There Was Spying On The Trump Campaign

[rogue06]

Your dishonesty is really despicable, but then you Evangelicals support Trump so one can expect no less.

The Dems have NEVER said they "want" illegal aliens in sanctuary cities.

Who else would need sanctuary cities? Legal immigrants?

[Mountain Man]

Who else would need sanctuary cities? Legal immigrants?

Indeed. The whole point of sanctuary cities is to protect illegals from being deported.

[oxmixmudd]

Investigating the hostile power is an entirely separate thing than spying on a presidential campaign.

You had the intersection of the two here rogue. It wasnt one or the other. There were compromised people working in the trump camoaign. Important people. And trump himself appealed to the russians for help, 'jesting' or not. Though It seems no matter how many of these issues are listed, an 'excuse' can be found for each by those sufficiently motivated to protect Trump.. Nevertheless there were a lot of shady actions and connections with the russians by people in and around the trump campaign, including trump himself. And that many red flags deserves to be investigated, if necessay snd if it can be legally justified, up to and including spying.

The only real issue here is going to be if somehow it can be shown that the warrant granting the right to surveil was somehow obtained illegally.

And since we no longer have any real hope that the attorney general of the us is himself an impartial individual, any such declaration, if it comes from barr or his office, will itself be suspect.

Jim

[Mountain Man]

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/crime-c...arrant-n893666

The FBI would have been derelict in its duty if it hadn't investigated accusations of meddling in the election by a hostile power.

Except the Papadapolous thing was a setup from the beginning, and the charges against him are suspect. He gave the FBI actionable information, but they refused to take advantage of it and accused him of lying in order to squeeze him for more information to use against Trump.

https://thefederalist.com/2018/09/04...#disqus_thread

Oh, and the initial arrest of Papadopoulos was a scam from the beginning. The FBI arranged for him to be given $10,000 by an Israeli asset, the idea being that when he returned with the money to the US, the FBI could nail him on treasury charges for failing to report it. But Papa wisely left the money with a lawyer in Greece, so when the FBI arrested him at the airport, and he didn't have the money they expected him to have, they suddenly had no probable cause and had to scramble to invent a reason to hold him.

Summary: George Papadopoulos and his wife Mangiane Papadopoulos were approached in Greece by a known CIA/FBI operative, Charles Tawil. Mr. Tawil enlists George as a business consultant, under the auspices of energy development interests, and hands him $10,000 in cash to take back to the U.S. Upon arrival at the Dulles airport Robert Mueller had FBI agents waiting. Papadopoulos was stopped and searched; however, he never had the cash because he smartly left it in Greece with his lawyer. Further:

[W]hen he was arrested at Dulles Airport on July 27 after coming off a flight from Munich, prosecutors had no warrant for him and no indictment or criminal complaint. The complaint would be filed the following morning and approved by Howell in Washington.

And when prosecutors filed the complaint the next day they got a spoken order from Howell to seal it, but followed up with a written request that they could take to the magistrate in Alexandria, where they showed up almost an hour later than she expected.

All of it suggests something of a scramble, rather than a carefully prepared plan to take Papadopoulos into custody.

https://theconservativetreehouse.com...-in-july-2017/

[Mountain Man]

And since we no longer have any real hope that the attorney general of the us is himself an impartial individual, any such declaration, if it comes from barr or his office, will itself be suspect.

On what basis do you claim that Barr is suspect? Is it because he didn't tell you what you so desperately wanted to hear? I bet it's because he didn't tell you what you so desperately wanted to hear.

Two-years of hopes and fevered dreams dashed in only four-pages.

[oxmixmudd]

Who else would need sanctuary cities? Legal immigrants?

What sanctuary cities are trying to do is protect otherwise good people that are here because of poverty or mortal danger from being deported without mercy. Sanctuary cities are not asking for criminals, and are not trying to prevent the deportation of bad elements, although they do bring those elements to themselves by attempting to extend mercy to the poor and outcast. One can make the case sanctuary cities are not an effective way to help to poor and disadvantaged. But one can not make the case sanctuary cities are an attempt to help criminal and violent gang members gain entry into the US.

But to then support Trump's vengence in this case is to then act in a way 10x worse than the actions Trump was ostensibly elected to correct. And those that support it, including trump, are supporting revenge that not only only doesn't help correct lax policies in the past, it outdoes them. It provides a mechanism, no matter how short a time it exists, that can be leveraged by gangs and cartels to flood our country with their ilk, removing even the weak barriers that exist to their entry.

It is also, plain and simple, vengence against people and governments that see an injustice and are trying to help the poor and disadvantaged. And for the most petty of reasons - they are in Donald Trump's way as he tries to solve the problem simplistically and without mercy.




Jim

[oxmixmudd]

On what basis do you claim that Barr is suspect? Is it because he didn't tell you what you so desperately wanted to hear? I bet it's because he didn't tell you what you so desperately wanted to hear.

Two-years of hopes and fevered dreams dashed in only four-pages.

Barr carries with him a view of President as much closer to king than ever envisioned by the founding fathers and should have never been confirmed. Further, with each firing, with each dismissal in office after office, we see a persistent policy from the president of ousting those that resist trumps authority on legal, constitutional or moral principle and a continued and persistent walk towards government officials in independent offices that are puppets of Donald Trump. He is gradually and effectively extending his power beyond that granted him by the constitution by placing into power people that are loyal first to him.

Ostensibly the founding fathers put a mechanism in place to help prevent a president from doing this: appointees had to be approved by the legislative branch. But the legislative branch is not doing it's job, and that provision is not all that effective in the end it seems, in that a weak willed and/or compromised legislative branch will not refuse to confirm those that are in fact willing to act as surrogates for Trump's wishes.


Jim

[Cow Poke]

On what basis do you claim that Barr is suspect?...

On the basis that he hasn't come out screaming that Trump is a nasty reprobate who needs to burn in Hell.

[tabibito]

On the basis that he hasn't come out screaming that Trump is a nasty reprobate who needs to burn in Hell.

Seems legit.

[Mountain Man]

Barr carries with him a view of President as much closer to king than ever envisioned by the founding fathers...

Presumably you can substantiate this assertion?

[oxmixmudd]

Presumably you can substantiate this assertion?

Source: Kinkopf

The conception of presidential power embraced in the Barr Memo goes well beyond the ordinary unitary executive claims

© Copyright Original Source

https://www.acslaw.org/acsblog/the-b...al-presidency/


Neil Kinkopf is ACS Faculty Advisor and Professor of Law, Georgia State University College of Law.


Jim

* I believe this is a mistake, he is discussing Barr's memo addressing Mueller's obstruction theory

[JimL]

You're full of crap, Jim.

Just because I'm not piling on with you and the band of liberal loonies foaming at the mouth in your hatred of trump doesn't mean I approve of his conduct, or that I'm "helping him get away" with anything.

Oh, yes you are helping him, you just like to fool yourself and others into thinking you're not. You think he belongs in office, that he shouldn't be impeached, you support him and blame it on his being the better alternative to Hillary. You're helping a treasonous autocrat to carry out his plan to centralize power into his hands alone. Unless you are ignorant, that is treasonous in and of itself.

What amazes me is that you appear to think you're accomplishing anything by spewing forth such hatred.

Expressing a curiosity as to why you are, or trying to educate you concerning your ignorance, is not spewing forth hatred.

[JimL]

A technique the MSM has been using for several decades to put forth unsubstantiated rumors and the like.

So, you think Trump is full of crap?

[JimL]

The foreign intelligence was the Steele dossier. Everything else came after.

Not that you actually care, but wrong as usual.

[Sparko]

It's a matter of semantics, but surveiling known Russian activity against the U.S., which happens to bleed into the Trump campaign, is not spying on the Trump campaign. Perhaps you would just like to allow such adversarial activity to go unchecked. Obviously you would!

You just said it was not spying:

Surveilance of known Russian activities which bleed into the Trump campaign is not the same thing as spying,

Now you are admitting it WAS spying, but just not against Trump's campaign?