Header Image (book)

aowheader.3.2.gif

Friday, August 12, 2022

Get it Off Your Chest 8/12/22

 

Open Comments 

Comments from trolls and rants against administrators will still be deleted.

 By Warren   

Coming: A post on the historical and recent problems in the FBI.






160 comments:

  1. Hillary Clinton had a dozen phones and computers smashed , , & pulverized that had been subpoenaed by the FBI. Nothing happened to her. The Democrats already had control of the DOJ even before 2016.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That what the DEI Commissars are for.

      Delete
    2. The DoJ and OCR are like thepolitical officers that run the parallel chain of command in Guard: units like in the old USSR military. The other offices are merely "penal" units.

      Delete
    3. The "guard units:" are there to ensure that the "penal units" don't retreat from Diversity, Equity, & Inclusion (DEI) goals.

      Delete
    4. And Hillary was investigated by the DOJ and the GOP for months. They found she acted inappropriately, but did not break the law.

      That led a GOP controlled Congress to change the law regarding Admin officials being in possession of classified docs outside of secure places a felony.

      It was signed into law in 2018 by President Trump.

      So while we may not have liked what HRC did, at least then, it was not criminal. Stupid. Maddening. Even wrong. But not criminal.

      Delete
    5. Correction, Dave. Comey announced a couple weeks before the election that she did violate the law but could not be prosecuted because she did not "do so with criminal intent." If they find technical violations in Trump's case, will they require similar standards of criminal intent?

      Delete
    6. Hillary broke federal statutes with her mishandling of classified information, Dave. She broke the law. Intentionally.

      Ordinary Joe's in the military get prosecuted for less than what she did, but her Royal heinous, and the rest of the syndicates made men, are above the law.

      Delete
    7. Or.... just like the "Twump weally won" whining we've heard for over a year and a half, when it came time to go to court on anything about Hillary, the Republicans had zip nada nothing but friction burns from high speed circle jerking.

      At this rate you'd think the Republican Party would have even accidentally convicted a Democrat of some malfeasance by now. The hyperventilating is simply just boring now.

      Delete
    8. Not hyperventilating. Just establishing the facts of what we are talking about.

      Delete
    9. (((Thought Criminal)))August 12, 2022 at 4:07:00 PM CDT

      Speaking of establishing the facts, how many congressional hearings does it take to exonerate Hillary Clinton? I'm not exactly a fan of hers, but the worst thing she did, openly, was collaborate with the media to give Trump $3 Billion in free air time to blow out the 2016 GOP primaries and secure him the Republican nomination. If she wasn't going to win the Presidency she was going to at least still get a Republican Party destroying leftist in the White House. The guy held on to her "Obama is a Kenyan" campaign fundraising nonsense longer than anybody... the perfect toolbag to end and reverse the trend of Republicans winning elected office at all levels.

      But turning 25 years of Republican anti-Clinton smears into Clinton prison sentences, "lock her up!" - it's clearly more likely that rather than the Clintons being criminal masterminds, the Republicans are actually just full of shit. Wad was shot, no effect.

      Not even John Barron's flawless Donald Trump impressions can fix that.

      Delete
    10. Hillary broke the law when she mishandled classified information.

      As for the hearings, I don't even know what the GOP was trying to accomplish. I don't think they know.

      Delete
    11. (((Thought Criminal)))August 13, 2022 at 3:13:00 AM CDT

      They certainly didn't come up with anything like demonstrating that Hillary Clinton mishandled classified information. A good story shows, not tells. Did Hillary Clinton mishandle classified information? Not by the lights of the literally hundreds of people officially tasked to show that. Why should anyone take an unsubstantiated political smear as gospel? Trump couldn't "lock her up" because she needed to have committed a crime first. Facts don't care about your feelings.

      Delete
    12. Its not up to congress. Comey said she broke the law, but acting as investigator and prosecutor, said she didn't have criminal intent, so he wasn't charging her.

      I understand the Hillary people being pissed that it played out during the election season.

      Delete

  2. There is a policy not to go after politicians before an election within a 90 day window before an election, is a policy attempting to prevent the FBI from influencing elections in a partisan way, i. e. corruption.

    So they did it 91 days before an election

    ReplyDelete
  3. All week long, Fox was busy duping the gullibles.

    Sean Hannity: “All they needed to do was issue a simple subpoena, and that would have mandated that if there's anything left, you turn it over,” -

    Jessie Waters: “If Trump is not allowed to keep all this stuff, fine, Get a subpoena, he will give it back. It's not like Trump won't cooperate.”

    Charlie Gasparino: “It looks like one of the worst abuses of justice that we've seen in a long time. I mean literally, they could have asked for the stuff, they could have subpoenaed the stuff but they came with FBI agents, guns out.”

    Byron York: “No subpoena for the documents. They didn't use any less intrusive method to get the documents and, bang, there's 30 FBI Agents at Mar-a-Lago. We don't know why that happened.”

    Lawrence Jones: “Why didn't they just subpoena the president to go through the documents? Why the raid, why the show of force?”

    Will Cain: “Last night's rate of the former president's home had nothing to do with the retention of classified materials. You can handle missing records with a subpoena. You don't come kicking the doors and end up blowing open safes.”

    Problem with that horseshit is that months were spent trying to negotiate which failed and a grand jury issued a subpoena for the docs months ago.

    Yet, the gullibles continue to shovel it down.




    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. They were negotiating to get the nuclear launch codes back? Who knew?

      Delete
    2. Wow Ronald. You sure consume a lot of right wing media

      Delete
    3. The left media keeps looking for the MacGuffin that will eventually disqualify Trump and the right media keeps debunking it... as ducky would say, "the struggle is eternal".

      Delete
    4. Ron... notice no one proffered an answer to the obvious question... When someone resists a legal subpoena and refuses to comply, how should law enforcement respond?

      With another subpoena? By asking again nicely? Just giving up?

      As you pointed out, there was a legal subpoena already in force and the Trump team was slow walking/ignoring it.

      Delete
    5. So in reality, the Trumper's are the skeptics, not the gullibles.

      Delete
    6. The when are the documents that Trump declassified on his last day in office exposing FBI malfeasance going to be released, Dave? in 2025 when Trump returns to office? Talk about a slow-walk...

      Delete
    7. Given their cultish adulation in the face of systemic and pathological lying by dear leader……nope.

      - CI

      Delete
    8. ...or would it put too many of your IC buddies out of work, CI?

      Delete
    9. I have to admit the recent devolution by conservatives as it relates to law enforcement is stunning. For years poor folks, libs and minorities decried unequal treatment by not just cops, but the entire judicial system. And for years, most conservatives told us to pound sand.

      Maybe someone can tell me what caused the abrupt switch in views over the last year or so?

      For example...

      Author Liz Wheeler mocked BLM for calling to defund the police, saying it would make a mockery of law enforcement and safety. Now she calls for the abolishment of the FBI.

      Rep MTG said "Crime is exploding in Democrat-run cities ... this is 100% the result of their left-wing policies of defunding the police, backing BLM / ANTIFA, destroying families, and coddling of criminals!" Now she's calling to "Defund the FBI."

      Todd Starnes has crime and violence is what happens when you defund police and law enforcement. Now he calls for defunding and dismantling the FBI.

      Why?

      For decades, when police overstepped their mandates to protect and committed violence against the American people, conservatives said it was just a few "rogue cops." That the system was not bad.

      Systems cannot be bad we were told, only people.

      Maybe someone here can explain to me what changed? Why are conservatives suddenly converts to the idea of law enforcement overreach and systemic problems, when for years they denied those problems even existed?

      Delete
    10. “Back the Blue” has always been a scam.

      - CI

      Delete
    11. Yep.

      Sadly I've even heard a MAGA doofus down at the breakfast cafe say out loud what they're thinking. "Why is the FBI treating Trump like he's a [N-word slur for black person.]"

      Shit ya not.

      Delete
    12. Dave,

      That's a neat rhetorical trick, conflating local police with an armed and politicized federal bureaucracy that can throw your ass in jail and tie you up forever with expensive legal defense.

      Delete
    13. And speaking only for myself, at the time of the Ferguson incident, I blogged about how that municipality was basically using its police force to extort money from poor citizens via all kinds of ticketed infractions

      Delete
    14. There's no grey, sf, only black and white. Police all perfect, or police all corrupt.

      Delete
    15. The fact that FBI and DoJ aren't openly exhibitting their bias' against Republicans is because of the fact that statistically, more Republicans are corrupt scumbags and accepting of criminal behaviour, and most Democrats are honest Joe's fighting for and defending the rights of the people....

      Blacks aren't statistically more likely to be both perp and victim....

      ...e-r-p-p-p!

      Delete
  4. The IRS is coming after the middle class and working class. Yellen swore that the percentage of audits would not increase for people making less than $400,000.

    Currently, 75% of all audits are of people making less than $200,000. Most of those audits target people making under $100,000.

    Nothing but word games emanating from DC

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I’m amused by all the people who didn’t know that the IRS had armed agents. Best not tell them about the Post Office….

      - CI

      Delete
    2. Hell the EPA has armed agents. OSHA too.

      Delete
  5. Silver... that is the talking point of the right. But if people correctly file their taxes, and keep good records, after the change in the tax code during the Trump admin, it won't make much difference for the average filer.

    Now those passive income folks and high earners?

    Maybe so.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Nice try Dave. A mathematical fact is not a talking point. The number of audits will defacto increase, on the middle class and working class.

      The federal government is channeling bank robber Willie Sutton. Why go after the middle class and working class?

      Because that's where the easy money is.

      People making over 400,000, and well-funded businesses know how to lawyer up.

      Delete
    2. SF, fact checkers aren't on you side on this one. You sound like you've stayed too long at the Tucker, Hannity, York, Waters, Cain etc trough. It's the wealth protecting propaganda machine TELLING you they're going after the working class. It's the latest and greatest and as we know, fear mongering is their specialty.

      The GOP has been applying their 1000 cuts to the IRS for years, taking needed recourses while giving a free pass to their mega donors.

      Time Magazine is pretty much spot on:

      "A Treasury Department report from May 2021 estimated that [investments in line with the spending from the Inflation Reduction Act] would enable the agency to hire roughly 87,000 employees by 2031. But most of those hires would not be Internal Revenue agents, and wouldn’t be new positions. According to a Treasury Department official, the funds would cover a wide range of positions including IT technicians and taxpayer services support staff, as well as experienced auditors who would be largely tasked with cracking down on corporate and high-income tax evaders."

      Fred Goldberg, Charles Rossotti and John Koskinen wrote:
      “In fact, for ordinary Americans who already fulfill their tax obligations, audit scrutiny will decline, because the IRS will be better at selecting returns for examination. This bill is about getting to the heart of the problem and pursuing high-end taxpayers and corporations who today illegally evade their tax obligations.”

      That's been the problem-the IRS not having the resources to go after expensive corporate tax lawyers.

      Dave, GOP advocating lawlessness for their own really isn't anything new but they have become bolder. They've been crying "deregulate" corporations for years. By definition, make them lawless.

      Delete
    3. On the subject of the IRS, it bears noting that there will be nowhere near 87,000 newly minted, armed jackboots, ready to bust down the door of Cletus's single wide. Another talking point for the rubes.

      Delete
    4. Keep spinning boys.

      The factory remains, 75% of audits are on people making less than $200,000.

      Democrats have stated that the purpose of this additional funding is to go after tax cheats, and they have said they will not adjust the ratios of who gets audited.

      If you cannot follow that simple logic, I cannot help you further.

      Delete
    5. But you can admit, that there are not 87,000 pending armed IRS agents, right?

      Delete
    6. Admit???

      Why would you pose such a question to me? Nowhere in my comments that I say anything like that. Go light another straw man on fire.

      Delete
    7. Dems are on record stating anyone earning over $50,000 annually are considered "Rich - High Earners".
      This fact cannot be denied. It is in Congressional Record!

      Delete
  6. BTW Warren... the only thing missing is the special Pee Wee belt buckle on the Senator.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Dave Miller,

    Since we're asking questions about who supported what when, here's a question for you.

    How did the left, who used to stand up for civil liberties, come to be such cheerleaders for organizations like the CIA and the FBI? The FBI spied on Dr Martin Luther King, and others who had the temerity to question our government. You all good with that?

    The CIA has a legacy of murder drug trafficking human trafficking and all kinds of other horrible things in Latin America. You all good with that?

    You tell us, how you have become such a cheerleader for these organizations

    ReplyDelete
  8. A better question SF is- who is telling you that the left have become cheerleaders for such organizations?

    Could it be that you easily confuse "cheerleading" for simply calling bullshit, just as above where you confuse my calling out Fox News bullshit as "consuming right wing media"?

    It's kinda like above when you spew something about some inability to follow logic when your sole game is to reject logical inputs that conflicts with your desired logical outputs.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Ronald, shut up and stay out of it. I was asking Dave Miller. Your comments are nonsense.

      Delete
    2. And yes Ronald, you suck at logic. I made a simple factual statement about what percentage of people making under $200,000 a year get audited. I also restated with a Democrats said. I did not mention the number of agents. I simply stated that the Democrats themselves stated the purpose of this legislation was to go after tax cheats with more audits.

      If you don't want another logical lesson, stop blabbering nonsense

      Delete
    3. Ohh wee, is someone mad??

      Did I step in on your private conversation?

      Does your “shut up and stay out of it” apply to every time FJ does his rodeo clown act in our convos?

      And next time I converse with that nut job, are you bound by your own rules to “shut up and stay out of it”? Seems to be a new set of rules?

      Very good week for team blue and a very bad week for both team red and team orange. As outlined previously, the more
      the rabbit hole widens, the more deranged you become.

      By apologies for not knowing how to compute rabbit hole logic.

      Delete
    4. If you cannot understand basic facts, I don't know what else I can do for you.

      I asked a question of Dave, not you. If you had provided a cogent reply, we could have engaged productively, but I have no patience for your regurgitated talking points. If you ever expressed an original thought, I'd be pleasantly surprised.

      Delete
  9. Silver... where do I start?

    1. A rhetorical trick? If you think poor folks, minorities and immigrants who struggle with over policing, over zealous prosecutors and "rogue" officers are only talking about local police, you're not paying attention. This has been a systemic problem for decades as conservatives by and large have defined the problem as just a few bad apples or "rogue" units. Local, state or federal.

    There are plenty of good cops, local, state and federal. But the system by and large has been corrupted.

    2. I don't recall even mentioning the CIA but thanks for conflating their stupid behavior since their inception with what I said. Talk about rhetorical tricks. Iran, Iraq, Latin America, etc.

    3. As for the FBI and King, yeah it was horrible. But given the alternative, local, racist, BS, lying police forces across the south and other areas, most African American ppl I know will gladly look the other way on that. Because those federal cops forced the south to integrate, follow the law, and helped usher in the Civil Rights Era. Heck, my brother in law had to take federal marshals with him to Alabama in the early 2000's to deal with education discrimation. Why? Because the local police refused to safeguard him.

    Look, I've never been a lock step leftie, and you darn well know that. I've openly criticized left leaning politicians, writers and thinkers. As I have those on the right. I've detailed excesses and defined as best I can, the extremes from the left, something very few on the right have even attempted. I did not vote for Gore, Kerry or HRC.

    I'm no cheerleader. And in this case, as I stated above, I'm not happy that we now know Fmr Pres Trump had in his possession documents classified at an extremely high level.

    It's just a fact and stating that, and the applicable laws and asking people to respond to that is not cheerleading.

    I'm sorry if the guy most people here supported for president has now apparently been found to have broken the law. Believe me, that's how I felt when Nixon resigned. Because I walked precincts for him.

    But it was bad not because he was "my guy" even as a young kid, but because it was bad for our country. But I was not going to defend him. He was caught red handed, as the saying goes.

    Time will tell if Trump was too. And then we may finally find out if he was right, he could stand in the middle of 5th Avenue, commit a crime and no one care.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Dave, you earned it. With your trollish why do conservatives... Rhetorical bomb throwing questions.

      You're a smart man, and I enjoy interacting with you, but that type of question can be turned right back around, which is why those types of questions are so damn boring and just a big waste of time.

      Delete
  10. (((Thought Criminal)))August 12, 2022 at 3:22:00 PM CDT

    ...Nevermind the roundabout implication that Donald Trump keeping classified information around to whip out to foreign party guests and God knows who else makes him Martin Luther King. I mean, we're not even getting a letter from the Birmingham jail out of the analogy. Forget about a "I have a dream that one day pleading the fifth with make a lawsuit go away like that Brady Bunch episode..."

    The stupid is palpable.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Speaking of stupid, why would you think that this in any way equates Trump to Martin Luther King?

      Delete
    2. (((Thought Criminal)))August 13, 2022 at 3:02:00 AM CDT

      What is that defection style? Saul Alinsky or Pee Wee Herman? It was, after all, your palpably stupid "Whataboutism:"

      "How did the left, who used to stand up for civil liberties, come to be such cheerleaders for organizations like the CIA and the FBI? The FBI spied on Dr Martin Luther King, and others who had the temerity to question our government. You all good with that?

      Your implications are? The FBI is wrong on Trump because they were wrong on Martin Luther King? That the left doesn't stand up for civil liberties because Trump got hself into legal troubles? That stealing TS/SCI classified documents and storing them in a utility closet is
      just "having temerity to question out government?"

      Pretty sure you're not supposed to wear the bear trap clamps around your face. Your gotcha got yourself. Pry that off and try again.

      Delete
    3. You read waaaaay too much into that comment.

      Let me recap.

      Dave Miller channeled a leftwing Tucker Carlson, feigning ignorance and sincerity in asking why conservatives have turned against the police (they have not), conflating hatred of the FBI with 'Defund the Police,' which I immediately pegged as a neat rhetorical trick.

      Questions like that are unproductive, trollish nonsense that can never advance the debate because they are designed only to inflame and spark a partisan political hissy fight of whataboutisms, you too-isms, etc.

      Any question like that can be turned around on the person who asked it, and that's what I did. "Why has the left, who used to be very critical of the CIA and FBI now cheerleading them?"

      Trump had absolutely nothing to do with any of that.

      See? We just wasted more time.

      Delete
    4. You also may want to see a doctor. Your galloping TDS, while understandable, is eating into your optic chiasm. All you see is all Trump all the time, in everything, and it had driven you into a permanent nutball rage and is clouding your otherwise sharp thinking.

      Delete
    5. I'm not saying the FBI can't be wrong. Apparently they've been aware of Trump's theft of TS/SCI files for quite some time and have thus far failed to knock his teeth out with a rifle butt in apprehending him. The conspiracy goes much deeper though. In 2016, nearly 63 million Americans conspired to give Trump access to TS/SCI data. These people will need to be rounded up and waterboarded with kerosene to find out who else they may be trying to grant access to classified data.

      Delete
    6. Perhaps you, beamish, CI or someone else, can describe the Grave Damage to National Security that arose from all those TS/SCI documents stored at Mar-a-Lago? Did Iran get the bomb from them? Venezuela? Surely the US suffered some "grave" damage...

      Delete
    7. Surely you have some "intelligence" not revealing sources or methods you can refer us to and to warrant an espionage charge for a former US President?

      Delete
    8. ...and of course, only the part of the search warrant related to what was to be searched for and what w found got released. The part dealing with what led anyone to believe that a crime had been committed was NOT, and in my estimation, NEVER will be.

      Then there are the missing documents. We don’t have the most important part of the warrant application: the affidavit in support prepared by an FBI agent. The affidavit would likely describe:

      The basis for believing that classified documents, including those relating to nuclear weapons, were at Mar-A-Lago;

      The history of the Trump classified documents investigation;

      The assertion of probable cause that Trump had committed a crime; and

      Information gathered through surveillance or through informants (most notably whoever told the FBI about the safe).

      Delete
    9. Wonder which of the Trump lawyers will be indicted for falsely claiming in a written statement to the DOJ in June that all classified material had been returned.

      -CI

      Delete
    10. What’s great news though, is that I should be able to start taking work home with me now. Apparently it’s no big deal……

      - CI

      Delete
    11. Nope. I can’t. Just like a former president can’t.

      Delete
    12. Good luck proving that the documents weren't. Its a "he said, she said".

      Delete
    13. “And then you go to… Attorney General Garland making a statement that he wants to be totally transparent. If he wants to be totally transparent, then he should make sure that the affidavits follow up on the warrant, and then you’d have transparency, Grassley said."

      Delete
    14. If information in Trump’s possession was declassified, there’s a record of that. If no record exists of Trump’s claims……he’s guilty. Period.

      Delete
    15. So, yeah…….I do have that.

      Delete
    16. Nope. he can just say the words... and say them to the Vladimir Putin, and its' 'done".

      Delete
    17. ...let the unelelected bureaucrats moan and whine all they want, the material is "declassified".

      Delete
    18. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    19. Regardless whether they heed the declassification orders or not. They're not the deciders. They're paid to follow orders.

      Delete
    20. And I'll say again, perhaps read it slower this time, if information is deemed declassified by POTUS.....there's a record of that. No record of declassification? Didn't happen.

      And the notion of some 'standing order' that whatever Trump took to the potty was considered declassified? Laughably absurd, but certainly bought into by the slacked-jawed sycophants.

      Delete
    21. The people who are there to "hear" orders don't get to decide which ones they "didn't hear".

      Delete
    22. "Hey boss, if I didn't write it down, you musta never said it!"

      Delete
    23. The process to disseminate declassification orders, and ensure that instances of that information is likewise declassified in all other finished intelligence products where it was cited...is not verbal. This is really not difficult to understand.

      Delete
    24. ...unless you're the PotUS. He wouldn't need 1 million minions, otherwise.

      Delete
    25. Now be a good little minion and go fetch your former Master his tea.

      Delete
    26. ...cuz the US Constitution doesn't address "declassification procedures".

      Delete
    27. Ah, so you don't understand. But you pretend you do anyway. Cool. You do you....I'll sit by and laugh.

      Delete
    28. ...and the laws grant the Executive the power to declassify everything and anything he wants to.

      Delete
    29. The Coherence of a Presidential order isn't a requirement under the Constitution.

      Delete
    30. Can presidents declassify matters directly?
      Yes, because it is ultimately their constitutional authority.

      Delete
    31. ...and so I will now continue to laugh.

      Delete
    32. ...whilst the minions argue amongst themselves about how best to clean up their mess.

      Delete
    33. Who here has ever argued that POTUS can't declassify? Are you even aware of what you're debating?

      Delete
    34. ...so if a tree falls in a forest and no bureaucrat heard it fall, it didn't make a sound.

      Delete
    35. Government.... the new omniscient "Big Other".

      Delete
    36. Appearances MUST be maintained lest the bureaucracy lose its' raison d'etre!

      Delete
    37. ...for without their symbols of authority, no one would <a href='https://youtu.be/WptlIruczS0">respect their "authoritah"</a>.. Charismatic <a href="https://youtu.be/zv9t7WZHHZc">they are NOT</a>!

      Delete
    38. I'm not speaking of bureaucrats. I'm speaking of analysts and other consumers of intelligence (not to mention sources, methods and capabilities), who would still be citing said information at the previously classified status, if POTUS were to mumble or think 'declassified'......without having the most basic sense of what his actions mean for an institution(s) of which he ultimately oversees.

      I'm not caring a whit about 'bureaucrats', I'm caring about those affected by the information, while not being PAI, would still be obtainable through other means. There are significant reasons why information is classified at the levels they are...which is why responsible POTUSs rely on advice and counsel before acting rashly.

      So while you rail against bureaucrats, you illustrate a fundamental un-education, like many Americans, on the subject that you're arguing.

      Once again, even slower.....if a sitting POTUS wants to declassify information.....and doesn't tell anybody.....it's not declassified. If there's no record of declassificiation.....it didn't happen. It can't happen. Because the rest of us operate in the real world, not an orange tinged fever dream.

      Delete
    39. So your saying that consistent paperwork should be PotUS chief concern when running the country. Got it. The bureaucracy is the ultimate Big Other, and so it's paperwork is the final arbiter of "reality", So Trump MUST face Buttle's end! Got it.

      @@

      Delete
    40. Wow. TC was right.....the stupid really is palpable.

      Delete
    41. It goes with unescapable ending, Brazil yesterday, today and FOREVER!

      Delete
    42. Who knew that Socrates' answer to the perennial question, "What is virtue?" is an efficient bureaucracy. Mr. Eichmann, your pardon awaits in the New Jerusalem. Miss Arendt, you were wrong. There is no evil in banality.

      Delete
    43. I'm sure you've a stellar career ahead of you in Susan Rice's SS.

      Delete
    44. What would we do without Susan and her fellow CI isnpired Mr. HelpMann's? How would we survive?

      Delete
    45. ...and would we even "exist" were our birth certificates unrecorded?

      Delete
  11. (((Thought Criminal)))August 12, 2022 at 3:36:00 PM CDT

    Any search warrant requires a representative of the plaintiff to be present to guard against improper procedures. Like planting evidence...

    Mmmm yes. The FBI smuggled in boxes of classified documents in their cargo shorts.

    The stupid is palpable.

    ReplyDelete
  12. In just the last few months the GOP has voted against…
    Lowering prescription drug prices
    Saving our plants from climate change
    Reproductive rights for women
    Tax increase for the wealthy
    Helping sick veterans

    But they do like….
    Having a dictator seat at CPAC
    Supports Trump’s idea for concentration camps
    Supports Trump’s theft of classified documents
    Supports Trump’s idea to ‘federalize’ the National Guard to make his own police force.
    Supports Trump’s contention that his generals should follow him like Hilter’s Generals.

    While Biden…
    Oversees a thriving economy
    Reducing gas prices Records unemployment
    Wage up
    Creating more jobs than Trump

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. What industry is that 'more jobs' coming from other than people needing 2 jobs to fight inflation? You can't raise gas prices this high and rejoice over reducing them for a few days! Wages up, purchasing power WAY down!!! Please supply the quote of Trump talking about generals and Hitler, and concentration camps :-) (that was your hero FDR, remember?)......AND, i always get such a kick from the rhetoric; Prescription drugs should go cheaper but it'll hurt new development...depending on what state your people have voted in women have all the reproductive rights they ever had!, hoping the wealthy always stay wealthy and not fall into Mao jackets "one for all" because then NOBODY gets hired, nobody gets free insurance, nobody builds luxury items because nobody can afford luxury! ON and ON the Left mischaracterizes and doesn't realize it's killing America. Good job. By the way; give the Right a CLEAN BILL and see how much Republicans are FOR ...they're FOR the people.

      Delete
    2. We most definitely MUST "save out plants from climate change!" lol

      Delete
    3. “I wish to have no connection with any ship that does not sail fast; for I intend to go in harm’s way."

      Anybody remember the USS Indianapolis tragedy? That's where the overclassification of data can send you. Especially if its raison d etre is no longer pertinent.

      Delete
  13. This is for CI. I know the Hillaryboi is too busy marinating in his own rage.

    The Reason Roundtable discussed the Democrat IRS plus up, and they are rightly very skeptical.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks SF, I’ll try and give it a listen this weekend.

      - CI

      Delete
    2. CI, a good time saving tip, if you're a quick listener, is to speed it up 20%, get through it faster

      Delete
  14. Going after former President Trump is an unprecedented move, and the FACT that they use a bottom of the barrel magistrate judge to get the warrant, as opposed to an actual Federal Judge? This stinks to high heavens.

    Perhaps when you have Stacy Abrahms,or Kamala Harris as your president you Democrats will be happy ,

    ReplyDelete
  15. Another day of the Trump team/supporters claiming that the FBI planted classified documents that he says he didn’t have, but that he magically declassified anyway.

    More popcorn please.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. ^ That’s was me. My phone won’t let me log into Blogger.

      - CI

      Delete
    2. (((Thought Criminal)))August 13, 2022 at 8:08:00 AM CDT

      My favorite thing to do currently is agree with the Trumpy Bears. If the FBI knew Trump had illegal possession of TS/SCI files all this time they should have caved his face in with a rifle butt long before this week! Join me in calling for the death penalty of this spy!

      Delete
    3. I'm taking the wait and see...

      I don't think anybody's coming clean out of this one when it all finally comes out... if it all ever comes out.

      Delete
    4. After all, too many people forget the FBI determined Hellary and her staff broke the law, but recommended no prosecution because they didn't mean to, or something like that. Huffpo has a nice recap, complete with sarcastic commentary

      https://www.huffpost.com/entry/fbi-clinton-was-extremely_b_10818458

      I make no apologies for Trump. If he was in possession of classified material, he needs to be prosecuted, just as Hellary should have been.

      Military people and low-level civilians were literally sent to prison for doing what Hellary did and what Trump is accused of doing.

      We do not have equality under the law.

      Delete
    5. The Trump scenario is slightly different, as we've known Trump is a spy for Russia since May 10, 2017. Trump has appeared several times in public since then, at widely advertised locations. There simply is no excuse why the FBI never swooped in, tossed flashbangs, and carefully dragged this enemy of the state by ankles in such a way that his forehead would bounce upon every stair and change in elevation. This is gross negligence on the FBI's part. Hopefully Merrick Garland will oversee changes to exigent warrant execution so that clearly known traitors get the express lane to the electric chair in the future. I'm reminded of the accounts of Julius Rosenberg's execution. Rosenberg had sought to avoid being executed on the Jewish Sabbath, so the Eisenhower Justice Department pulled strings to have Sing Sing execute him 8 hours ahead of schedule. That's an efficiency sorely lacking in today's Justice Department.

      Hopefully, we can restore public executions. Julius Rosenberg went out on the first zap. Ethel Rosenberg had to be shocked three times to carry out her sentence and her head caught on fire. That would have been funny to watch over and over on YouTube had someone had the foresight to film it. Hopefully when they fry. poison, shoot or hang Trump we can catch it on pay-per-view to raise money for securing America's borders against the threat of the Republican Party.

      Delete
    6. The Trump scenario is slightly different....

      I'm comfortable not going quite that far, and assessing rather him as a useful idiot.

      I was hoping though, that the warrant would have discovered Marina Gross's notes from Helsinki.

      Delete
    7. Trump does blur the lines between stupid and evil a bit often. For a while there it was a toss up. But no, it's become more than clear he's not accident prone. Clearly his assaults on national security have been intentional.

      Meanwhile at Mar-A-Lago

      Delete
    8. Physicians, heal thyselves....

      Shortly after 3 p.m., the Justice Department confirmed that Trump’s lawyers would not oppose the public release of the search warrant and underlying receipt of materials, which had already begun to circulate widely.

      Delete
    9. “A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants on.”

      Which is why the Democrats love "leaking" their "classified" MacGuffins.

      Delete
    10. Here, refute "this"... it's Top Secret/SCI... but you can't talk about the specifics cuz they're classified. You must trust us when we tell you its' "really bad" and that we punish these security violations consistently, regardless of office holder ability to render these classifications "moot"...

      As Bertolt Brecht once said, "What is the greater crime, the robbing of a bank, or the founding of a bank?"

      The "bankers" say that Trump's checks were never properly "cancelled" and are therefore still valid and subject to cash redemption. Should we believe them, or the check's issuer?

      Delete
    11. ...and the timeline for making the decision correspondes exaclt with the initiation of the Jan 6 Committee Hearings following a June scouting meeting that Trump's legal team had cooperated with.

      Delete
    12. The "raid" was merely an "advert" to collect MacGuffins for the promised resumption of the Jan 6 House committee hearings this fall. The ratings from the first set had suffered from lack of interest and new revelations.

      As noted by President Trump and numerous lawyers in/around his office, the U.S. Dept of Justice and FBI visited Mar-a-Lago on June 3, 2022, to review presidential documents kept in storage boxes there. After that visit the next contact with DOJ and FBI officials was the raid on August 8th.

      The original exploration of Mar-a-Lago took place before the first J6 hearing ever happened. The first J6 hearing took place June 9, a week after the DOJ and FBI initially went to Mar-a-Lago. Do not be naive. Intellectual honesty would accept the results of that June 3rd review were part of the larger Trump targeting dynamic.

      Delete
    13. Many more twists and turns to come.

      If DOJ has a real case, this will be tried in a court of law.

      If they don't, it will be tried in the court of public opinion.

      Delete
    14. (((Thought Criminal)))August 14, 2022 at 5:22:00 AM CDT

      Here, refute "this"... it's Top Secret/SCI... but you can't talk about the specifics cuz they're classified. You must trust us when we tell you its' "really bad" and that we punish these security violations consistently, regardless of office holder ability to render these classifications "moot"...

      If they weren't "really bad" and were "declassified" infomation, why didn't Trump upload it all to Truth Social, or raffle it off in a fundraising campaign?

      Psssst. Refuted. What did I win?

      Delete
    15. Give him time... he ordered most of it demonstrating the unconstitutional spying on US citizens to be redacted and published by the government when he left office, but they still haven't done so... "ongoing investigations" and all that rot.

      Delete
  16. Wow. The trolls and bots are angry this morning.....

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I can't camp out here 24/7. We zap the trolls when we find them.

      Delete
    2. Oh, absolutely. They don't bother me....I'm entertained by impotent rage. Can't see why they don't get the hint.

      Delete
    3. I don't understand why people take the time to type in long screeds of stale talking points.

      Delete
  17. Hey silverware, why are you constantly allowing these Idiots to write these DISGUSTING, and DISGRACEFUL COMMENTS, yet delete the reasonable comments from others?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Give us an example of a reasonable comment you think got deleted.

      Delete
  18. AOW, Silverfoot is RUINING YOUR BLOG. Let him get his own blog, and stop his comments here

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. SF is -- and remains -- a valued team member here at this blog.

      Delete
    2. This is AOW's blog, not mine, but I've come to see it as a friendly, comfortable coffee shop, where friends gather to discuss and debate the issues of the day.

      We are not a lockstep hallelujah choir; we often disagree, sometimes heatedly, but nobody gets banished for what beliefs or opinions they espouse.

      Commenters who post slobbery cut and paste here, addressed to no one in particular, are like someone who barges into a coffee shop, stands in the middle of the room and shouts out a rant. It interrupts the conversation and adds nothing to it.

      Delete
    3. SF,
      A comfortable coffee shop is an excellent analogy, my friend.

      Delete
  19. Resting in the yard. Lazy adult daughter has covid. I am in the yard as long as it takes. Of course that is where the entitled useless asshat belongs. When she got me sick the last time I endured two brutal weeks in a cold rat infested basement.

    This raid is just stupid. At a certain point we are in Moby Dick mode.
    Covid is still here and given studies in schools over 80/ have antibodies. I dont know what impact more vaccinations will have, but everything thus far has been wrong. Okay what is the benefit of shot four, especially if you have antibodies.

    What has Biden done well? Unite the Republicans. I will point out the cult of Obama is directly responsible for Trump. The Biden administration is really Obama 3. Now without any serious qualifications they want Michelle Obama. What has she run? School lunches….. Second rate attorney. She is smarter than AOC but so are the nuts and produce at the grocery store. If they are talking Cori Bush you are into paper product level IQ.

    Garland and Mayorkas need to go.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The above was Beakerkin

      Delete
    2. Another thing I think Biden will accomplish: Drive the suburban soccer moms back to the GOP.

      Delete
  20. Biden's DOJ has crossed the Rubicon.

    If they do not charge President Trump and prosecute a case against him, it was all politics.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The irony of Andrew McCabe commentating authoritatively on this is lost on the Infotainment Media Complex.

      Delete
    2. If they do not charge President Trump....

      Sure. They'll be carrying on the deeply rooted tradition of protecting the political class and the wealthy elite...whereas for the same transgressions, the peasants and serfs provide the fodder for the prison-industrial complex.

      I am enjoying however, the Trump team's current (of the many revolving narratives) defense that a sitting POTUS can merely waive his +4 Wand of Declassifying, and without informing the originating agency or ODNI, and 'presto-chango'.

      A whole lot of overnight barracks declassification experts racing to beclown themselves.

      Delete
    3. Yup. As you state, it just don't work that way. They are blowing smoke.

      DOJ is playing their own games, starting with the leaks to preferred press outlets before the official release of information and documents.

      We have a long way to go before we see anything approaching the truth, which is why I'm not getting too excited.

      Delete
    4. I will engage the Thought Criminal as the Great Mr Beamish

      Here is the problem with the part about the political class. This is all bullshit. The issues at the FBI and DOJ are well documented. This is a big problem when the agency has freaks like Peter Strzok and Lisa Page in its employ. The FBI and the DOJ need a housecleaning. Every GS 14 and above eligible for retirement needs to go. Top managers GS 14 are essentially political hires and may be terminated.

      When you take so many bites at the apple and fail you leave an obvious conclusion. There never was a case against Trump and whole hearings need to be dedicated. The exact nature of the Barry Obong misconduct regarding General Flynn needs to be investigated. Obong did abuse his authority and should be disbarred and fined.

      The crimes of Lois Lerner deserve serious jail time. The IRS tampered with evidence and Lerner should be stripped of her pension and do hard time. Her crimes far exceed Watergate and included harassing supporters of Israel.

      The GOP will hold the house and Bezos, Zuckerberg and Soros deserve payback.

      Delete
    5. (((Thought Criminal)))August 15, 2022 at 1:25:00 AM CDT

      Accepting a pardon is an admission of guilt. "General" Michael Flynn is thusly a self-confessed Russian intelligence asset.

      I'm sure he's running around selling tickets to shows where he advocates civil war and insurrection against the US government for other reasons though. Maybe he's mad Denny's doesn't serve grits anymore. ;)

      Delete
    6. (((Thought Criminal)))August 15, 2022 at 1:36:00 AM CDT

      As for Peter Strzok and Lisa Page, I think theirs is more a case of knowing things about Trump that couldn't be proven by legal standards or without revealing how deeply our intelligence agencies have people embedded in the Russian FSB and GRU. It happens. It's happening now. The FBI knew Trump illegally possessed TS/SCI classified data. They can't come forward with how they know what he intended to do with nuclear weapons information. It's enough for me to know some freelance plan to blow up a hurricane has been thwarted.

      Delete

We welcome civil dialogue at Always on Watch. Comments that include any of the following are subject to deletion:
1. Any use of profanity or abusive language
2. Off topic comments and spam
3. Use of personal invective

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.

!--BLOCKING--