US congresswoman states America should be "more fearful of white men"

notobtuse

Matt Barrett wrote: »

A 'news' outlet owned and operated by Salem Media, whose board includes a bible ministry, an anti-abortion group, and a country club among other groups.

So, rather than engage in ad hominem attacks, ad nauseum.... What in the article I posted was incorrect? *** I predict crickets chirping. ***

James Brown

notobtuse wrote: »

Ah, now I understand. You're engaging in moral malpractice... Accuse someone of something, without evidence, and it must be true, eh?

I literally quoted you twice.

Here's three:

The latest news from a member of The Squad and their march to destroy the US

Lines like this are of the low grade ramblings of a right wing youtuber.

peddlelies

Nobody cared that Clinton used a private email server, it's why she used it. She did it so those conversations wouldn't be archived in the state department system. Same scrutiny should apply to Ivanka and others too.

Clinton whored out the state department for personal gain. Anyone who denies that is either stupid or being disingenuous. The fact she non securely sent and received classified information is just the cherry on top.

https://apnews.com/82df550e1ec646098b434f7d5771f625

"More than half the people outside the government who met with Hillary Clinton while she was secretary of state gave money — either personally or through companies or groups — to the Clinton Foundation. It’s an extraordinary proportion indicating her possible ethics challenges if elected president."

James Brown

notobtuse wrote: »

How many of those emails of her family schedules had the word CLASSIFIED written on top of them?

If ifs and buts.... maybe 'classified' might have helped their case? Rather they used a shared personal account for government business. Feel free to attack Hillary but don't be such a transparent hypocrite comrade.

James Brown

notobtuse wrote: »

So, rather than engage in ad hominem attacks, ad nauseum.... What in the article I posted was incorrect? *** I predict crickets chirping. ***

It's a severely biased one sided opinion piece you are passing off as fact.

notobtuse

peddlelies wrote: »

Nobody cared that Clinton used a private email server, it's why she used it. She did it so those conversations wouldn't be archived in the state department system. Same scrutiny should apply to Ivanka and others too.

Clinton whored out the state department for personal gain. Anyone who denies that is either stupid or being disingenuous. The fact she non securely sent and received classified information is just the cherry on top.

https://apnews.com/82df550e1ec646098b434f7d5771f625

"More than half the people outside the government who met with Hillary Clinton while she was secretary of state gave money — either personally or through companies or groups — to the Clinton Foundation. It’s an extraordinary proportion indicating her possible ethics challenges if elected president."

Correct. The big difference is Ivanka, who didn't serve in public service, didn't know the rules during the transition period. After she was informed she turned over every single email to the government... Unlike Hillary who destroyed all evidence of 30,000+ emails while they were under a Congressional subpoena.

notobtuse

Matt Barrett wrote: »

It's a severely biased one sided opinion piece you are passing off as fact.

That's an odd way of saying every pertinent piece of information noted in the article was factually correct.

peddlelies

notobtuse wrote: »

Correct. The big difference is Ivanka, who didn't serve in public service, didn't know the rules during the transition period. After she was informed she turned over every single email to the government... Unlike Hillary who destroyed all evidence of 30,000+ emails while they were under a Congressional subpoena.

Not only that, but her own lawyers got to choose which emails they deemed work related and which were personal. So basically she was able to hand pick which emails to give to investigators. The whole investigation was a farce, and everybody knows it.

Oh, and just to add.

batgoat

notobtuse wrote: »

The latest news from a member of The Squad and their march to destroy the US... Omar is now demanding that the United Nations take control of the US border with Mexico, which would represent a direct violation of US sovereignty and fundamentally weaken America’s national security. She has also called for the elimination of the entire Department of Homeland Security, which was tasked with dealing with threats to the nation following 9/11. So, a congresswoman who has been implicated on immigration fraud suspicion by possibly marrying her brother to scam the process, and who was accused this week of having an affair with a married man, lectures us about "moral high ground." This would be funny if it wasn't so serious as her and her ilk are the future of the Democratic Party, folks.

Your remark about an unfounded claim about her being married to her brother is a bit like saying "suspicions that Obama is Kenyan". It's a rather vile tactic to try to smear her for your unAmerican narrative.

notobtuse

peddlelies wrote: »

Not only that, but her own lawyers got to choose which emails they deemed work related and which were personal. So basically she was able to hand pick which emails to give to investigators. The whole investigation was a farce, and everybody knows it.

And her lawyers didn't have clearance to view any of those emails deemed Classified or Top Secret. The woman's disregard for our laws and rules is epic.

And I understand Trump might declassify information on her dealings with the transfer of 20% of America's uranium supply (you know… the stuff to make atomic bombs) to a company controlled by Russia. Seems she might be a far bigger liar then what people accuse Trump of.

https://thehill.com/opinion/white-house/459197-trump-can-change-history-by-declassifying-three-obama-era-documents

notobtuse

batgoat wrote: »

Your remark about an unfounded claim about her being married to her brother is a bit like saying "suspicions that Obama is Kenyan". It's a rather vile tactic to try to smear her for your unAmerican narrative.

Sorry... No so unfounded.

https://www.judicialwatch.org/press-releases/judicial-watch-files-house-ethics-complaint-against-rep-ilhan-omar-over-potential-immigration-marriage-tax-and-student-loan-fraud/

hetuzozaho

notobtuse wrote: »

Here you go...

https://townhall.com/tipsheet/bethbaumann/2018/11/19/wapo-attempts-to-draw-parallels-between-ivanka-and-hillarys-emails-but-its-st-n2536239

Thanks for the link!
That article is hilarious

The author Beth is gas too, she likes her guns going by her twitter.

"Beth Baumann is an Associate Editor for Townhall. Her primary interests include the Second Amendment.."

hetuzozaho

Matt Barrett wrote: »

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/22/us/politics/jared-kushner-ivanka-trump-private-emails.html

https://www.politico.com/story/2017/09/24/jared-kushner-private-email-white-house-243071

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/trump-subpoena-ivanka-jared-kushner-vote-house-text-email-democrats-a9022246.html

https://www.cnn.com/2018/11/20/politics/ivanka-trump-email/index.html

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/cummings-jared-kushner-and-ivanka-trumps-private-emails-texts-raise-security-concerns

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/ivanka-trump-jared-kushner-subpoena-house-democrats

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/22/us/politics/jared-kushner-ivanka-trump-private-emails.html

Notobtuse is trying to bury it.

A lot there cheers.

What's the big deal about the emails? Is it more the hypocrisy of trump about hillarys?

There was nothing nefarious going on via email I mean. Just maybe not great to be sending work mail via personal etc?

notobtuse

hetuzozaho wrote: »

Thanks for the link!
That article is hilarious

The author Beth is gas too, she likes her guns going by her twitter.

"Beth Baumann is an Associate Editor for Townhall. Her primary interests include the Second Amendment.."

Ah, let me see if I understand....

So an inquiry, based on a three-year-long meticulous investigation in both the United States and the United Kingdom that has the potential to be the most extensive spree of illegal misconduct committed by a House member in American history, is bogus.

But a two year Russia collusion investigation, costing millions, based on a bogus dossier paid for by a political opponent is worthy of the governments tireless investigation comprising 500 witnesses, 19 lawyers who were employed by the special counsel's office; 40 FBI agents, intelligence analysts, forensic accountants and other staff that assisted with the investigation; more than 2,800 subpoenas issued by the Special Counsel's office, nearly 500 search warrants executed and more than 230 orders for communication records, was warranted. Oh yeah, and coming up with NOTHING, by the way!

Do you realize how stupid this type of argument would look to a neutral and casual onlooker?

batgoat

notobtuse wrote: »

Sorry... No so unfounded.

https://www.judicialwatch.org/press-releases/judicial-watch-files-house-ethics-complaint-against-rep-ilhan-omar-over-potential-immigration-marriage-tax-and-student-loan-fraud/

Judicial watch making a complaint still doesn't make it suddenly credible. They make many such complaints with little success.

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/judicial-watch/

hetuzozaho

notobtuse wrote: »

Ah, let me see if I understand....

So an inquiry, based on of a three-year-long meticulous investigation in both the United States and the United Kingdom that has the potential to be the most extensive spree of illegal misconduct committed by a House member in American history, is bogus.

But a two year Russia collusion investigation, costing millions, based on a bogus dossier paid for by a political opponent is worthy of the governments tireless investigation comprising 500 witnesses, 19 lawyers who were employed by the special counsel's office; 40 FBI agents, intelligence analysts, forensic accountants and other staff that assisted with the investigation; more than 2,800 subpoenas issued by the Special Counsel's office, nearly 500 search warrants executed and more than 230 orders for communication records, was warranted. Oh yeah, and coming up with NOTHING, by the way!

Do you realize how stupid this type of argument would look to a neutral and casual onlooker?

Sorry?

notobtuse

batgoat wrote: »

Judicial watch making a complaint still doesn't make it suddenly credible. They make many such complaints with little success.

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/judicial-watch/

They've had some success, especially in pulling information out of the government that they don't want the public to see, via Freedom Of Information lawsuits. We need a government watchdog. Heavens knows the mainstream media has given up all their journalistic integrity in favor of being mouthpieces for the Democrat party. We'll have to see if this one gains any legs, I guess.

James Brown

hetuzozaho wrote: »

A lot there cheers.

What's the big deal about the emails? Is it more the hypocrisy of trump about hillarys?

There was nothing nefarious going on via email I mean. Just maybe not great to be sending work mail via personal etc?

To be fair I'd class using personal email accounts for government business to be at best incompetent. If people have an issue with Hillary they should have an issue with Ivanka and Jared. If they are in any way genuine. Doing gymnastics to explain away one to infer clandestine goings on with the other loses any credibility IMO.

Notobtuse, with most of these posts, is behaving like a monkey in the zoo throwing filth at anyone who'll come take a look.

notobtuse

Matt Barrett wrote: »

To be fair I'd class using personal email accounts for government business to be at best incompetent. If people have an issue with Hillary they should have an issue with Ivanka and Jared. If they are in any way genuine. Doing gymnastics to explain away one to infer clandestine goings on with the other loses any credibility IMO.

Notobtuse, with most of these posts, is behaving like a monkey in the zoo throwing filth at anyone who'll come take a look.

At best incompetent? Incompetent is being generous on the part of Hillary. She was a Senator and Secretary of State. SHE KNEW BETTER! Thank god she didn't win the presidency, then.

Can't stand opposing views, eh?

batgoat

notobtuse wrote: »

They've had some success, especially in pulling information out of the government that they don't want the public to see, via Freedom Of Information lawsuits. We need a government watchdog. Heavens knows the mainstream media has given up all their journalistic integrity in favor of being mouthpieces for the Democrat party. We'll have to see if this one gains any legs, I guess.

Judicial Watch have journalistic credibility? They don't. They're a right wing mouthpiece that have a tendency to push plenty of conspiracy theories. You're free to consider them a good news outlet but it doesn't lend any credibility to your claims.

James Brown

notobtuse wrote: »

At best incompetent? Incompetent is being generous on the part of Hillary. She was a Senator and Secretary of State. SHE KNEW BETTER! Thank god she didn't win the presidency, then.

Can't stand opposing views, eh?

She knew better. Agreed. Ivanka and Jared aren't fit for their roles, but once in them they need take responsibility no?
Opposing views? Try blatant hypocrisy. You're covering for Ivanka and going after Hillary. A has been. I can only see Trump's ego being fluffed as the reason why Hillary is still a thing in such discussions.
I wouldn't have voted for Hiliary. Too cosy with big business IMO.

mad muffin

In a week that Ilhan Omar calling for the UN to take control of America’s borders, we now have this…

https://twitter.com/IlhanMN/status/1165688109176172544

In addition to providing funding, Hormuud Telecommunications has provided key material and logistical support to Al-Shabaab to include weapons, private fighters and ammunition. Spokespersons for moderate Somali groups have warned the Somali people not to use Hormuud Telecommunications Company, because Hormuud personnel listen in on conversations for Al-Shabaab. Additionally, Hormuud has cut off telephone service during Al-Shabaab attacks against pro-Somali Government forces.


https://www.un.org/press/en/2012/sc10545.doc.htm

James Brown

mad muffin wrote: »

In a week that Ilhan Omar calling for the UN to take control of America’s borders, we now have this…

https://twitter.com/IlhanMN/status/1165688109176172544

In addition to providing funding, Hormuud Telecommunications has provided key material and logistical support to Al-Shabaab to include weapons, private fighters and ammunition. Spokespersons for moderate Somali groups have warned the Somali people not to use Hormuud Telecommunications Company, because Hormuud personnel listen in on conversations for Al-Shabaab. Additionally, Hormuud has cut off telephone service during Al-Shabaab attacks against pro-Somali Government forces.


https://www.un.org/press/en/2012/sc10545.doc.htm

You do know the U.S.A.'s track record right?

JohnMc1

mad muffin wrote: »

In a week that Ilhan Omar calling for the UN to take control of America’s borders, we now have this…

https://twitter.com/IlhanMN/status/1165688109176172544

In addition to providing funding, Hormuud Telecommunications has provided key material and logistical support to Al-Shabaab to include weapons, private fighters and ammunition. Spokespersons for moderate Somali groups have warned the Somali people not to use Hormuud Telecommunications Company, because Hormuud personnel listen in on conversations for Al-Shabaab. Additionally, Hormuud has cut off telephone service during Al-Shabaab attacks against pro-Somali Government forces.


https://www.un.org/press/en/2012/sc10545.doc.htm

But remember Kids...Trump is the real tyrant.

FreudianSlippers

notobtuse wrote: »

The FBI has an obligation to certify to the court before it approves FISA warrants that its evidence is verified, and to alert the judges to any flaws in its evidence or information that suggest the target might be innocent. The bureau, under a Democratic-controlled Justice Department, sought a warrant to spy on the duly nominated GOP candidate for president in the final weeks of the 2016 election, based on evidence that was generated under a contract paid by his political opponent. That evidence, the Steele dossier, was not fully vetted by the bureau and was deemed unverified. They planted a spy in the Trump administration, they lied to federal courts not once but four times in order to get a counterintelligence warrant. You had the Hillary campaign, democrats, and the Obama administration and his appointed flunkies in the FBI and DOJ trying to take out the Republican candidate for president of the United States. These are high crimes with criminal consequences. What charges could they be facing? I’m not sure but it has the potential for some of these bad actors spending decades behind bars.

But will charges be forthcoming? Probably not as it would tear the country apart even more than it already is. I think what we will probably see is a push by the deep state to admonish the bad actors in public, but whitewash their crimes and merely just put toothless new laws into effect that crimes of the Obama administration, his flunkies, Clinton and the democrats must not happen again. Sadly I predict like democrats and never-Trumpers will get away with their high crimes. Sad state of affairs, IMO.

It's weird, because on one hand you quoted my post implying that you were going to answer the question... but on the other hand you didn't even remotely answer the question.

That's leaving aside everything you said in there is borderline conspiracy theory stuff with only a loose grounding in reality.

notobtuse

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

It's weird, because on one hand you quoted my post implying that you were going to answer the question... but on the other hand you didn't even remotely answer the question.

That's leaving aside everything you said in there is borderline conspiracy theory stuff with only a loose grounding in reality.

You just didn't like my answer, eh? Some people can't handle the truth, apparently.

What criminal charges can be brought about for violation of the Espionage Act? 20 years imprisonment and fines up to $10,000, I believe.

The key dirty players, from most reports, who participated in political surveillance masquerading as national security, involve political appointees from the executive branch involve Brennan, Clapper, Comey, Baker, Rice, Power, McCabe, Yates, Strzok, and Rosenstein, so far. All reports I’ve read indicate there was a deliberate, multi-pronged effort to use the government’s most powerful tools to undermine a free and fair election, and after Trump was elected to try and unseat him, by the cast of characters listed. And it could even reach all the way up to Obama and Biden if a key text between Strzok and Page, that “The White House is running this”, is determined to be credible.

I hope Barr throws the book at them all.

James Brown

notobtuse wrote: »

You just didn't like my answer, eh? Some people can't handle the truth, apparently.

What criminal charges can be brought about for violation of the Espionage Act? 20 years imprisonment and fines up to $10,000, I believe.

The key dirty players, from most reports, who participated in political surveillance masquerading as national security, involve political appointees from the executive branch involve Brennan, Clapper, Comey, Baker, Rice, Power, McCabe, Yates, Strzok, and Rosenstein, so far. All reports I’ve read indicate there was a deliberate, multi-pronged effort to use the government’s most powerful tools to undermine a free and fair election, and after Trump was elected to try and unseat him, by the cast of characters listed. And it could even reach all the way up to Obama and Biden if a key text between Strzok and Page, that “The White House is running this”, is determined to be credible.

I hope Barr throws the book at them all.

Barr is compromised and damaged goods. Kavanagh is unfit. You left Trump's right hand man Cohen off your list and Don Jnr. who met with Russian operatives to get help with the election. How on earth do you think we are going to take you seriously when you spout White House level alternative truths all the time?

notobtuse

Matt Barrett wrote: »

Barr is compromised and damaged goods. Kavanagh is unfit. You left Trumps right hand man Cohen off your list and Don Jnr. who met with Russian operatives to get help with the election. How on earth do you think we are going to take your seriously when you spout White House level alternative truths all the time?

I’m sorry, but I have to laugh at this. I received an extensive ban in Politics for saying the Trump campaign was spied on, based on available reporting not coming from the liberal media intent on protecting Democrats at all costs. The same thing you say now was said back then. But who was right? ME! And from what has come out so far from the abuse investigation indicates Trump is once again correct in his assertions. But I think Trump hope's the criminal charges hold off for awhile, at least until the campaign goes into full swing. And if it does, look for Bloomberg to jump into the race and probably win the Democratic nomination.

James Brown

notobtuse wrote: »

I’m sorry, but I have to laugh at this. I received an extensive ban in Politics for saying the Trump campaign was spied on, based on available reporting not coming from the liberal media intent on protecting Democrats at all costs. The same thing you say now was said back then. But who was right? ME! And from what has come out so far from the abuse investigation indicates Trump is once again correct in his assertions. But I think Trump hope's the criminal charges hold off for awhile, at least until the campaign goes into full swing. And if it does, look for Bloomberg to jump into the race and probably win the Democratic nomination.

A nothing response.
Is the 'liberal media' any outlet that makes Trump look bad for being Trump? I'd call that 'the media'.

hetuzozaho

Matt Barrett wrote: »

A nothing response.
Is the 'liberal media' any outlet that makes Trump look bad for being Trump? I'd call that 'the media'.

His own Twitter account does this IMHO.

Particularly enjoying his hurricane Dorian map