Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Obummer plans insurgency against President Trump

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

  • #16
    You spent eight years grandstanding and soaking up admiration like a sponge. You made no attempts to maintain a connection with middle America. You put no effort into building the base of your party and now it is run by absolute lunatics that only appeal to people... that are lunatics. The Democrat party has devolved into complete insignificance. The 2018 elections will cement that fact when the Republicans gain a supermajority in the Senate. You oversaw all this and felt confident that your charm and charisma would be enough to guarantee a continued presidency to whatever sack of shit the Ds decided to run in 2016. And boy did you back a loser.

    When Democrat donors get sick of pissing away millions of dollars to fund these idiots, they will abandon them and start a new party that appeals to people with some semblance of morality and sanity. Until then, get used to their losing. Even Obama's pretty smile can't save that sinking ship.
    When the government pays, the government controls.

    Comment


    • #17
      rules for radicals. only problem is they didn't think about trump.
      my pop was a kennedy democrat . in the late 60's he had had enough. i have watched the slow progression of the leftist party. lbj kicked it off after they killed jfk because kennedy would not go along with their entitlement programs to control the poor.
      in the next 2 years look for obama and/or clinton to be charged with sedition . treason is way harder to prove .

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by bubbaearl View Post
        in the next 2 years look for obama and/or clinton to be charged with sedition . treason is way harder to prove .
        I seriously doubt either of them will ever be tried for anything. Bryan Pagliano and Huma are about as big as we can hope for. Pagliano has already been charged with contempt of congress and the FBI knows Huma mishandled classified material as they found it on her computer.

        Comment


        • #19
          Yeah, neither will be charged with anything
          1971 Ford Torino - Time to go bigger and better.

          2011 F150 Limited - Stock with a 6.2

          Comment


          • #20
            I wonder if General Lynn can be reinstated to his position. I would love to see that so that he can do inflict maximum damage on anybody that is involved in this coup.

            Comment


            • #21
              Not mine. I copied from the interwebs of fb.

              1. June 2016: FISA request. The Obama administration files a request with the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISA) to monitor communications involving Donald Trump and several advisers. The request, uncharacteristically, is denied.

              2. July 2016: The Russia joke. Wikileaks releases emails from the Democratic National Committee that show an effort to prevent Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) from winning the presidential nomination. In a press conference, Donald Trump refers to Hillary Clinton’s own missing emails, joking: “Russia, if you’re listening, I hope you’re able to find the 30,000 e-mails that are missing.” That remark becomes the basis for accusations by Clinton and the media that Trump invited further hacking.

              3. October 2016: Podesta emails. In October, Wikileaks releases the emails of Clinton campaign chair John Podesta, rolling out batches every day until the election, creating new mini-scandals. The Clinton campaign blames Trump and the Russians.

              4. October 2016: FISA request. The Obama administration submits a new, narrow request to the FISA court, now focused on a computer server in Trump Tower suspected of links to Russian banks. No evidence is found — but the wiretaps continue, ostensibly for national security reasons, Andrew McCarthy at National Review later notes. The Obama administration is now monitoring an opposing presidential campaign using the high-tech surveillance powers of the federal intelligence services.

              5. January 2017: Buzzfeed/CNN dossier. Buzzfeed releases, and CNN reports, a supposed intelligence “dossier” compiled by a foreign former spy. It purports to show continuous contact between Russia and the Trump campaign, and says that the Russians have compromising information about Trump. None of the allegations can be verified and some are proven false. Several media outlets claim that they had been aware of the dossier for months and that it had been circulating in Washington.

              6. January 2017: Obama expands NSA sharing. As Michael Walsh later notes, and as the New York Times reports, the outgoing Obama administration “expanded the power of the National Security Agency to share globally intercepted personal communications with the government’s 16 other intelligence agencies before applying privacy protections.” The new powers, and reduced protections, could make it easier for intelligence on private citizens to be circulated improperly or leaked.

              7. January 2017: Times report. The New York Times reports, on the eve of Inauguration Day, that several agencies — the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), the National Security Agency (NSA) and the Treasury Department are monitoring several associates of the Trump campaign suspected of Russian ties. Other news outlets also report the exisentence of “a multiagency working group to coordinate investigations across the government,” though it is unclear how they found out, since the investigations would have been secret and involved classified information.

              8. February 2017: Mike Flynn scandal. Reports emerge that the FBI intercepted a conversation in 2016 between future National Security Adviser Michael Flynn — then a private citizen — and Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak. The intercept supposedly was part of routine spying on the ambassador, not monitoring of the Trump campaign. The FBI transcripts reportedly show the two discussing Obama’s newly-imposed sanctions on Russia, though Flynn earlier denied discussing them. Sally Yates, whom Trump would later fire as acting Attorney General for insubordination, is involved in the investigation. In the end, Flynn resigns over having misled Vice President Mike Pence (perhaps inadvertently) about the content of the conversation.

              9. February 2017: Times claims extensive Russian contacts. The New York Times cites “four current and former American officials” in reporting that the Trump campaign had “repeated contacts with senior Russian intelligence officials. The Trump campaign denies the claims — and the Times admits that there is “no evidence” of coordination between the campaign and the Russians. The White House and some congressional Republicans begin to raise questions about illegal intelligence leaks.

              10. March 2017: the Washington Post targets Jeff Sessions. The Washington Post reports that Attorney General Jeff Sessions had contact twice with the Russian ambassador during the campaign — once at a Heritage Foundation event and once at a meeting in Sessions’s Senate office. The Post suggests that the two meetings contradict Sessions’s testimony at his confirmation hearings that he had no contacts with the Russians, though in context (not presented by the Post) it was clear he meant in his capacity as a campaign surrogate, and that he was responding to claims in the “dossier” of ongoing contacts. The New York Times, in covering the story, adds that the Obama White House “rushed to preserve” intelligence related to alleged Russian links with the Trump campaign. By “preserve” it really means “disseminate”: officials spread evidence throughout other government agencies “to leave a clear trail of intelligence for government investigators” and perhaps the media as well.

              In summary: the Obama administration sought, and eventually obtained, authorization to eavesdrop on the Trump campaign; continued monitoring the Trump team even when no evidence of wrongdoing was found; then relaxed the NSA rules to allow evidence to be shared widely within the government, virtually ensuring that the information, including the conversations of private citizens, would be leaked to the media.
              All in a bid to stop or overthrow a Trump administration.
              Fuck you. We're going to Costco.

              Comment


              • #22
                politics as usual.
                THE BAD HOMBRE

                Comment


                • #23
                  So now it's politics as usual when your guy gets busted. HAHA.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    It is pretty normal since the patriot act passed.... anything in the name of security.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by naynay View Post
                      politics as usual.
                      You mean, like Watergate?
                      When the government pays, the government controls.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        the move to socialism is slow and deliberate . entitlement , disarmament dominance .

                        Comment


                        • #27


                          Obama Advisor Rhodes Is Wrong: The President Can Order A Wiretap, And Why Trump May Have The Last Laugh

                          Following Trump's stunning allegation that Obama wiretapped the Trump Tower in October of 2016, prior to the presidential election, which may or may not have been sourced from a Breitbart story, numerous Democrats and media pundits have come out with scathing accusations that Trump is either mentally disturbed, or simply has no idea what he is talking about.

                          The best example of this came from Ben Rhodes, a former senior adviser to President Obama in his role as deputy National Security Advisor, who slammed Trump's accusation, insisting that "No President can order a wiretap. Those restrictions were put in place to protect citizens from people like you." He also said "only a liar" could make the case, as Trump suggested, that Obama wire tapped Trump Tower ahead of the election.

                          It would appear, however, that Rhodes is wrong, especially as pertains to matters of Foreign Intelligence Surveillance, and its associated FISA court, under which the alleged wiretap of Donald Trump would have been granted, as it pertained specifically to Trump's alleged illicit interactions with Russian entities.

                          In Chapter 36 of Title 50 of the US Code *War and National Defense", Subchapter 1, Section 1802, we read the following:

                          (1) Notwithstanding any other law, the President, through the Attorney General, may authorize electronic surveillance without a court order under this subchapter to acquire foreign intelligence information for periods of up to one year if the Attorney General certifies in writing under oath that—

                          (A) the electronic surveillance is solely directed at—
                          (i) the acquisition of the contents of communications transmitted by means of communications used exclusively between or among foreign powers, as defined in section 1801(a)(1), (2), or (3) of this title; or
                          (ii) the acquisition of technical intelligence, other than the spoken communications of individuals, from property or premises under the open and exclusive control of a foreign power, as defined in section 1801(a)(1), (2), or (3) of this title;

                          (B) there is no substantial likelihood that the surveillance will acquire the contents of any communication to which a United States person is a party; and

                          (C) the proposed minimization procedures with respect to such surveillance meet the definition of minimization procedures under section 1801(h) of this title; and
                          if the Attorney General reports such minimization procedures and any changes thereto to the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence and the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence at least thirty days prior to their effective date, unless the Attorney General determines immediate action is required and notifies the committees immediately of such minimization procedures and the reason for their becoming effective immediately.

                          While (B) seems to contradict the underlying permissive nature of Section 1802 as it involves a United States person, what the Snowden affair has demonstrated all too clearly, is how frequently the NSA and FISA court would make US citizens collateral damage. To be sure, many pointed out the fact that Fox News correspondent James Rosen was notoriously wiretapped in 2013 when the DOJ was investigating government leaks. The Associated Press was also infamously wiretapped in relation to the same investigation.

                          As pertains to Trump, the Guardian reported as much in early January, when news of the alleged anti-Trump dossier by former UK spy Chris Steele broke in January:

                          The Guardian has learned that the FBI applied for a warrant from the foreign intelligence surveillance (Fisa) court over the summer in order to monitor four members of the Trump team suspected of irregular contacts with Russian officials. The Fisa court turned down the application asking FBI counter-intelligence investigators to narrow its focus. According to one report, the FBI was finally granted a warrant in October, but that has not been confirmed, and it is not clear whether any warrant led to a full investigation.

                          Furthermore, while most Democrats - not to mention former president Obama himself - have been harshly critical of Trump's comments, some such as former Obama speechwriter Jon Favreau was quite clear in his warning to reporters that Obama did not say there was no wiretapping, effectively confirming it:


                          Favreau also urged his twitter followers to read a thread that explicitly suggested the prior existence of FISA-endorsed wiretaps:

                          Additionally, Philip Rucker, the WaPo's White House bureau chief echoed Favreau's caveat, namely that the Obama spokesman’s statement does not deny the existence of wiretaps on Trump Tower, only that Obama himself and the Obama White House did not approve them if they did exist.



                          Further implying the existence of such a wiretap was David Axelrod, who tweeted today that that such a wiretap could exist but would have "been OK'ed only for a a reason."


                          Yet ironically, it was none other than the Trump administration which just earlier this week announced it supports the renewal of spy law which incorporates the FISA court, without reforms: "the Trump administration does not want to reform an internet surveillance law to address privacy concerns, a White House official told Reuters on Wednesday, saying it is needed to protect national security. The announcement could put President Donald Trump on a collision course with Congress, where some Republicans and Democrats have advocated curtailing the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, or FISA, parts of which are due to expire at the end of the year."

                          "We support the clean reauthorization and the administration believes it's necessary to protect the security of the nation," the official said on condition of anonymity.



                          The FISA law has been criticized by privacy and civil liberties advocates as allowing broad, intrusive spying. It gained renewed attention following the 2013 disclosures by former National Security Agency contractor Edward Snowden that the agency carried out widespread monitoring of emails and other electronic communications.

                          In any event, the bottom line here appears to be that with his tweet, Trump has opened a can of worms with two possible outcomes: either the wiretaps exist as Trump has suggested, and the president will use them to attack both the Obama administration and the media for political overreach; or, there were no wiretaps, which as Matthew Boyle writes, would suggest the previous administration had no reason to suspect Trump colluded with a foreign government.

                          Senator Ben Sasse said as much in his statement issued earlier today:



                          The President today made some very serious allegations, and the informed citizens that a republic requires deserve more information. If there were wiretaps of then-candidate Trump's organization or campaign, then it was either with FISA Court authorization or without such authorization. If without, the President should explain what sort of wiretap it was and how he knows this. It is possible that he was illegally tapped. On the other hand, if it was with a legal FISA Court order, then an application for surveillance exists that the Court found credible.

                          But what is perhaps most important, is that we may know soon enough. As the NYT reported on Saturday afternoon, a senior White House official said that Donald F. McGahn II, the president’s chief counsel, was working on Saturday to secure access to what the official described as a document issued by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court authorizing surveillance of Mr. Trump and his associates.

                          If and when such a document is made public - assuming it exists of course - it would be Trump, once again, that gets the last laugh.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            this is all just a diversion tactic to pull attention away from Sessions, and the fact that on our first raid we lost a ranger.

                            in fact, how serious could it be when the POTUS makes this ridiculous claim in a tweet at 6:30am, then 3 minutes later, is tweeting about Arnold Schwarzenegger and the Celebrity Apprentice.
                            THE BAD HOMBRE

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by naynay View Post
                              this is all just a diversion tactic to pull attention away from Sessions, and the fact that on our first raid we lost a ranger.

                              in fact, how serious could it be when the POTUS makes this ridiculous claim in a tweet at 6:30am, then 3 minutes later, is tweeting about Arnold Schwarzenegger and the Celebrity Apprentice.
                              Is that what your fellow libbies are saying over on libnutjob.com? You know damn well that Obummer and his cronies started the "Russian" firestorm to set a trap for Trump and his cabinet and now they're putting the spin on whatever they can come up with to try to destroy it. You can go tell your friends that they will get more than they bargain for when the shit hits the fan.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X