. Barr: They don't know what they are talking about. I laughed out loud. Made me think he wanted to say that (and worse) about the Democrats more than once during this interview. 3 1
Albwan Posted May 17, 2019 Posted May 17, 2019 4 hours ago, Buffalo_Gal said: Juan Williams gives idiots a bad name. That guy... I'm not sure who irritates me more Juan or Marie Harf. 1
Deranged Rhino Posted May 17, 2019 Posted May 17, 2019 47 minutes ago, Albwan said: I'm not sure who irritates me more Juan or Marie Harf. Harf for me. Juan is a partisan and defender of the message. Harf is from the intelligence community and plays down her biases/background to a duplicitous degree.
njbuff Posted May 17, 2019 Posted May 17, 2019 49 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said: Harf for me. Juan is a partisan and defender of the message. Harf is from the intelligence community and plays down her biases/background to a duplicitous degree. Barf and Whine Williams are useless hacks. If you ever watch The Five and it’s their turn to talk (whichever nimrod is on), the mute button is your best friend. Trust me, it works wonders.
3rdnlng Posted May 17, 2019 Posted May 17, 2019 1 hour ago, Deranged Rhino said: Harf for me. Juan is a partisan and defender of the message. Harf is from the intelligence community and plays down her biases/background to a duplicitous degree. I thought Harf was a State Dept. spokesperson in the past? 1
Deranged Rhino Posted May 17, 2019 Posted May 17, 2019 Just now, 3rdnlng said: I thought Harf was a State Dept. spokesperson in the past? She was -- with a CIA background. The CIA and State Department are interwoven by design, State provides the cover for almost all the officers for example. 1
3rdnlng Posted May 17, 2019 Posted May 17, 2019 3 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said: She was -- with a CIA background. The CIA and State Department are interwoven by design, State provides the cover for almost all the officers for example. A good example might be "Berlin Station"? 2
Deranged Rhino Posted May 17, 2019 Posted May 17, 2019 1 minute ago, 3rdnlng said: A good example might be "Berlin Station"? Yup. It's also (one of the many) reasons why the breach of Clinton's servers -- or the way she handled those servers at all -- is so f'ing dangerous. Sec State has access to almost everything in Langley as well as State, including the lists of all the non cover personnel deployed in hostile/foreign governments. People died because of her (intentional?) mishandling of information. It was, more than likely, how the Chinese managed to round up and kill dozens of CIA assets as another example.
njbuff Posted May 17, 2019 Posted May 17, 2019 What are the odds of these “MANY” bad players actually going to prison? Of course, depending on what Barr and co. find? MSM will break their backs to try and cover for these people as they will be trashing Durham full speed before you know it. 1
B-Man Posted May 17, 2019 Posted May 17, 2019 ‘Nervous?’ Adam Schiff has a BIG problem with Bill Barr investigating roots of Mueller probe 1
3rdnlng Posted May 17, 2019 Posted May 17, 2019 8 minutes ago, B-Man said: ‘Nervous?’ Adam Schiff has a BIG problem with Bill Barr investigating roots of Mueller probe It's like telling a cop he's an ugly pig when he pulls you over for speeding. I don't think he's going to get off with a warning. 1
Deranged Rhino Posted May 18, 2019 Posted May 18, 2019 1 hour ago, njbuff said: What are the odds of these “MANY” bad players actually going to prison? Of course, depending on what Barr and co. find? MSM will break their backs to try and cover for these people as they will be trashing Durham full speed before you know it. I'm not sure the answer, that's the big question looming over all of this at the moment. I expect there to be indictments of multiple high ranking FBI and DOJ officials in the very near future (Comey, Baker, McCabe almost certainly, maybe a couple more) and for those indictments/prosecutions to lead to other areas like former intelligence chiefs. That will come on the heels of (or perhaps simultaneously with) the DOJ-IG report focused on the FISA abuse. There's also a separate criminal leak investigation running parallel to this which will also spin off indictments -- there will be overlap for those main three in these indictments in my estimation. Being indicted doesn't assure anyone goes to jail, of course. I have been convinced for awhile that more than just one or two "Scooter Libby" types will do actual time -- considering the stakes, an example must be set to assure that this kind of overreach and abuse can never happen again. But that's speculation of course. I do believe that regardless of how the above shakes out, there will be a major push for reforms to the FISC and oversight of the intelligence community. That's going to be every bit as important as making examples out of the guilty. Just my take. 1
njbuff Posted May 18, 2019 Posted May 18, 2019 1 hour ago, B-Man said: ‘Nervous?’ Adam Schiff has a BIG problem with Bill Barr investigating roots of Mueller probe This jackhammer wanted naked pictures of Trump. That's all I need to know about this guy. 10 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said: I'm not sure the answer, that's the big question looming over all of this at the moment. I expect there to be indictments of multiple high ranking FBI and DOJ officials in the very near future (Comey, Baker, McCabe almost certainly, maybe a couple more) and for those indictments/prosecutions to lead to other areas like former intelligence chiefs. That will come on the heels of (or perhaps simultaneously with) the DOJ-IG report focused on the FISA abuse. There's also a separate criminal leak investigation running parallel to this which will also spin off indictments -- there will be overlap for those main three in these indictments in my estimation. Being indicted doesn't assure anyone goes to jail, of course. I have been convinced for awhile that more than just one or two "Scooter Libby" types will do actual time -- considering the stakes, an example must be set to assure that this kind of overreach and abuse can never happen again. But that's speculation of course. I do believe that regardless of how the above shakes out, there will be a major push for reforms to the FISC and oversight of the intelligence community. That's going to be every bit as important as making examples out of the guilty. Just my take. Nobody trusts rank in file people of the justice departments because of the high ranking foul players of these agencies. It shouldn't be that way, but it is. Hopefully this gets put to rest one way or the other.
Deranged Rhino Posted May 18, 2019 Posted May 18, 2019 4 minutes ago, njbuff said: This jackhammer wanted naked pictures of Trump. That's all I need to know about this guy. Nobody trusts rank in file people of the justice departments because of the high ranking foul players of these agencies. It shouldn't be that way, but it is. Hopefully this gets put to rest one way or the other. To give you a ray of hope, I think there's a reason the last two years were spent prioritizing judicial confirmations and firing/demoting/removing swaths of career bureaucrats inside the DOJ: they were clearing the decks of the bad actors ahead of what's coming. They at least seem to be planning on giving our justice system the chance to prove it's no longer two tiered... that will be key towards rebuilding faith in key institutions. 2 2
Deranged Rhino Posted May 18, 2019 Posted May 18, 2019 Correct. Cillizza thinks you're too stupid to remember basic facts - or he is too stupid to remember basic facts. They will try and try to spin this but they can't escape the truth: the media was always in on this con job from the start. 22 hours ago, Deranged Rhino said: I'm away from my notes on Jake, so I have to double check the sequence -- but essentially it went like this: * Clapper/Brennan were pushing the dossier to not just the FBI/DOJ but also to select members of Congress in the hopes of it leaking to the press (this went on for much of October/November/Dec). No one in the media would bite on the dossier because even they saw how nutty it was. * Post election win for Trump, Clapper/Brennan go to Comey and try to get him to insert it into the daily brief (though, Brennan already had done so) so that the media would have a "hook" to publish the dossier. * Clapper then has a meeting with CNN and Jake Tapper the day before (maybe a few days, I have the exact date in my notes) Comey briefs Trump and Obama on the dossier. Clapper then tells Comey before this briefing that CNN has it (because Clapper and Jake talked about it) -- which gives Comey the "cover" to say that media outlets are getting ready to publish. * Comey and Clapper both then confirm to Jake at CNN (anonymous sources) that both Trump and Potus were briefed on this dossier and CNN runs with it on Jake's show, this "legit" coverage gives Buzzfeed the push it needed (along with 1.5 million dollars from Obama's PAC after the election) to publish the dossier in full. * Jake Tapper then gets Clapper a job on CNN post transition and gives him a platform to push disinformation for two+ years. This was (an almost unprovable) quid pro quo between the two when they met. Jake's the second most compromised personality on CNN behind CIAooper. His wife has deep ties to some of the most insidious elements of the uniparty cabal as well. Jake's a bad guy -- and he's going to try to play the middle in the weeks to come and hope that he's spared blowback. Adding to this -- this sequence is what Barr is highlighting here. That it's the first thing he mentions about what troubled him when he started poking around is telling. (Posting for the Barr clip above) 3 1
Deranged Rhino Posted May 18, 2019 Posted May 18, 2019 And now, the officials are squabbling over who pushed the dossier. Why? Because the dossier — a Clinton-campaign opposition-research screed, based on anonymous Russian sources peddling farcical hearsay, compiled by a well-paid foreign operative (former British spy Christopher Steele) — is crumbling by the day. As I write, we mark the two-year anniversary of Robert Mueller’s appointment to take over the Russiagate probe — which is fast transforming into the Spygate probe. Special Counsel Mueller inherited the investigation seven months after the Obama Justice Department and FBI sought a FISC warrant to monitor former Trump-campaign adviser Carter Page. By then, it was already acknowledged that dossier information was “salacious and unverified,” to quote congressional testimony by former FBI director James Comey. That was problematic on a number of levels. If dossier claims were still unverified when Comey testified to Congress in mid 2017 (and thereafter), then those claims could not have been verified when the Obama Justice Department and FBI submitted it to the FISC as a “VERIFIED APPLICATION” in October 2016. It also had to have been unverified on January 6, 2017, when the Obama administration chose to include a sliver of the dossier in the briefing of President-elect Trump — the day after intelligence chiefs met with President Obama in the Oval Office and discussed what Russia information should be shared with the incoming Trump team. 3
njbuff Posted May 19, 2019 Posted May 19, 2019 John Brenna was the head of the CIA. Let that sink in for a minute. It's a good thing I knew nothing or could have cared less about politics when Obama was in office because it was one big clown show in the Oval Office from 2008-16. Some would say from 1988-2016. ?
Recommended Posts