Donald Trump Presidency discussion thread III

everlast75

2 Scoops wrote: »

Both the Inspector General and the Office of Responsibility say McCabe lied to them during their investigations. McCabe should have also recused himself from anything HRC related after his wife received all that money from Terry McCauliffe.

Something is amiss here and while the evidence is flimsy, there does seem to be a pattern of questionable ethics surrounding the FBI and political influence during the election. There's far too many instances like the one below where top FBI people are giving different answers.

http://thehill.com/opinion/judiciary/378919-mccabe-just-made-life-tough-for-comey-and-the-special-counsel

“I chose to share with a reporter through my public affairs officer and a legal counselor,” McCabe stated. “As deputy director, I was one of only a few people who had the authority to do that. It was not a secret, it took place over several days, and others, including the director, were aware of the interaction with the reporter.”

If the “interaction” means leaking the information, then McCabe’s statement would seem to directly contradict statements Comey made in a May 2017 congressional hearing. Asked if he had “ever been an anonymous source in news reports about matters relating to the Trump investigation or the Clinton investigation” or whether he had “ever authorized someone else at the FBI to be an anonymous source in news reports about the Trump investigation or the Clinton investigation,” Comey replied “never” and “no.”

I believe there was a recommendation that he be fired by a working group review but he wasn't.

The tweet from Trump makes it clear that it was a personal matter and the timing supports that.

I still believe it's to detract from the Stormy court case.

Btw the dems have offered McCabe a job for 2 days so that he may still get his full pension

2 Scoops

everlast75 wrote: »

Btw the dems have offered McCabe a job for 2 days so that he may still get his full pension

I don't find that surprising.

General Flynn has had to sell his house to pay legal bills over allegedly lying to the FBI, those in the bureau should be held to the same standards.

2 Scoops

2 Scoops wrote: »

I don't find that surprising.

General Flynn has had to sell his house to pay legal bills over allegedly lying to the FBI, those in the bureau should be held to the same standards.

Despite being fired by two consecutive presidents and pleading guilty to lying to the FBI Flynn gets to keep his military pension.
https://www.google.ie/amp/s/m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_5a219b9fe4b0a02abe90ff61/amp

Itssoeasy

2 Scoops wrote: »

I don't find that surprising.

General Flynn has had to sell his house to pay legal bills over allegedly lying to the FBI, those in the bureau should be held to the same standards.

He plead guilty to that charge so how is it alledgedly ?

Itssoeasy

I see trumps lawyer is saying that rob ronsenstein must now end the mueller investigation. Is that allowed ?

Also McCabe is reported to have kept memos regarding trump. It's strange that people seem to feel the need to keep records of interactions with trump. I wonder why that is ?

aloyisious

DubInMeath wrote: »

If he does know anything, I don't think he would be legally allowed say anything about it in the public domain.

The exception being a courtroom, or a setting similar to a court-room where he could be questioned openly [say by a Democratic Party member] on what he knew about who did what, with the press present.

StringerBell

For me the firing of McCabe other than being the usual Trump being Trump is also so that if McCabe we're to come out and say anything against the president the waters can be muddied and he can be labelled a disgruntled former employee who has reacted badly to being fired. Fox will run with it and his base will not question it.

Probably covered in just Trump being Trump actually. Cover the bases on the narrative

aloyisious

aloyisious wrote: »

The exception being a courtroom, or a setting similar to a court-room where he could be questioned openly [say by a Democratic Party member] on what he knew about who did what, with the press present.

True. Going to back door sources to the media might be a dangerous tactic for him to engage in, or just be labeled fake news.

everlast75

Another tweet by Trump, doubling down on the sacking - attacking the FBI, Justice and State. All to undermine the credibility of the investigation. Sessions will now be next. Kelly seems safe after a pledge of allegiance of sorts.

DT's solicitor has called for the ending of the Mueller investigation, as have a number of senior Republicans.

The shít must really be hitting the fan. Trump is getting more and more emboldened/desperate

StringerBell

everlast75 wrote: »

Another tweet by Trump, doubling down on the sacking - attacking the FBI, Justice and State. All to undermine the credibility of the investigation. Sessions will now be next. Kelly seems safe after a pledge of allegiance of sorts.

DT's solicitor has called for the ending of the Mueller investigation, as have a number of senior Republicans.

The shít must really be hitting the fan. Trump is getting more and more emboldened/desperate

It's actually a disgrace that these Republicans have sold all their morals and principles down the river in this way, if they had any in the first place of course.

Imagine, they are actively calling for the full facts to be left alone and not brought to light. It is a scary time for the world right now when the people tasked with ensuring the honour of office is upheld and the American people are never kept in the dark are the very ones trying to cover it up.

It also calls into account how you can be expected to believe there is nothing to be found. Innocent people don't behave in this way.

2 Scoops

It's been 20 months now Trump and his campaign have been under multiple investigations starting with the FBI in July of 2016 so it's not like any facts have been stifled. Suggesting Republicans have sold their soul is petty and disingenuous, politicians, whether R or D behave the same in such circumstances and past investigations prove that.

Christy42

2 Scoops wrote: »

It's been 20 months now Trump and his campaign have been under multiple investigations starting with the FBI in July of 2016 so it's not like any facts have been stifled. Suggesting Republicans have sold their soul is petty and disingenuous, politicians, whether R or D behave the same in such circumstances and past investigations prove that.

These things take longer than 20 months. Look at Nixon. They are jumping now because they are worried. Especially as it is making progress. Any Republicans calling for this to be cut short are selling their souls.

Until the investigation is complete it should be allowed to continue. Stopping it is nothing more than obstruction of justice.

Water John

This is a real story. How Cambridge Analytica accessed the profiles of 50m Facebook users and their friends.
They then used that info to target voters in USA and the UK.
As Demfad has said here before and here is the whistleblower.

https://www.theguardian.com/news/2018/mar/17/cambridge-analytica-facebook-influence-us-election

'A whistleblower has revealed to the Observer how Cambridge Analytica – a company owned by the hedge fund billionaire Robert Mercer, and headed at the time by Trump’s key adviser Steve Bannon – used personal information taken without authorisation in early 2014 to build a system that could profile individual US voters, in order to target them with personalised political advertisements'.

Key words are, 'taken without authorisation'

aloyisious

everlast75 wrote: »

Another tweet by Trump, doubling down on the sacking - attacking the FBI, Justice and State. All to undermine the credibility of the investigation. Sessions will now be next. Kelly seems safe after a pledge of allegiance of sorts.

DT's solicitor has called for the ending of the Mueller investigation, as have a number of senior Republicans.

The shít must really be hitting the fan. Trump is getting more and more emboldened/desperate

IMO, the push to end the investigation would be a sign that they fear it has files from other sources on Trump business dealings, copies of what the Trump lawyers have and are required to keep for X amount of years under federal law or face prosecution and disbarment. They probably got the shakes when the subpoenas landed on their desks seeking full disclosure, knowing there are terms of imprisonment for contempt of court.

Put the pressure on the Trump lawyers about their legal obligations as members of the legal profession and court officers and their personal futures if they fail to comply with the law. I wonder what the thought of a few months behind bars in, say: Leavenworth.. would do for the health of Jeff Sessions memory recall. Getting a pardon would cover him up to offences committed prior to the pardon, not offences caused by failure to comply with orders after the pardon. The same would apply to lawyers acting on behalf of others named as involved in any such dealings. It's all part of the paper trail.

Leroy42

20 months and so far we have Flynn admitting to lying to the FBI about meetings with Russians to illegally discuss sanctions.
We have Manafort on charges and his mate admitting to similar charges.
We have Trump jr admitting to actively looking to work through Russia to secure illegally obtained information.
We have Trump caught lying to try to cover that up.
We have Trump admitting that he fired the head of the FBI to try to stop the Russia investigation.
We have the AG caught lying to congress.

Not bad for one of the most lawyered up and protected by the very swamp he promised to drain people in the world.

I wonder do you take the same view on others. Remember Nixon was not found guilty of anything. Either was Bill Clinton or Hc.

aloyisious

2 Scoops wrote: »

Suggesting Republicans have sold their soul is petty and disingenuous, politicians, whether R or D behave the same in such circumstances and past investigations prove that.

The comparison is, therefore, not mutully exclusive.... unless you are stating that Republican politicians can, and always do, hold themselves to a higher standard than Democrat politicians.

2 Scoops

Christy42 wrote: »

Until the investigation is complete it should be allowed to continue. Stopping it is nothing more than obstruction of justice.

I agree with you and 99% of people would in normal circumstances but it's not black and white.

You know what the problem is right? His supporters and many Republicans like Lindsey Graham think the previous administrations investigation of Clinton was corrupt and that the decision not to prosecute was made on day 1.. then the dossier pops up and is used to to spy on the Trump campaign - those reasons alone is why there's been so much pushback at least from the public against the investigations into Trump.

All that said I'm fine with it reaching a conclusion.. Trump getting nailed would be a spectacle beyond imagination.

pitifulgod

2 Scoops wrote: »

I agree with you and 99% of people would in normal circumstances but it's not black and white.

You know what the problem is right? His supporters and many Republicans like Lindsey Graham think the previous administrations investigation of Clinton was corrupt and that the decision not to prosecute was made on day 1.. then the dossier pops up and is used to to spy on the Trump campaign - those reasons alone is why there's been so much pushback at least from the public against the investigations into Trump.

Thing is, we know for a fact that the dossier wasn't they key piece of evidence used by the FBI, it was part of the evidence but not the key piece. Was also clearly stated on why the dossier was compiled. I've seen absolute no proof of the Clinton investigation being corrupt but there seems to be considerable ethical issues with the Trumps even ignoring the investigation which has a pretty legit basis for its foundation.

Water John

'push back from the public'. where did you dig that bit of nonsense from?

Now CA (Mercer)and Bannon along with Facebook will be tried for breaches of state laws in California. No pardon there.
Misuse of personal data of 50m people.

2 Scoops

pitifulgod wrote: »

Thing is, we know for a fact that the dossier wasn't they key piece of evidence used by the FBI, it was part of the evidence but not the key piece.

That depends on who you want to believe and most of it is down partisan lines. McCabe said under oath that without the dossier the fisa warrant would have never been issued. He later claimed his quotes were taken out of context by Republicans.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/trey-gowdy-face-the-nation-fisa-surveillance-warrant-would-not-have-been-authorized-without-dossier/

Rep. Trey Gowdy, R-South Carolina, one of the four authors of the GOP memo released Friday, told CBS News' "Face the Nation" that he believes a surveillance warrant for former Trump campaign adviser Carter Page would not have ever been authorized without the existence of the controversial "Steele dossier."

pitifulgod

2 Scoops wrote: »

That depends on who you want to believe and most of it is down partisan lines. McCabe said under oath that without the dossier the fisa warrant would have never been issued. He later claimed his quotes were taken out of context by Republicans.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/trey-gowdy-face-the-nation-fisa-surveillance-warrant-would-not-have-been-authorized-without-dossier/

Rep. Trey Gowdy, R-South Carolina, one of the four authors of the GOP memo released Friday, told CBS News' "Face the Nation" that he believes a surveillance warrant for former Trump campaign adviser Carter Page would not have ever been authorized without the existence of the controversial "Steele dossier."

Thing is, the republican memo didn't actually provide info on anything from the FISA warrants. The Nunes memo worked on a basis that the Judge was misled which has been proven to be untrue. It outright quotes the FISA application which Nunes memo didn't do at any point, so I prefer supporting documentation to propaganda exercises.

2 Scoops

pitifulgod wrote: »

Thing is, the republican memo didn't actually provide info on anything from the FISA warrants. The Nunes memo worked on a basis that the Judge was misled which has been proven to be untrue. It outright quotes the FISA application which Nunes memo didn't do at any point, so I prefer supporting documentation to propaganda exercises.

So Steele talking to yahoo news is propaganda is it? The FBI cited the same article to try and corroborate the dossier for the fisa warrant.

Water John

And we are supposed to believe Gowdy, one of the authors of the GOP whitewash?
The Steele dossier, was never relied on solely. It colloborated other evidence.

For a new kid on the block, Scoops, you are very determined to support, your man. Where have you been all this time?

pitifulgod

2 Scoops wrote: »

So Steele talking to yahoo news is propaganda is it? The FBI cited the same article to try and corroborate the dossier.

But then something interesting happened. After the FISA warrant was approved, Schiff writes, “[the] DOJ provided additional information obtained through multiple independent sources that corroborated Steele’s reporting.” The precise nature of those sources is included in the Schiff memo, but it’s redacted in the public copy, to the point where it’s not even clear which specific Steele claims have been vindicated.

https://www.vox.com/world/2018/2/24/17048936/democrat-rebuttal-nunes-schiff-memo

So yep, you're misrepresenting. The Steele Dossier had portions verified independently so yep, wasn't solely based upon one dossier. It was multiple pieces of documentation that the warrants were issued based on. They also explicitly stated how the dossier came into existence. So yep, it was done above board and not how Nunes depicted it.

2 Scoops

Water John wrote: »

And we are supposed to believe Gowdy, one of the authors of the GOP whitewash?
The Steele dossier, was never relied on solely. It colloborated other evidence.

If by pointing out obvious facts some of you chose to willfully ignore makes me some kind of defender so be it.

As for Gowdy, he has more integrity than the sum of the parts of the Democrat party.

2 Scoops

pitifulgod wrote: »

So yep, you're misrepresenting. The Steele Dossier had portions verified independently so yep, wasn't solely based upon one dossier. It was multiple pieces of documentation that the warrants were issued based on. They also explicitly stated how the dossier came into existence. So yep, it was done above board and not how Nunes depicted it.

McCabe testified under oath the only thing the FBI could collaberate in the dossier was that Carter Page visited Russia, not that he spoke with people there, that he visited Russia. Nothing else was collaborated.

Vox is about hyper partisan as you can get, so no thanks.

Water John

Well your take on Gowdy, let's us all know, your slant on things.
As well, your a good bit, out of date on what you are arguing about. Better have a look at Leroy's list, at the top of the page.

2 Scoops

Water John wrote: »

Well your take on Gowdy, let's us all know, your slant on things.

You don't have to look many posts up to find posters accusing Republicans of selling their souls, part of the course round here I suppose.

Leroy42

2scoops, do you just ignore all the other charges laid against many of his team and Trump continued lies that it will A) all be over shortly and that Trump is being totally transparent and cooperating despite the fact that any testimonies given by those connected to him to the congress and claimed privilege and refused to cooperate?

2 Scoops

Leroy42 wrote: »

2scoops, do you just ignore all the other charges laid against many of his team and Trump continued lies

No I don't. I'm just sick of people pretending the FBI and other agencies intentions can't be questioned, it wasn't that long ago when the CIA were spying on members of congress. Of course John Brennan these days is part of the "resistance", short memories.