Announcement

Collapse

Civics 101 Guidelines

Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!

Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less

Schiff Targets Political Rival, Journalist

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
    The Obama administration didn't even care about Russian election meddling, said it was no big deal until they thought they could use the narrative to beat up on Trump.
    That's false, ignorant, and in my opinion you understand it to be a lie. President Obama not only personally warned Putin to knock it off, but he also made it known to Congress what was taking place, and Moscow Mitch threatened that if Obama made that public that he, Moscow Mitch, would use it to to say that Obama was just trying to effect the election. It was the republican Congress, led by Moscow Mitch, that didn't care about Russian meddling, not the Obama administration.

    Comment


    • Meanwhile...

      Democrats have embraced the exact surveillance tactics they used to warn about

      For years, Democrats have been warning Americans about the dangers of law enforcement metadata collections. They cautioned that communication giants were working in cahoots with law enforcement to undermine our privacy. They said that metadata snooping might one day be used to smear other politicians.

      That was then. Today, House Intelligence Chairman Adam Schiff not only employs the power of the surveillance state to smear his colleagues and press his political agenda, he has set a number of dangerous precedents by “unmasking” his political rivals in an effort to smear them with innuendo.
      "Neighbor, how long has it been since you’ve had a big, thick, steaming bowl of Wolf Brand Chili?”

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
        Meanwhile...

        Democrats have embraced the exact surveillance tactics they used to warn about

        For years, Democrats have been warning Americans about the dangers of law enforcement metadata collections. They cautioned that communication giants were working in cahoots with law enforcement to undermine our privacy. They said that metadata snooping might one day be used to smear other politicians.

        That was then. Today, House Intelligence Chairman Adam Schiff not only employs the power of the surveillance state to smear his colleagues and press his political agenda, he has set a number of dangerous precedents by “unmasking” his political rivals in an effort to smear them with innuendo.

        What, exactly, have Democrats been warning Americans about the dangers of metadata collections? Has it not been the indiscriminate collection of metadata by agencies like the NSA?

        This is not that. These call records are subpoenas obtained from ISPs (e.g., AT&T, Verizon), not US government intelligence agencies, and obtained through lawful subpoena of Lev Parnas and Rudy Giuliani, two targets of the investigation. This is the traditional and uncontroversial collection of evidence during an investigation and has not been a subject of Democratic complaint over the years. What happened was that Solomon and Nunes were both caught being in contact, at best, or collusion, at worst, with the very people Trump enlisted to smear his own ambassador and push a Kremlin-approved conspiracy theory about Ukraine hacking the DNC/Cloudstrike servers.

        And -- I gotta say -- folks here know the difference. It wouldn't need to be explained again if people would just stop trying to latch onto each and every new thing bad actors are trying to make into a diversionary outrage.

        --Sam
        "I wonder about the trees. / Why do we wish to bear / Forever the noise of these / More than another noise / So close to our dwelling place?" — Robert Frost, "The Sound of Trees"

        Comment


        • Originally posted by JimLamebrain View Post
          That's false, ignorant, and in my opinion you understand it to be a lie. President Obama not only personally warned Putin to knock it off, but he also made it known to Congress what was taking place, and Moscow Mitch threatened that if Obama made that public that he, Moscow Mitch, would use it to to say that Obama was just trying to effect the election. It was the republican Congress, led by Moscow Mitch, that didn't care about Russian meddling, not the Obama administration.
          Yes, after they decided it was something they could use to beat up Trump. Obama originally blew it off.
          Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
          But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
          Than a fool in the eyes of God


          From "Fools Gold" by Petra

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Juvenal View Post
            In point of fact, the wailing and gnashing was coming from everyone but Trump, but apparently, because the Democrats were also opposed, the perpetual partisan hack bot doing your posting nowadays obligates you to push the other way, even if it's also against the entirety of the Republican party and the Trump administration, too.

            Bolton, and the NSC, were opposed. State, and Pompeo, were opposed. Defense was opposed. The joint staff was opposed.

            It's just you and Trump on this, rougebot.

            And Mick Mulvaney, maybe.

            Also in point of fact, the lethal aid under Trump's administration, opposed by Trump himself, is strategic, not tactical. Unlike the training and professionalization of their military, begun on a bipartisan basis under Obama, the Javelins aren't actually being used to lethal effect. Their presence on the battlefield deters the deployment of Russian tanks, meaning Russian tanks don't enter the battlefield.
            Which begs the question why the Obama administration refused to provide them. I appreciate you torpedoing your own post, clever insults not withstanding.
            Enter the Church and wash away your sins. For here there is a hospital and not a court of law. Do not be ashamed to enter the Church; be ashamed when you sin, but not when you repent. – St. John Chrysostom

            Veritas vos Liberabit<>< Learn Greek <>< Look here for an Orthodox Church in America<><Ancient Faith Radio
            sigpic
            I recommend you do not try too hard and ...research as little as possible. Such weighty things give me a headache. - Shunyadragon, Baha'i apologist

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Juvenal View Post
              First, it's "aid."

              And even more first ...
              ... the unanimous response is ranging from "no, you," to more partisan hackery, as if a heavy enough counter-accusation, repeatedly frequently enough, will somehow make the facts go away, or provide an excuse for the hackery.

              It's still nope. And more still nope.

              Even if your lies were true, they wouldn't amount to a defense of Trump's Russian butt-licking. And only the Russians call Ukraine "the Ukraine" anymore. They do it because it demeans Ukraine as an independent country. That's not a good look on someone accusing someone else of failing to support Ukraine against the Russians.
              Kindly disregard the "Amen." I pulled a CP.
              Enter the Church and wash away your sins. For here there is a hospital and not a court of law. Do not be ashamed to enter the Church; be ashamed when you sin, but not when you repent. – St. John Chrysostom

              Veritas vos Liberabit<>< Learn Greek <>< Look here for an Orthodox Church in America<><Ancient Faith Radio
              sigpic
              I recommend you do not try too hard and ...research as little as possible. Such weighty things give me a headache. - Shunyadragon, Baha'i apologist

              Comment


              • Originally posted by One Bad Pig View Post
                Kindly disregard the "Amen." I pulled a CP.
                I'm honored!
                "Neighbor, how long has it been since you’ve had a big, thick, steaming bowl of Wolf Brand Chili?”

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
                  I'm honored!
                  Enter the Church and wash away your sins. For here there is a hospital and not a court of law. Do not be ashamed to enter the Church; be ashamed when you sin, but not when you repent. – St. John Chrysostom

                  Veritas vos Liberabit<>< Learn Greek <>< Look here for an Orthodox Church in America<><Ancient Faith Radio
                  sigpic
                  I recommend you do not try too hard and ...research as little as possible. Such weighty things give me a headache. - Shunyadragon, Baha'i apologist

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by JimL View Post
                    Oh, that's easy. Schiff didn't have access to the data in the complaint, and the data in the complaint was substantiated, so the only one that could possibly have had anything to do with facts contained in the complaint itself, was the whistleblower himself. What do you think, that Schiff made the whole thing up and then it just happened to turn out to be true?
                    Evidently not - YOU stated you had evidence that PROVED Schiff did not have contact with the whistle blower prior to the complaint - WHERE IS IT?

                    To the converse:

                    Source: FactCheck.org / NYT


                    The New York Times broke the story on Oct. 2 that Schiff knew about “the outlines” of the whistleblower’s concerns before the Aug. 12 complaint was filed. The whistleblower had contacted an intelligence committee aide after passing along concerns to the CIA’s top lawyer and being “[c]oncerned about how that initial avenue for airing his allegations through the C.I.A. was unfolding,” the Times reported.

                    New York Times, Oct. 2: The House staff member, following the committee’s procedures, suggested the [whistleblower] find a lawyer to advise him and meet with an inspector general, with whom he could file a whistle-blower complaint. The aide shared some of what the officer conveyed to Mr. Schiff. The aide did not share the whistle-blower’s identity with Mr. Schiff, an official said.
                    Source

                    © Copyright Original Source



                    Seventh time: prove it. Where's this exonerating evidence you stated exists.

                    "He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain that which he cannot lose." - Jim Elliot


                    "Forgiveness is the way of love." Gary Chapman

                    My Personal Blog

                    My Novella blog (Current Novella Begins on 7/25/14)

                    Comment


                    • Shouldn't equal measure apply here? You claimed that Schiff had contact with the whistleblower and just posted a fact check that rebuts your claim. If JimL is to prove the negative (not quite sure how one would do that but the article you provide is evidence for his claim), shouldn't you provide evidence for the affirmative?

                      --Sam

                      Originally posted by Teallaura View Post
                      Evidently not - YOU stated you had evidence that PROVED Schiff did not have contact with the whistle blower prior to the complaint - WHERE IS IT?

                      To the converse:

                      Source: FactCheck.org / NYT


                      The New York Times broke the story on Oct. 2 that Schiff knew about “the outlines” of the whistleblower’s concerns before the Aug. 12 complaint was filed. The whistleblower had contacted an intelligence committee aide after passing along concerns to the CIA’s top lawyer and being “[c]oncerned about how that initial avenue for airing his allegations through the C.I.A. was unfolding,” the Times reported.

                      New York Times, Oct. 2: The House staff member, following the committee’s procedures, suggested the [whistleblower] find a lawyer to advise him and meet with an inspector general, with whom he could file a whistle-blower complaint. The aide shared some of what the officer conveyed to Mr. Schiff. The aide did not share the whistle-blower’s identity with Mr. Schiff, an official said.
                      Source

                      © Copyright Original Source



                      Seventh time: prove it. Where's this exonerating evidence you stated exists.
                      "I wonder about the trees. / Why do we wish to bear / Forever the noise of these / More than another noise / So close to our dwelling place?" — Robert Frost, "The Sound of Trees"

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by One Bad Pig View Post
                        Which begs the question why the Obama administration refused to provide them. I appreciate you torpedoing your own post, clever insults not withstanding.
                        You misspelled balancing.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Teallaura View Post
                          Evidently not - YOU stated you had evidence that PROVED Schiff did not have contact with the whistle blower prior to the complaint - WHERE IS IT?

                          To the converse:

                          Source: FactCheck.org / NYT


                          The New York Times broke the story on Oct. 2 that Schiff knew about “the outlines” of the whistleblower’s concerns before the Aug. 12 complaint was filed. The whistleblower had contacted an intelligence committee aide after passing along concerns to the CIA’s top lawyer and being “[c]oncerned about how that initial avenue for airing his allegations through the C.I.A. was unfolding,” the Times reported.

                          New York Times, Oct. 2: The House staff member, following the committee’s procedures, suggested the [whistleblower] find a lawyer to advise him and meet with an inspector general, with whom he could file a whistle-blower complaint. The aide shared some of what the officer conveyed to Mr. Schiff. The aide did not share the whistle-blower’s identity with Mr. Schiff, an official said.
                          Source

                          © Copyright Original Source



                          Seventh time: prove it. Where's this exonerating evidence you stated exists.
                          Ah, now I see your error. Thats why you should have answered me when I asked you about 5 or 6 times what it was that you wanted me to prove. I never claimed what you're asking me to prove, I never said that I had evidence that Schiff never talked with the whistleblower, what I said was "who cares if he did", what difference does it make?
                          Last edited by JimL; 12-11-2019, 01:40 AM.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Teallaura View Post
                            It's past time for a criminal investigation into Adam Schiff.
                            Originally posted by seer View Post
                            This is why all this needs to go to the Senate for trial...
                            Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
                            That will only happen if he switches parties.
                            Originally posted by seanD View Post
                            Schiff is 100% lawless.

                            I'm now leaning more towards this whole thing solely being a cover-up of Obama/Biden Ukraine activity. Trump was getting too close to the truth. CIA mole sounds the alarm to Schiff, and the Establishment Dems create the media smokes screen.
                            Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
                            They falsely accuse Trump of abuse of power while abusing power themselves.
                            This is what an echo chamber looks like.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Juvenal View Post
                              This is what an echo chamber looks like.
                              You could pick out all the contrary posts, including your own, and say the exact same thing. What does that prove?
                              Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
                              But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
                              Than a fool in the eyes of God


                              From "Fools Gold" by Petra

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by JimL View Post
                                Ah, now I see your error. Thats why you should have answered me when I asked you about 5 or 6 times what it was that you wanted me to prove. I never claimed what you're asking me to prove, I never said that I had evidence that Schiff never talked with the whistleblower, what I said was "who cares if he did", what difference does it make?
                                Ahem...

                                Originally posted by JimL View Post
                                If he had contact with the whistleblower, which for one, is just a republican assertion, and two, who the hell cares, and why? Schiff doesn't have anything to do with the whistleblowers complaint, which by the way is confirmed by evidence. So, seriously, other than your being told to care, why do you care?
                                That's the evidence she is asking for.

                                Comment

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by mossrose, Today, 07:12 PM
                                3 responses
                                18 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post mossrose  
                                Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, Today, 06:47 PM
                                2 responses
                                24 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post seer
                                by seer
                                 
                                Started by seer, Today, 09:32 AM
                                4 responses
                                53 views
                                1 like
                                Last Post seer
                                by seer
                                 
                                Started by Sparko, Today, 08:25 AM
                                70 responses
                                421 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Hypatia_Alexandria  
                                Started by CivilDiscourse, Today, 08:15 AM
                                6 responses
                                31 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post CivilDiscourse  
                                Working...
                                X