(08-16-2018, 10:57 PM)Vlad Wrote: "Partisan" beef with huh?
Do you know you've just incriminated this lovely bunch?
People positions of law and justice aren't supposed to be partisan, obviously they've made it clear that they are...you just acknowledged it.
You're supposed to be oblivious to the fact that they were Hillary supporters and Trump haters, and because it's clear that they were was why we have just experienced corruption like we've never seen before.
You have this supposedly full of integrity Robert Mueller who if he really had integrity would have shut this Russian hoax investigation down after 2 weeks...and instead began investigating Brennan, Comey, Strzok, Hillary, the DNC, Clapper, Ohr and his wife, McCabe, the Obama DOJ, the Obama FBI etc...that is were the criminal activity was. This is where the collusion was. That is where attempts to stack the deck against a presidential candidate was.
But Mueller cant do that because then he would be investigating himself.
He's gotten so desperate looking for stuff he's now investigating whores and prostitutes.
He's going after Melania?
It's joke...like most of the post I quoted....put your pencils down.
Your anger and ego will always reveal your true self.
(08-16-2018, 10:57 PM)Vlad Wrote: "Partisan" beef with huh?
Do you know you've just incriminated this lovely bunch?
People positions of law and justice aren't supposed to be partisan, obviously they've made it clear that they are...you just acknowledged it.
You're supposed to be oblivious to the fact that they were Hillary supporters and Trump haters, and because it's clear that they were was why we have just experienced corruption like we've never seen before.
You have this supposedly full of integrity Robert Mueller who if he really had integrity would have shut this Russian hoax investigation down after 2 weeks...and instead began investigating Brennan, Comey, Strzok, Hillary, the DNC, Clapper, Ohr and his wife, McCabe, the Obama DOJ, the Obama FBI etc...that is were the criminal activity was. This is where the collusion was. That is where attempts to stack the deck against a presidential candidate was.
But Mueller cant do that because then he would be investigating himself.
He's gotten so desperate looking for stuff he's now investigating whores and prostitutes.
Damn it, I hope no federal prosecutors read my Bengals Board posts.
Quote:Why a retired Navy SEAL commander wants Trump to revoke his security clearance Retired Navy admiral William McRaven, who oversaw the Navy SEAL operation that resulted in al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden's death, penned a short but scathing letter to President Donald Trump asking that his security clearance be revoked after the commander-in-chief revoked former CIA director John Brennan's clearance.
"I would consider it an honor if you would revoke my security clearance as well, so I can add my name to the list of men and women who have spoken up against your presidency," McRaven wrote in the letter published Thursday by The Washington Post.
McRaven, who was commander of the U.S. Joint Special Operations Command from 2011 to 2014 under former President Barack Obama, praised Brennan and called him "one of the finest public servants" with "unparalleled integrity."
The former Navy admiral bashed Trump's leadership and said that Trump used "McCarthy-era tactics" against his critics.
"Through your actions, you have embarrassed us in the eyes of our children, humiliated us on the world stage and, worst of all, divided us as a nation," McRaven wrote.
McRaven's letter joined a chorus of detractors who have condemned Trump's decision Wednesday to revoke Brennan's security clearance.
More: Donald Trump revokes former CIA director John Brennan's security clearance More: John Brennan: Donald Trump's denial of Russian collusion is 'hogwash'
House Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., called it "a stunning abuse of power" while U.S. Rep. Adam Schiff of California, the top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, said Trump again demonstrated "how deeply insecure and vindictive he is – two character flaws dangerous in any President."
"This has zero to do with national security," tweeted Michael Bromwich, an attorney for former deputy FBI director Andrew McCabe, whose security clearance is under review.
Brennan himself bashed the move and called it part of a broader effort by Trump to "suppress freedom of speech" and "punish critics."
This action is part of a broader effort by Mr. Trump to suppress freedom of speech & punish critics. It should gravely worry all Americans, including intelligence professionals, about the cost of speaking out. My principles are worth far more than clearances. I will not relent. NBC News
In a New York Times op-ed published Thursday, Brennan said Trump revoked his security clearance to try to silence him for speaking out against Trump's friendliness with Russians who influenced the 2016 election.
"Mr. Trump’s claims of no collusion are, in a word, hogwash," Brennan wrote.
In a statement read Wednesday by White House Press Secretary Sarah Sanders, Trump said that Brennan has used his status "to make a series of unfounded and outrageous allegations" and "wild outbursts on the Internet and television about this administration."
Your anger and ego will always reveal your true self.
(08-16-2018, 10:57 PM)Vlad Wrote: You have this supposedly full of integrity Robert Mueller who if he really had integrity would have shut this Russian hoax investigation down after 2 weeks...and instead began investigating Brennan, Comey, Strzok, Hillary, the DNC, Clapper, Ohr and his wife, McCabe, the Obama DOJ, the Obama FBI etc...that is were the criminal activity was. This is where the collusion was. That is where attempts to stack the deck against a presidential candidate was.
That fake 'witch hunt' that the President talks about all the time has produced indictments of over 30 witches, guilty pleas from 5 witches and cooperation from multiple witches. For a fake witch hunt, it sure has exposed a lot of very real witches.
You can dislike the Russia investigation as much as you want, but to say it's a hoax is just purposely turning a blind eye to reality.
Trump went on a rant today praising Manafort for being such a good person and saying it is a very sad day for our country that he is being prosecuted for his numerous crimes.
He also said ranted about Bruce Ohr and said "Mr. Mueller is highly conflicted. In fact, Comey is like his best friend", seemingly to suggest that there's conflicts of interest.
(08-17-2018, 01:11 PM)Bengalholic Wrote: That fake 'witch hunt' that the President talks about all the time has produced indictments of over 30 witches, guilty pleas from 5 witches and cooperation from multiple witches. For a fake witch hunt, it sure has exposed a lot of very real witches.
Of those indictments, how many were of American citizens, and, of those, how many were for something other than lying to the FBI or obstruction of justice? To be sure, the latter are crimes and should be punished, but lying to the FBI does not equal collusion with Russia in order to affect an election.
Philip Mudd, a former CIA and FBI official who contributes to CNN, got into it with CNN's resident Trump supporter, Paris Dennard last night, resulting in Mudd shouting down Dennard after Dennard seems to imply that Mudd profits from his security clearance.
Trump tweeted about it, suggesting that this cause for Mudd to lose his security clearance.
(08-21-2018, 09:58 AM)BmorePat87 Wrote: Philip Mudd, a former CIA and FBI official who contributes to CNN, got into it with CNN's resident Trump supporter, Paris Dennard last night, resulting in Mudd shouting down Dennard after Dennard seems to imply that Mudd profits from his security clearance.
Trump tweeted about it, suggesting that this cause for Mudd to lose his security clearance.
Couple questions:
1) Should one lose one's security clearance if they profit from it?
2) Couldn't you argue that getting a non-government job that requires security clearance is a way of proftting from one's security clearance?
(08-21-2018, 02:03 PM)PhilHos Wrote: Couple questions:
1) Should one lose one's security clearance if they profit from it?
2) Couldn't you argue that getting a non-government job that requires security clearance is a way of proftting from one's security clearance?
1. no
2. yes, but not necessarily a way of making money, if the position is unpaid.
(08-17-2018, 02:58 PM)PhilHos Wrote: Of those indictments, how many were of American citizens, and, of those, how many were for something other than lying to the FBI or obstruction of justice? To be sure, the latter are crimes and should be punished, but lying to the FBI does not equal collusion with Russia in order to affect an election.
So why does that mean the investigation is a fake? How does this prove it is a "witch hunt"?
You do realize that the Presidents original basis for his claim that this was a "witch hunt" was that the Russians did not interfere in any way with the election, don't you? The fact that he was 100% wrong kind of makes his "witch hunt" claim look stupid. Don't know why so many people still take his side when he has said so many stupid things that have been proven wrong.
Then of course there is the question of why Trump and everyone around him has lied about pretty much every aspect of their actions that are under investigation. Why lie about things when you didn't do anything wrong?
So to re-cap. Trump lies about Russians not interfering with election. Trump lies about the meetings with Russians. Lots of other people involved in investigation are also proven to be liars. But Fox News calls it a "witch hunt" so it must be a "witch hunt", right?
(08-17-2018, 02:58 PM)PhilHos Wrote: Of those indictments, how many were of American citizens, and, of those, how many were for something other than lying to the FBI or obstruction of justice? To be sure, the latter are crimes and should be punished, but lying to the FBI does not equal collusion with Russia in order to affect an election.
Only 5--and counting.
If you tell the FBI you didn't meet with Russians to work some angle for the Trump campaign, and they find out you did, then lying to the FBI is at least ABOUT collusion.
Trump keeps insisting there was no collusion on the part of him or his campaign, despite so much open source evidence to the contrary. And he is obsessed with stopping the investigation--through, if you trust the intel services, Russia continues to meddle in our election processes.
Do you ever watch Hannity? Almost every night he insists there is a deep state engaged in a witchhunt to bring Trump down. He insists there Mueller has offered no evidence of collusion and wants the investigation shut down. I wonder--is Mueller supposed to announce whatever evidence he finds whenever he finds it? Do other investigators do that?
Seems to me that Trump, Hannity and company are doing their best to cast doubt on the FBI as an institution and to disparage the character of Mueller et al. so that when the special counsels report finally comes out, enough people will be uncertain about it to keep Congress in check.
Mueller and Comey are "best friends" now and swamp creatures who have made money of their time in the FBI--just the kind of people who would want to bring down the swamp cleaner Trump. The steady, disciplined and focused Mueller who has served his country honorably for decades is no more trustworthy than an undisciplined, wildly tweeting/lying Trump who appears way more worried than an innocent man should be about "perjury traps" and mob-style fixers who might turn on him.
(08-21-2018, 02:35 PM)fredtoast Wrote: So why does that mean the investigation is a fake? How does this prove it is a "witch hunt"?
I never said it was fake. However, if the goal of the investigation was to find illegal collusion with a foreign entity and the only charges filed are completely unrelated to collusion, one could make the case the investigation was a witch hunt. I personally would not call it (mainly because there HAVE been a couple related charges) that but I could see the argument.
(08-21-2018, 02:52 PM)Dill Wrote: Only 5--and counting.
If you tell the FBI you didn't meet with Russians to work some angle for the Trump campaign, and they find out you did, then lying to the FBI is at least ABOUT collusion.
And I would say that should count amongst the charges of collusion (if it's not already).
(08-21-2018, 03:26 PM)PhilHos Wrote: I never said it was fake. However, if the goal of the investigation was to find illegal collusion with a foreign entity and the only charges filed are completely unrelated to collusion, one could make the case the investigation was a witch hunt. I personally would not call it (mainly because there HAVE been a couple related charges) that but I could see the argument.
There is no legitimate argument that this was a witch hunt.
The only way it is a witch hunt is if there was not evidence requiring an investigation. Lots of things are investigated that turn out to be false. That does not mean every investigation is a "witch hunt".
There was clear evidence that the Russians approached the Trump campaign with offers to interfere with the election. It had to be investigated. Many of those allegations have now been proven true. In fact it has been proven that the Trump campaign lied repeatedly about these meetings. The ONLY people who think this should never have been investigated are Trump loyalist who don't care what illegal activities he takes part in.
(08-21-2018, 09:58 AM)BmorePat87 Wrote: Philip Mudd, a former CIA and FBI official who contributes to CNN, got into it with CNN's resident Trump supporter, Paris Dennard last night, resulting in Mudd shouting down Dennard after Dennard seems to imply that Mudd profits from his security clearance.
Trump tweeted about it, suggesting that this cause for Mudd to lose his security clearance.
No sure if he should lose his clearance because he profits off of it; however, it is true that having a secret clearance can be profitable. I'm not sure if they purposely ignored his point or really didn't understand it; as they kept going back to what they do for government.
I will say it seems one person in the exchange was sane; so the unhinged one might be a security risk.
(08-16-2018, 10:57 PM)Vlad Wrote: "Partisan" beef with huh?
Do you know you've just incriminated this lovely bunch?
People positions of law and justice aren't supposed to be partisan, obviously they've made it clear that they are...you just acknowledged it.
You're supposed to be oblivious to the fact that they were Hillary supporters and Trump haters, and because it's clear that they were was why we have just experienced corruption like we've never seen before.
You have this supposedly full of integrity Robert Mueller who if he really had integrity would have shut this Russian hoax investigation down after 2 weeks...and instead began investigating Brennan, Comey, Strzok, Hillary, the DNC, Clapper, Ohr and his wife, McCabe, the Obama DOJ, the Obama FBI etc...that is were the criminal activity was. This is where the collusion was. That is where attempts to stack the deck against a presidential candidate was.
But Mueller cant do that because then he would be investigating himself.
He's gotten so desperate looking for stuff he's now investigating whores and prostitutes.
So much fake news in this post. But the user name gives this Russian away so I'm not surprised he's all in protecting Putin/Trump.
Quote:"Success doesn’t mean every single move they make is good" ~ Anonymous "Let not the dumb have to educate" ~ jj22
(08-21-2018, 02:35 PM)fredtoast Wrote: So why does that mean the investigation is a fake? How does this prove it is a "witch hunt"?
You do realize that the Presidents original basis for his claim that this was a "witch hunt" was that the Russians did not interfere in any way with the election, don't you? The fact that he was 100% wrong kind of makes his "witch hunt" claim look stupid. Don't know why so many people still take his side when he has said so many stupid things that have been proven wrong.
Then of course there is the question of why Trump and everyone around him has lied about pretty much every aspect of their actions that are under investigation. Why lie about things when you didn't do anything wrong?
So to re-cap. Trump lies about Russians not interfering with election. Trump lies about the meetings with Russians. Lots of other people involved in investigation are also proven to be liars. But Fox News calls it a "witch hunt" so it must be a "witch hunt", right?
Why even bother. These people don't care about America.
Ignore all the indictments involving the Russian investigation that is a "witch hunt" but Hillary who has been investigated over 40 years and no indictments anywhere is guilty....
Exactly. Lames.
Quote:"Success doesn’t mean every single move they make is good" ~ Anonymous "Let not the dumb have to educate" ~ jj22
(08-21-2018, 05:57 PM)bfine32 Wrote: No sure if he should lose his clearance because he profits off of it; however, it is true that having a secret clearance can be profitable. I'm not sure if they purposely ignored his point or really didn't understand it; as they kept going back to what they do for government.
I will say it seems one person in the exchange was sane; so the unhinged one might be a security risk.
I think unhinged accurately describes his behavior in this clip, but I don't know if getting emotional over perceived personal attacks is a security risk.
(08-21-2018, 02:03 PM)PhilHos Wrote: Couple questions:
1) Should one lose one's security clearance if they profit from it?
2) Couldn't you argue that getting a non-government job that requires security clearance is a way of proftting from one's security clearance?
I have to answer #2 first and that answer is "yes". So that answer makes my answer to #1 "no" because then many would lose it and many jobs would be unfilled.
But obviously abuse of the security clearance would make me support revoking one's security clearance.
(08-21-2018, 06:56 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: I think unhinged accurately describes his behavior in this clip, but I don't know if getting emotional over perceived personal attacks is a security risk.
Guy is just angry because he is falsely accused of "monetizing" his clearance. It was a matter of pride and personal honor, something likely unknown to the Trump surrogates out their sliming honorable men--most conservatives and Republicans as well.
I can understand why these ex-military officials fly into rages when their honor is impugned as part of a smear campaign to defend Trump, who avoided service and is now using presidential powers meant to protect the country to protect himself.
That seems to be Fox strategy going forward now--constantly talk about how Trump critics are "making money" off their clearances and are part of the Swamp/deep state. Yanking their clearances is deserved punishment from a president who invited Russian diplomats and spies into the Oval Office unescorted and gave away top secret intel in fashion which harmed relation with an ally.
![[Image: giphy.gif]](https://media0.giphy.com/media/1kwsTjL8BNqlszNtnCE/giphy.gif)
![[Image: ulVdgX6.jpg]](http://i.imgur.com/ulVdgX6.jpg)
![[Image: 4CV0TeR.png]](https://i.imgur.com/4CV0TeR.png)
![[Image: hxbD0MyG_normal.jpg]](https://pbs.twimg.com/profile_images/943947333645099014/hxbD0MyG_normal.jpg)
![[Image: giphy.gif]](http://media1.giphy.com/media/9EmYYw6o9cmsM/giphy.gif)
![[Image: bfine-guns2.png]](https://i.ibb.co/YBkDQJV/bfine-guns2.png)
