Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
If you can stand to listen to podcasts, this one's a doozy:
"‘Trump Has Spent His Entire Adult Life’ Finding Ways To Spy On People, Says GOP Pundit Who Had Her Emails Hacked
...
“There have been other instances where I’ve been told that C-Suite types, after staying in a Trump property, had some funny things happening on their cell phones after that, and had to have everything wiped or reconfigured,” she said. “So to assume that Trump has not been doing this sort of thing forever, well, we know that he has.”"
you just got shake your head at the political hackery going on here. Instead of acting as AG of the people, Barr has become another stooge lawyer for Trump, much like Giuliani.
Does Obama stooges names like Holder or Lynch ring a bell?
The FBI went to the FISA court, and swore under oath that Carter Page was a Russian spy, and was activity engaged in illegal activity on behalf of the Russians.
The FBI didn't say Page might be a spy, they swore under oath that he was a Russian spy.
I don't know how you can swear under oath that someone is a spy, activity engaged in illegal activity on behalf of the Russians, then it all turns out to be one big lie.
How do we as a country reconcile that?
We need to be willing to admit that conducting a surveillance operation, is by definition spying.
I know some people don't like the connotations of the word spying, but that was in actual fact what was going on.
And like i said, the bar that must crossed over in order to authorize a Democratic Party presidential administration to spy on the opposition party during the presidential general election, so it must be set incredibly high.
I admit that this is my conspiracy theory. It appears like a small cabal of Obama sycophants in the Obama DOJ walked over that bar, without any fact based evidence or justification, and created a hoax as a prelude to spy on Trump. Thinking that since Hilary was going to be a shoe in for president, once she was president all evidence of Obama's illegal activity would be erased.
I think that if the President or any members of the GOP *think* they were surveilled illegally, Barr has an ability to investigate it. He basically said that on TV. What I'm saying is that I don't think he needs hard evidence to start an investigation as was brought up earlier on thread. I think he can "just do it" if he feels the President feels that he was surveilled illegally.
It's not just "he can do it" - those people all work for him and the Buck ends with the DOJ.
It's his duty to make sure everything involved was "predicated" (does legally).
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goodnight
He didn't offer that this was regarding the Page FISA Warrant, he made it sound like it was some other illegal form of spying. Besides that has already been investigated.
Barr was responding to Shaheen's question as to why he was investigating the origin of the Mueller investigation and he stated it was because of spying. An Attorney General using that word for his own agency on national TV, we are in new territory.
It might help to view the entire transcript - Shaheen opened the thing and she is the person that introduced that ugly word "spying".
Senator Shaheen: News just broke, today, that you have a special team looking into why the FBI opened an investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 elections. I wonder if you can share with this committee: who is on that team; why you felt the need to form that kind of a team; and what you intend to be the scope of their investigation?
AG William Barr: Yeah, I, uh, as I said in my confirmation hearing, I am going to be reviewing both the genesis and the conduct of intelligence activities directed at the Trump campaign during 2016. And, uh, alot of this has already been investigated, and a substantial portion of this has been investigated, and is being investigated, by the office of the inspector general at the department. But one of the things I want to do is pull together all the information from the investigations that have gone on, including on the Hill and the department, and see if there are any remaining questions to be addressed.
Shaheen: Can you share with us why you feel the need to do that?
Barr: Well, for the same reason we are worried about foreign influence in elections we want to make sure that, uh, during an election, I think spying on a political campaign is a big deal. It’s a big deal.
The generation I grew up in, which is the Vietnam war period, people were all concerned about spying on anti-war people and so forth by the government; and there were a lot of rules put in place to ensure there was an adequate basis for, before our law enforcement agencies get involved in political surveillance. I’m not suggesting that those rules were violated, but I think it’s important to look at that; and I’m not just talking about the FBI necessarily, but the intelligence agencies more broadly.
Shaheen: So your not, your not suggesting though that spying occurred?
Barr: I don’t, well, I guess you could, I think there’s that spying did occur. Yes, I think spying did occur.
I think Shaheen gasped and then a long silence ........
Shaheen: Wow, let me, uh…
Barr: But the question is: whether it was predicated. Adequately predicated. And I’m not suggested that it wasn’t adequately predicated, but I need to explore that.
I think it’s my obligation, congress is usually very concerned about intelligence agencies and law enforcement agencies staying in their proper lane, and I want to make sure that happened; we have a lot of rules about that.
And, I want to say that I’ve said I’m reviewing this, I am going to, I haven’t set up a team yet but I do have, I have in mind having some colleagues help me pulling this information all together, and let me know if there’s some areas that should be looked at.
And I also want to make clear this is not launching an investigation of the FBI. Frankly, to the extent that there were issues at the FBI, I do not view it as a problem that’s endemic to the FBI. I think there was probably a failure among a group of leaders there, at the upper echelon; and so I don’t like to hear attacks about the FBI, because I think the FBI is an outstanding organization, and I think that Chris Wray is a great partner for me and I’m very pleased that he’s there as the director.
And if it becomes necessary to look over some former official activities, I expect that I’ll be relying heavily on Chris, and work closely with him in looking at that information. But, that’s what I’m doing, I feel I have an obligation to make sure that government power is not abused; I think that’s one of the principle roles of the attorney general.
Quote:
Originally Posted by stburr91
I find it strange that people are so willing to deny what we have known for a year now, they were spying on the Trump campaign.
This is not up for debate, it in fact happened.
AG Barr is acknowledging this fact, and is looking to see that the spying that took place was properly predicated.
Exactly -- further in the hearing, he was quizzed several times about "what evidence to you have" and berated for the word "spying" .... that quickly became a rally cry by the Democrats. Barr carefully used the word "basis" -- they don't discuss on-going Investigations, we should all know this by now. He said he wasn't going to discuss any of it while waiting for all investigations to be completed - but that he did find a "basis" to look at it all. He correctly stated it's his DUTY to make sure his employees and those he has the responsibility to oversee are following the Law and that their actions are legally "predicated".
Last edited by Kibby; 04-11-2019 at 11:20 AM..
Reason: copy to save
]You cannot even back up your assumption that Barr is suddenly a Trumptoady.[/b] So yeah, it smacks of a conspiracy theory.
Why is Barr a toady of Trump's, because after a federal special counsel looked for evidence of Russian collusion for two years, and finding none whatsoever, and Barr wants to investigate what the hell the justification that was used for all the spying and surveillance. This makes Barr a Trump toady?
The bar needs to be set incredibly high, to justify the pro-Hilary Obama administration to spy on the opposition Party's presidential candidate. Is it so odd that Barr wants to see what was used to leap over that bar???
Where did I say that Barr "is suddenly" a Trump toady? What I said was: "..so far from what I have seenof him…". And the phrase "so far" includes Barr's June 2018 memo ripping the Mueller probe. That memo indicated to me that Barr is in the tank for Trump, and that is why he got the AG job--to run interference for Trump. So I'm not saying that Barr is "suddenly" a Trump toady. I'm saying that Barr has been a Trump toady going back to at least June of 2018.
If you can stand to listen to podcasts, this one's a doozy:
"‘Trump Has Spent His Entire Adult Life’ Finding Ways To Spy On People, Says GOP Pundit Who Had Her Emails Hacked
...
“There have been other instances where I’ve been told that C-Suite types, after staying in a Trump property, had some funny things happening on their cell phones after that, and had to have everything wiped or reconfigured,” she said. “So to assume that Trump has not been doing this sort of thing forever, well, we know that he has.”"
Cheri Jacobus is a "doozy" - which is why two publications she did freelance work for FIRED her.
Both The Hill and USA Today decided to not publish the "doozy" who was advocating child rape and suicide. She is a known "Anti-Trumper" who also claims she was "considered for a job in the Trump White House" ..... and her email "hacking" accusations are all about "may" and "been told". She is pretty much out in Left Field with her delusions. Can't keep a job and is reduced to Podcasts like this one.
Jacobus, a #NeverTrump Republican, is most well known for losing a $4 million defamation lawsuit against Donald Trump in December 2017.
Jacobus accused the president of hurting her career after he chided her as a “real dummy” on Twitter. Trump’s ire had been stirred after Jacobus suggested in January, 2016 that he skipped a GOP primary debate in Iowa because he was a “bad debater.”
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
