Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,963
Likes: 29
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
OP Offline
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,963
Likes: 29
HOUSE MEMO STATES DISPUTED DOSSIER WAS KEY TO FBI's FISA WARRANT

 Quote:

A much-hyped memo that shows alleged government surveillance abuse during the 2016 campaign has been released to the public and cites testimony from a high-ranking government official who says the FBI and DOJ would not have sought surveillance warrants to spy on a member of the Trump team without the infamous, Democrat-funded anti-Trump dossier.

Republicans on the House Intelligence Committee released the memo Friday. The White House responded by saying the memo “raises serious concerns about the integrity of decisions made at the highest levels of the Department of Justice and the FBI to use the government’s most intrusive surveillance tools against American citizens.”

The dossier, authored by former British spy Christopher Steele and commissioned by Fusion GPS, was paid for by the Democratic National Committee and Hillary Clinton's presidential campaign through law firm Perkins Coie. It included salacious and unverified allegations about Trump's connections to Russia.

The memo, which has been at the center of an intense power struggle between congressional Republicans and the FBI, specifically cites the DOJ and FBI’s surveillance of Trump campaign adviser Carter Page, saying the dossier "formed an essential part" of the application to spy on him.


Republicans have charged that the FBI used the dubious dossier, prepared as campaign opposition research for Clinton’s presidential bid, to get permission from the secret Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, or FISA, court to eavesdrop on Trump campaign and transition team communications.

The memo states that in December 2017, then FBI deputy director Andrew McCabe testified that “no surveillance warrant would have been sought” from the FISA court “without the Steele dossier information.”


The memo also says Steele was eventually cut off from the FBI for being chatty with the media. It says he was terminated in October 2016 as an FBI source “for what the FBI defines as the most serious of violations—an unauthorized disclosure to the media of his relationship with the FBI.”

But even after his termination, Steele remained in close contact with then-Associate Deputy Attorney General Bruce Ohr. Ohr’s wife, Nellie, began working for Fusion GPS, the firm behind the dossier, as early as May 2016.

According to the memo, Steele told Ohr that he “was desperate that Donald Trump not get elected and was passionate about him not being president.” But it says the FISA application process “ignored or concealed his anti-Trump financial and ideological motivations."

“This clear evidence of Steele’s bias was recorded by Ohr at the time and subsequently in official FBI files – but not reflected in any of the Page FISA applications,” the memo reads.

It also claims the FBI and DOJ used media reporting to lend credibility to the dossier. Fusion GPS, it says, briefed major American news outlets to include New York Times, Washington Post, CNN, New Yorker, Yahoo and Mother Jones on its contents.

Speaking to reporters on Friday, Trump, who has read the memo, called the contents “a disgrace.”

“A lot of people should be ashamed of themselves,” he said.

Attorney General Sessions responded to the release by saying he will “forward to appropriate DOJ components all information I receive from Congress regarding this.”

A senior U.S. official said that indicates Sessions will be referring the allegations in the memo to the Department of Justice Inspector General, which can work directly with US attorneys to build prosecutions.
“I am determined that we will fully and fairly ascertain the truth,” Sessions said.



For me, this was among the most over-hyped things since Geraldo Rivera opened Al Capone's vault, and it was completely empty.

While I think the plot against Trump by James Comey, Rod Rosenstein, Andrew McCabe, Bruce Ohr, Peter Strzok and Lisa Page really is newsworthy and a clear conspiracy against Trump, this memo wasn't the silver bullet that it was hyperbolically touted to be.

And Hannity and others who overplayed the memo to be proof that "will make Watergate look like stealing a Snickers bar" have hurt their own credibility by jumping the gun.

Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,792
Likes: 40
Fair Play!
15000+ posts
Offline
Fair Play!
15000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,792
Likes: 40
At some point does it get a little ridiculous that it's everybody conspiring against Trump? The women, the media, democrats, the FBI and those in his own party? And it's a big problem for Trump if your disappointed in the memo. I think this memo was to be used to fire some more people.


Fair play!
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,963
Likes: 29
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
OP Offline
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,963
Likes: 29
The women accusers mostly ARE Democrats, and very partisan in their opinion about Trump being president and wanting to stop him.

The media likewise are an auxiliary of the DNC, absolutely no separation between them, and eager to carry the DNC talking points and stop Trump by any means, and in numerous cases have said that's their holy mission, to stop Trump.

All the stated people above (Loretta Lynch, James Comey, Rod Rosenstein, Bruce Ohr >>AND<<< his Fusion GPS-employed wife, Andrew McCabe >>>AND<<< his Terry MacAuliff/Clinton campaign-funded wife, Peter Strzok, Lisa Page, on and on).
ALL have made clear in their direct e-mail/texted words or by advancing corrupt investigation that was clearly faked, their commitment to prevent Trump from becoming president, and (backup plan) to destroy his integrity by illicit fake evidence and cripple his presidency.

Comey leaked federal information to a college professor buddy, in his own congressional hearing videotaped words, for the expressed purpose of paving the way for a special investigation, based on fake evidence.

Rosenstein in a written report to Trump called for Comey to be fired as the only way to restore FBI internal morale, and to restore public trust in the FBI's integrity. THEN ROSENSTEIN CALLED FOR A SPECIAL INVESTIGATION, to investigate Trump's firing of Comey, THAT ROSENSTEIN HIMSELF RECOMMENDED! Why is there even an investigation?

The FISA requests to do surveillance on Trump officials was based on a DNC/Hillary-commissioned "dossier" by Chris Steele, and Rosenstein AGAIN was the hand that authorized the FISA requests, knowing that the evidence was fake. And bamboozled a judge into signing off on the FISA surveillance, with pseudo-corroboration of "verifying source" that also came from Steele (Yahoo News).

My disappointment with the Devin Nunes memo release is despite that it codifies what has been known for weeks, it offers no new evidence beyond what has been revealed over the last 2 weeks. But even if it was a silver bullet that proved everything, Democrats and the DNC Newspeak media would still pretend it didn't exist. They pretend what was already known doesn't exist and portray it as insignificant.

My complaint isn't that the evidence of Democrat/FBI/DOJ/Russian collusion doesn't exist, it's that the latest "memo" added to the stack of evidence was simply overhyped to a be smoking gun that it wasn't. At least not as dramatic a smoking gun as was promised in the hype.



Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,963
Likes: 29
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
OP Offline
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,963
Likes: 29
While not as dramatic as the hyperbole leading up to it, release of the Nunes memo confirmed:

1) that the Christopher Steele "Russia dossier" (commissioned by the Hillary Clinton campaign, and provably salacious and untrue) was the basis for the FISA surveillance request on Trump officials Carter Page, General Flynn, and Paul Manafort.

2) That the only verification of the dossier in obtaining the FISA surveillance request was a Yahoo News article by Michael Isikoff (which was in fact sourced from a press release to Isikoff by Christopher Steele, printed almost verbatim by Isikoff, and therefore not an actual second verifying source.)


3) As Andrew McCabe stated in congressional testimony, without the "Russia dossier", there would have been no basis for the FISA surveillance of Trump officials. IT NEVER WOULD HAVE BEEN APPROVED, AND WAS OBTAINED WITH FALSE EVIDENCE.

4) That Andrew McCabe, James Comey and others KNEW the "Russian dossier" basis for the FISA surveillance request on Trump officials was false evidence when they submitted it. That if a police officer or attorney did the same as McCabe and Comey, it would cost them their badges, and likely result in charges that would put them in jail.

5) The judges who approved the surveillance are in question too, for not investigating the evidence submitted to them by McCabe and Comey. And they could rescind the FISA surveillance order, ending all charges against Carter Page, General Flynn, and Paul Manafort. Fruit of a poisoned tree, that would throw all the evidence out of court, for the false pretenses under which it was obtained.


Finally (my own speculation) the fact that (5) has not occurred yet makes me wonder if the judges who approved the secret court FISA request are Deep State conspirators as well, that they are not outraged by the deceit of McCabe and Comey that allowed them to get the FISA request, and that they have not demanded that the poisoned fruit be thrown out by rescinding their initial FISA surveillance approval.

Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,792
Likes: 40
Fair Play!
15000+ posts
Offline
Fair Play!
15000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,792
Likes: 40
Everything you posted is being heavily contested by the Dems on the committee and the FBI and the DOJ. Carter Page called himself an advisor to the Kremlin. It shouldn't have been surprising that the FBI was keeping tabs on him.


Fair play!
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,792
Likes: 40
Fair Play!
15000+ posts
Offline
Fair Play!
15000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,792
Likes: 40


Fair play!
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,963
Likes: 29
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
OP Offline
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,963
Likes: 29


It's beyond challenge that the "Russia dossier" was commissioned by the Clinton campaign, and that the "evidence" in it is false and easily contested. It's beyond challenge that it was the basis for the FISA request.

It'ss beyond challenge and by their own admission that McCabe and Comey said that without the Russia dossier there would have been insufficient evidence for the secret court to approve surveillance of Trump officials.

Beyond outright DNC/liberal media lies, I don't know how those facts can be twisted.

Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,792
Likes: 40
Fair Play!
15000+ posts
Offline
Fair Play!
15000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,792
Likes: 40
We've only seen the memo that Nunes partisanly had produced. You can take his and Trump's word for it but that hardly constitutes fact.


Fair play!
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,963
Likes: 29
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
OP Offline
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,963
Likes: 29

It's laughable that you call Nunes "partisan", and treat guys like Rep. Adam Schiff, Comey, McCabe, Peter Strzok, Lisa Page and Christopher Steele as truth-tellers!
THEIR partisan bias is plain as day, in their own text messages and testimony.

Nunes has endured a lot of abuse and investigation of himself to tell THE TRUTH!

Democrats, conversely, at every turn want to sweep everything under a rug and hide the true facts. Democrats' shaving of the facts and punishing of truth-tellers is akin to a Soviet KGB investigation, only interested in exonerating themselves and destroying opponents.

Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,792
Likes: 40
Fair Play!
15000+ posts
Offline
Fair Play!
15000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,792
Likes: 40
It's not really even debatable that Nunes is being a partisan WB. The memo was pushed through along partisan lines with even some republicans like McCain criticizing it. When it's just one party pushing it through that alone makes it partisan. If they did indeed cherry pick facts to mislead than you should also have a problem with that dishonesty.


Fair play!
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,963
Likes: 29
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
OP Offline
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,963
Likes: 29
 Originally Posted By: Matter-eater Man
It's not really even debatable that Nunes is being a partisan WB. The memo was pushed through along partisan lines with even some republicans like McCain criticizing it. When it's just one party pushing it through that alone makes it partisan. If they did indeed cherry pick facts to mislead than you should also have a problem with that dishonesty.



"Even with Republicans like McCain criticizing it..."

\:lol\:

Do you REALLY think that McCain is a mainstream Republican, and that McCain DOESN'T have a clear hostility toward all things Trump?

In THE SHADOW PARTY, David Horowitz cites McCain as a Republican who secretly trades favors with George Soros. That doesn't sound like a principled conservative Republican to me. It sounds like a liberal progressive disguised in Republican sheep's clothing.

What is partisan is the Democrats who along a straight party line oppose anything Trump or Republicans offer in the way of policy. Democrats' goal is not the best interest of the nation or its people, it's just childishly denying any political victory to Trump and the Republicans.
And they are proven wrong over and over again. Schumer and Pelosi predicted Armageddon if Trump's tax reform were passed, and instead it has resulted in bonuses and raises for hundreds of thousands of workers nationwide. As well as corporations moving offices and factories and financial assets back into the United States.

Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,963
Likes: 29
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
OP Offline
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,963
Likes: 29

Incredible, what's been revealed over the last few days.

Particularly regarding Rep. Adam Schiff, the Democrat weasel who is attempting to make himself the DNC's Joe McCarthy, in his false accusations against Republicans as "traitors" and so forth at every turn.

Today it was revealed that two Russian comedians called Schiff's office and spoke to him directly for 8 minutes. They told him they had nude photos of Donald Trump, and Schiff audibly was taking careful notes, and talked about meeting Schiff to give him the photos. And that's different from Donald Trump's meeting with Veselnetskaya... how?
Schiff tried to walk it back and allege he knew it was a prank, but listening to the call, it was obvious Schiff was taking it seriously and taking detailed notes.

Ah, the hypocrisy runs deep. Who's the "traitor" now, dipshit?

It is, and always has been, the Democrats, the party of consistent treason since the days of FDR, McCarthy, the Vietnam war, the Persian gulf war, the Iraq war, on up to the present.

Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,963
Likes: 29
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
OP Offline
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,963
Likes: 29
KERRY CONTINUES THE TRADITION OF ANTI-WAR SOVIET PROPAGANDA

 Quote:
The Vietnam-era antiwar movement got its spin from the Kremlin.

by Ion Mihai Pacepa
February 26, 2004 8:28 AM



Part of Senator John Kerry’s appeal to a certain segment of Americans is his Vietnam-veteran status coupled with his antiwar activism during that period. On April 12, 1971, Kerry told the U.S. Congress that American soldiers claimed to him that they had, “raped, cut off ears, cut off heads, taped wires from portable telephones to human genitals and turned on the power, cut off limbs, blew up bodies, randomly shot at civilians, razed villages in a fashion reminiscent of Genghis Khan.”

The exact sources of that assertion should be tracked down. Kerry also ought to be asked who, exactly, told him any such thing, and what it was, exactly, that they said they did in Vietnam. Statutes of limitation now protect these individuals from prosecution for any such admissions. Or did Senator Kerry merely hear allegations of that sort as hearsay bandied about by members of antiwar groups (much of which has since been discredited)? To me, this assertion sounds exactly like the disinformation line that the Soviets were sowing worldwide throughout the Vietnam era.

KGB priority number one at that time was to damage American power, judgment, and credibility. One of its favorite tools was the fabrication of such evidence as photographs and “news reports” about invented American war atrocities. These tales were purveyed in KGB-operated magazines that would then flack them to reputable news organizations. Often enough, they would be picked up. News organizations are notoriously sloppy about verifying their sources. All in all, it was amazingly easy for Soviet-bloc spy organizations to fake many such reports and spread them around the free world.

As a spy chief and a general in the former Soviet satellite of Romania, I produced the very same vitriol Kerry repeated to the U.S. Congress almost word for word and planted it in leftist movements throughout Europe. KGB chairman Yuri Andropov managed our anti-Vietnam War operation. He often bragged about having damaged the U.S. foreign-policy consensus, poisoned domestic debate in the U.S., and built a credibility gap between America and European public opinion through our disinformation operations. Vietnam was, he once told me, “our most significant success.”


The KGB organized a vitriolic conference in Stockholm to condemn America’s aggression, on March 8, 1965, as the first American troops arrived in south Vietnam. On Andropov’s orders, one of the KGB’s paid agents, Romesh Chandra, the chairman of the KGB-financed World Peace Council, created the Stockholm Conference on Vietnam as a permanent international organization to aid or to conduct operations to help Americans dodge the draft or defect, to demoralize its army with anti-American propaganda, to conduct protests, demonstrations, and boycotts, and to sanction anyone connected with the war.

It was staffed by Soviet-bloc undercover intelligence officers and received about $15 million annually from the Communist Party’s international department–on top of the WPC’s $50 million a year, all delivered in laundered cash dollars. Both groups had Soviet-style secretariats to manage their general activities, Soviet-style working committees to conduct their day-to-day operations, and Soviet-style bureaucratic paperwork. The quote from Senator Kerry is unmistakable Soviet-style sloganeering from this period. I believe it is very like a direct quote from one of these organizations’ propaganda sheets.

The KGB campaign to assault the U.S. and Europe by means of disinformation was more than just a few Cold War dirty tricks. The whole foreign policy of the Soviet-bloc states, indeed its whole economic and military might, revolved around the larger Soviet objective of destroying America from within through the use of lies. The Soviets saw disinformation as a vital tool in the dialectical advance of world Communism.

The Stockholm conference held annual international meetings up to 1972. In its five years of existence it created thousands of “documentary” materials printed in all the major Western languages describing the “abominable crimes” committed by American soldiers against civilians in Vietnam, along with counterfeited pictures. All these materials were manufactured by the KGB’s disinformation department. I would print up these materials in hundreds of thousands of copies each.

The Romanian DIE (Ceausescu’s secret police) was tasked to distribute these KGB-concocted “incriminating documents” all over Western Europe. And ordinary people often bought it hook, line, and sinker. “Even Attila the Hun looks like an angel when compared to these Americans,” a West German businessman reprovingly told me after reading one such report.

The Italian, Greek, and Spanish Communist parties serviced by Bucharest were much affected by this material and their activists regularly distributed translations. They also handed them out to the participants at anti-American demonstrations around the world. Many “Ban-the-Bomb” and anti-nuclear movements were KGB-funded operations, too. I can no longer look at a petition for world peace or other supposedly noble cause, particularly of the anti-American variety, without thinking to myself, “KGB.”

In 1978, when I broke with Communism, my DIE was propagating the line that Washington’s adventure in Vietnam had wasted over $200 trillion. This waste, we warned darkly, would soon generate European inflation, recession, and unemployment. As far as I’m concerned, the KGB gave birth to the antiwar movement in America. In 1976, Andropov gave my own Romanian DIE credit for helping his KGB do so.

Leftist intellectuals in America now look to Europe–steeped for years in anti-American propaganda from the Soviet Union–for “a sane and frank European criticism of the Bush administration’s war policy.” Indeed, anti-Americanism in Europe today is almost as ferocious as it was during Vietnam. France and Germany insist we are torturing the al Qaeda prisoners held at Guantanamo Base. The Mirror, a British newspaper, is confident that President Bush and Prime Minister Tony Blair were “killing innocents in Afghanistan.” The Paris daily Le Monde put Jean Baudrillard on its front page asserting that “the Judeo-Christian West, led by America, not only provoked the [September 11] terrorist attacks, it actually desired them.”

In June 2002, a documentary film on “U.S. war crimes” in Afghanistan was shown in the German Bundestag by the crypto-Communist Party of Democratic Socialism (PDS). The film faithfully reincarnated the style of old Soviet-bloc “documentaries” demonizing the U.S. war in Vietnam. According to this 20-minute movie, American soldiers were involved in the torture and murder of some 3,000 Taliban prisoners in the region of Mazar-e-Sharif. One witness in the film even claimed he had seen an American soldier break the neck of one Afghan prisoner and pour acid on others.

During my last meeting with Andropov, he said, wisely, “now all we have to do is to keep the Vietnam-era anti-Americanism alive.” Andropov was a shrewd judge of human nature. He understood that in the end our original involvement would be forgotten, and our insinuations would take on a life of their own. He knew well that it was just the way human nature worked.
_______________________________

–Ion Mihai Pacepa was acting chief of Romania’s espionage service and national-security adviser to the country’s president. He is the highest-ranking intelligence officer ever to have defected from the former Soviet bloc.



Just a reminder of which party has been carrying Soviet/Russian water for over 50 years.

This former Rumanian director of Soviet propaganda who made up stories about American soldiers during the Vietnam war, who defected decades later to the U.S., and 4 decades later in 2004, was astonished to see John Kerry and other Democrats STILL repeating his manufactured false talking points.

And who would know better that the Democrat talking points are false, than the Soviet propaganda minister WHO MADE THEM UP IN THE FIRST PLACE?




  • from Do Racists have lower IQ's...

    Liberals who bemoan discrimination, intolerance, restraint of Constitutional freedoms, and promotion of hatred toward various abberant minorities, have absolutely no problem with discriminating against, being intolerant of, restricting Constitutional freedoms of, and directing hate-filled scapegoat rhetoric against conservatives.

    EXACTLY what they accuse Republicans/conservatives of doing, is EXACTLY what liberals/Democrats do themselves, to those who oppose their beliefs.
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,963
Likes: 29
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
OP Offline
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,963
Likes: 29

MCCARTHYISM: THE ROSETTA STONE OF LIBERAL LIES

 Quote:
November 7, 2007

by Ann Coulter


When I wrote a ferocious defense of Sen. Joe McCarthy in Treason: Liberal Treachery from the Cold War to the War on Terrorism , liberals chose not to argue with me. Instead they posted a scrolling series of reasons not to read my book, such as that I wear short skirts, date boys, and that "Treason" was not a scholarly tome.

After printing rabidly venomous accounts of McCarthy for half a century based on zero research, liberals would only accept research presenting an alternative view of McCarthy that included, as the Los Angeles Times put it, at least the "pretense of scholarly throat-clearing and objectivity."

This week, they got it. The great M. Stanton Evans has finally released Blacklisted by History: The Untold Story of Senator Joe McCarthy and His Fight Against America's Enemies . Based on a lifetime's work, including nearly a decade of thoroughgoing research, stores of original documents and never-before-seen government files, this 672-page book ends the argument on Joe McCarthy. Look for it hidden behind stacks of Bill Clinton's latest self-serving book at a bookstore near you.

Evans' book is such a tour de force that liberals are already preparing a "yesterday's news" defense -- as if they had long ago admitted the truth about McCarthy. Yes, and they fought shoulder to shoulder with Ronald Reagan to bring down the Evil Empire. Thus, Publishers Weekly preposterously claims that "the history Evans relates is already largely known, if not fully accepted." Somebody better tell George Clooney.

The McCarthy period is the Rosetta stone of all liberal lies. It is the textbook on how they rewrite history -- the sound chamber of liberal denunciations, their phony victimhood as they demean and oppress their enemies, their false imputation of dishonesty to their opponents, their legalization of every policy dispute, their ability to engage in lock-step shouting campaigns, and the black motives concealed by their endless cacophony.

The true story of Joe McCarthy, told in meticulous, irrefutable detail in "Blacklisted by History," is that from 1938 to 1946, the Democratic Party acquiesced in a monstrous conspiracy being run through the State Department, the military establishment, and even the White House to advance the Soviet cause within the U.S. government.

In the face of the Democrats' absolute refusal to admit to their fecklessness, fatuity and recklessness in allowing known Soviet spies to penetrate the deepest levels of government, McCarthy demanded an accounting.

Even if one concedes to on-the-one-hand-on-the-other-hand whiners like Ronald Radosh that Truman's Secretary of State Dean Acheson didn't like communism, his record is what it was. And that record was to treat Soviet spies like members of the Hasty Pudding Club.

Rather than own up to their moral blindness to Soviet espionage, Democrats fired up the liberal slander machine, which would be deployed again and again over the next half century to the present day. In hiding their own perfidy, liberals were guilty of every sin they lyingly imputed to McCarthy. There were no "McCarthyites" until liberals came along.

Blacklisted by History proves that every conventional belief about McCarthy is wrong, including:

-- That he lied about his war service: He was a tailgunner in World War II;
-- That he was a drunk: He would generally nurse a single drink all night;
-- That he made the whole thing up: He produced loads of Soviet spies in government jobs;
-- That he just did it for political gain: He understood perfectly the godless evil of communism.

Ironically, for all of their love of conspiracy theories -- the rigging of the 2000 election, vote suppression in Ohio in 2004, 9/11 being an inside job, oil companies covering up miracle technology that would allow cars to run on dirt, Britney Spears' career, etc., etc. -- when presented with an actual conspiracy of Soviet spies infiltrating the U.S. government, they laughed it off like world-weary skeptics and dedicated themselves to slandering Joe McCarthy.

Then as now, liberals protect themselves from detection with wild calumnies against anybody who opposes them. They have no interest in -- or aptitude for -- persuasion. Their goal is to anathematize their enemies. Blacklisted by History removes the curse from one of the greatest patriots in American history.



Ann Coulter details Democrat treason back to the days of FDR and Truman. Where they were warned and aware of Soviet spies in the U.S., had the chance to contain the threat, and instead dismissively did nothing, and let Soviet agents run wild in high level positions, gathering information.

And how do we know this happened? After the collapse of the Soviet Union, the Kremlin's own records were available to reveal it.

No thanks to the Democrats.


Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,963
Likes: 29
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
OP Offline
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,963
Likes: 29

Man...

This morning I watched Fox News, and the opening story was a text discovered between Peter Strzok and Lisa Page a month on Sept 2nd, a month before the Nov 2016 election saying: "POTUS wants to know everything we're doing."

That takes things to a whole new level, if Obama had personal involvement and knowledge of the FISA surveillance of Trump officials.

Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,792
Likes: 40
Fair Play!
15000+ posts
Offline
Fair Play!
15000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,792
Likes: 40
You might want to also read the actual historical records WB. The vote to censure McCarthy was not a partisan affair. I know by now facts don't matter but I would hope republicans rise up today like they did back than when power was abused.


Fair play!
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,963
Likes: 29
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
OP Offline
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,963
Likes: 29
 Originally Posted By: Matter-eater Man
You might want to also read the actual historical records WB. The vote to censure McCarthy was not a partisan affair. I know by now facts don't matter but I would hope republicans rise up today like they did back than when power was abused.



YOU could try reading, M E M.

The bipartisan condemnation of McCarthy was based on the perception that what McCarthy alleged was false. But as I just quoted Coulter citing, the Kremlin records after the Soviet Union collapsed vindicated McCarthy, decades after-the-fact.

There were Soviet spies everywhere, and the Kremlin's own records show that. Espionage that Democrat complacency allowed to happen.

Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,963
Likes: 29
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
OP Offline
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,963
Likes: 29


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_McCarthy#Arguments_for_vindication

 Quote:
ARGUMENTS FOR VINDICATION

McCarthy remains a controversial figure. Some scholars assert that new evidence—in the form of Venona-decrypted Soviet messages, Soviet espionage data now opened to the West, and newly released transcripts of closed hearings before McCarthy's subcommittee—has partially vindicated McCarthy by showing that many of his identifications of Communists were correct and that the scale of Soviet espionage activity in the United States during the 1940s and 1950s was larger than many scholars suspected.[146][147][148] After reviewing evidence from Venona and other sources, historian John Earl Haynes concluded that, of 159 people identified on lists used or referenced by McCarthy, evidence was substantial that nine had aided Soviet espionage efforts. He suggested that a majority of those on the lists could legitimately have been considered security risks, but that a substantial minority could not.[149] Many other scholars, including some generally regarded as conservative, have opposed these views.[which?][150]

Among those implicated in files later made public from the Venona project and Soviet sources were Cedric Belfrage, Frank Coe, Lauchlin Currie, Harold Glasser, David Karr, Mary Jane Keeney, and Leonard Mins.[149][151][152][153][154][155][156]

These viewpoints are considered by historian David Oshinsky to be fringe revisionist history.[157] Challenging efforts aimed at the "rehabilitation" of McCarthy, Haynes argues that McCarthy's attempts to "make anti-communism a partisan weapon" actually "threatened [the post-War] anti-Communist consensus", thereby ultimately harming anti-Communist efforts more than helping.[158]

Diplomat George F. Kennan drew on his State Department experience to provide his view that "The penetration of the American governmental services by members or agents (conscious or otherwise) of the American Communist Party in the late 1930s was not a figment of the imagination ... it really existed; and it assumed proportions which, while never overwhelming, were also not trivial." Kennan wrote that under the Roosevelt administration "warnings which should have been heeded fell too often on deaf or incredulous ears."[159] However, Kennan made his assessment before the revelation of the Venona decrypts. The previous cautious assessments had to be revised. Not a few but "hundreds of American Communists abetted Soviet espionage in the United States" in the 1930s and 1940s. No modern government had been more thoroughly penetrated. Plus, only a tiny fraction of the Venona intercepts have been decrypted (about 3%), so no one knows the entire extent of the penetration. All anyone can know for sure is that the Soviet penetration into the United States government was massive

Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,963
Likes: 29
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
OP Offline
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,963
Likes: 29


Hannity did a good overview of what was in the Nunes memo last night, and how the FBI, Comey and McCabe deceive the FISA court into doing surveillance on Carter Page, alleging they had "multiple sources" as the basis for the surveillance request. When in truth the ONLY souce they had was Christopher Steele, who was commissioned directly by the Hillary Clinton campaign, and a Yahoo News article, that was basically a press release from Steele, not a second source.

The second shoe dropped with the released redacted Grassley memo Hannity broke down.

1) Christopher Steele was hired by the Hillary campaign to get dirt on the Trump campaign, funded clandestinely through Fusion GPS. Steele got most of his information/allegations DIRECTLY FROM THE RUSSIANS (precisely what Trump's subordinates are accused of)

2) Steele gave this information to the FBI, that the FBI, in the person of Comey, told the Trump campaign was "salacious" and "unreliable", but that Comey SIMULTANEOUSLY USED AS SOURCES TO REQUEST FISA SURVEILLANCE OF THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION!

3) Steele told the FBI that he had not shared this information with any media. But he had, with Mother Jones, and Yahoo News, at the very least. That is a crime, lying to the FBI.

4) Comey and McCabe told the FISA court that the Steele dossier (the basis for the FISA request) was a reliable source. That is a crime, lying to the FISA court, misrepresenting the reliability of their evidence for the surveillance request they knew to be false.

5) Comey and McCabe also misrepresented and did not disclose what they knew, that the Steele dossier was initiated and funded by the Hillary Clinton campaign. This is another criminal lie.


I'm still wondering where the judge is who was given this evidence and okayed the FISA surveillance on Trump officials. He should at least be saying he is angry he was deceived, and more pointedly throwing out the FISA request and all the surveillance evidence obtained under the deception (i.e., the poisonous fruit).
Unless, quite possibly, the judge is as corrupt as Comey and McCabe and the rest, and was a willing part of the deception himself.

In any case, these two memos (Nunes memo, and Grassley memo) combined are much closer to meeting the expectation of the hype, in that they indicate willful deception for FISA surveillance, for which major players can go to jail.


Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,963
Likes: 29
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
OP Offline
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,963
Likes: 29


(YouTube, of Hannity radio program, Feb 6, 2018: )
Gingrich Breaks Down The Difference Between FISA Memo & Watergate

Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,792
Likes: 40
Fair Play!
15000+ posts
Offline
Fair Play!
15000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,792
Likes: 40
 Originally Posted By: Wonder Boy
 Originally Posted By: Matter-eater Man
You might want to also read the actual historical records WB. The vote to censure McCarthy was not a partisan affair. I know by now facts don't matter but I would hope republicans rise up today like they did back than when power was abused.



YOU could try reading, M E M.

The bipartisan condemnation of McCarthy was based on the perception that what McCarthy alleged was false. But as I just quoted Coulter citing, the Kremlin records after the Soviet Union collapsed vindicated McCarthy, decades after-the-fact.

There were Soviet spies everywhere, and the Kremlin's own records show that. Espionage that Democrat complacency allowed to happen.


You have made several false statements WB, that's why I recommended more reading. I would suggest you actually find out what he was censured for by both parties. Which ones were unproven? Looks to me like the answer is none.


Fair play!
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,963
Likes: 29
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
OP Offline
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,963
Likes: 29


You just say, "false statements", with nothing to back it up. I cited sources. It's on you to specify what exactly is untrue.

As I just quoted above, the Kremlin records revealed hundreds of communist agents who were handing over secrets to the Russians under FDR and Truman. People the FDR and Truman administrations were warned about, that those Democrat administrations were dismissive of and ignored. Not allegations. Not false statements. Kremlin records, from the Soviet archives themselves.

Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,792
Likes: 40
Fair Play!
15000+ posts
Offline
Fair Play!
15000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,792
Likes: 40
 Originally Posted By: Wonder Boy
 Originally Posted By: Matter-eater Man
You might want to also read the actual historical records WB. The vote to censure McCarthy was not a partisan affair. I know by now facts don't matter but I would hope republicans rise up today like they did back than when power was abused.



YOU could try reading, M E M.

The bipartisan condemnation of McCarthy was based on the perception that what McCarthy alleged was false. But as I just quoted Coulter citing, the Kremlin records after the Soviet Union collapsed vindicated McCarthy, decades after-the-fact.

There were Soviet spies everywhere, and the Kremlin's own records show that. Espionage that Democrat complacency allowed to happen.


If you had actually read what McCarthy was censured for it clearly was not based on that some of his accusations couldn't be true. A broken clock is right twice a day and all that. Again read what he was censured for and than explain what he shouldn't have been censured for.


Fair play!
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,963
Likes: 29
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
OP Offline
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,963
Likes: 29

I don't have to. Ann Coulter already wrote a column defending him, and sourced a book that defends McCarthy, citing Kremlin records, at far greater length.


Even in the event that McCarthy made a few mis-steps or errors (there are no famous people that I agree with on all their actions) that doesn't change the fact that he was essentially correct about the level of communist infiltration in that era, and the Democrats' nation-threatening indifference to it. Period.


  • from Do Racists have lower IQ's...

    Liberals who bemoan discrimination, intolerance, restraint of Constitutional freedoms, and promotion of hatred toward various abberant minorities, have absolutely no problem with discriminating against, being intolerant of, restricting Constitutional freedoms of, and directing hate-filled scapegoat rhetoric against conservatives.

    EXACTLY what they accuse Republicans/conservatives of doing, is EXACTLY what liberals/Democrats do themselves, to those who oppose their beliefs.
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,792
Likes: 40
Fair Play!
15000+ posts
Offline
Fair Play!
15000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,792
Likes: 40
They were more than missteps and errors WB. He was bipartisanly condemned for what you partisanly downplay. I'll just note that our intelligence agencies both say Russia interfered with our last election to aid a republican. The party of Trump formerly the GOP isn't looking to hot these days.


Fair play!
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,963
Likes: 29
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
OP Offline
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,963
Likes: 29


YEAR ONE: LIST OF 81 MAJOR TRUMP ACHIEVEMENTS, AND 11 OBAMA LEGACY ITEMS REPEALED



Not to mention Trumps rise in the polls among independent voters, and a strong base of voter (like myself) who voted for him and still support him.
Not to mention even some Democrat and minority voters who now support him.

When you talk about "even Republicans who criticize Trump", you really mean RINO people like McCain and Flake, who never supported Trump in the first place, and never miss a chance to attack, at any perceived moment of political weakness.

 Quote:
[Regarding Joe McCarthy:]They were more than missteps and errors WB. He was bipartisanly condemned for what you partisanly downplay.


I've yet to see you produce anything to disprove what I quoted, other than namecalling and vague assertions. I recall one GOP leader saying that he supported McCarthy's goals, but not his tactics. But AGAIN: There were communist informats and inflitrators everywhere, according to the Kremlin's own records. Far more than was known or suspected back in the 1950's.

 Originally Posted By: M E M
I'll just note that our intelligence agencies both say Russia interfered with our last election to aid a republican. The party of Trump formerly the GOP isn't looking to hot these days.


That's again a misleading statement, and I think deliberately so.
The goal of the Russians was simply to undermine the credibility of the U.S. presidential election, no matter who won, Clinton or Trump.
And as has also been said repeatedly, EVEN THE RUSSIANS THOUGHT HILLARY WOULD WIN. If they didn't think Trump would win, how could they have orchestrated his victory. That Democrat/progressive rhetoric is utter shit garbage, with nothing to back it up.

Conversely, all the evidence is that it was the Hillary Clinton campaign the Russians were helping, with FusionGPS and Christopher Steele being fed anti-Trump disinformation from Russian agents. Not to mention buying Frau Hitlery off with millions in donations to the Clinton Foundation, and receiving 20% of the U.S. uranium supply in exchange for these payoffs.
Not to mention Hillary's illegal private server, that left the highest levels of Pentagon, State Department and White House communication ripe for the hacking EVERY SINGLE DAY she was Secretary of State.

If Hillary had won the presidency, she'd be overseeing the further collapse of our military under sequestrations in spending, instead of rebuilding it as Trump is. I can't envision the Russians being overly happy about that.

Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,792
Likes: 40
Fair Play!
15000+ posts
Offline
Fair Play!
15000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,792
Likes: 40
There are plenty of news stories to show that Russia was helping Trump in the election WB. Here's one but you can google for more...
RUSSIA WAS HELPING TRUMP JUST DAYS AFTER HE ENTERED THE 2016 PRIMARY

Here's the Wikipedia entry that details what our intelligence found...
Russian interference in the 2016 United States elections
This isn't new news but stuff you already know.


Fair play!
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,792
Likes: 40
Fair Play!
15000+ posts
Offline
Fair Play!
15000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,792
Likes: 40
And of course Trump has now blocked the demo memo. The republican one he had decided to release even before reading it.


Fair play!
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,951
Likes: 6
Officially "too old for this shit"
15000+ posts
Offline
Officially "too old for this shit"
15000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,951
Likes: 6
 Originally Posted By: Matter-eater Man
And of course Trump has now blocked the demo memo. The republican one he had decided to release even before reading it.


Lets see what Ryan and Graham say. Neither is a Trump fan. If they support redaction before release its probable that redaction is required.

Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,963
Likes: 29
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
OP Offline
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,963
Likes: 29


I just heard former CIA field agent Mike Baker call for releasing all the information, because
1) the public has a right to know,
2) it's highly unlikely that anything in either the Devin Nunes memo or the Democrat memo contain anything that would put intelligence or agents at risk,
and
3) with the level of public spotlight on the redacted information, it will inevitably be leaked soon anyway.

One other point I've seen elsewhere is that FBI, DOJ and CIA tend to redact a lot that doesn't need to be redacted, for the simple reason that if released it will make those agencies look just as corrupt and stupid as they truly are, so they don't want it released only for that reason.

Rep Adam Schiff and other Democrats had a hissy fit a week ago about how "dangerous" it was to release the Nunes Memo. And when it was released, it was proven to be a completely false talking point, nothing damaging revealed.

I'm in agreement, pending a few days of review. Democrat or Republican memos, get it all out there, the public has a right to know, what these agencies have been up to. We're not talking about field agents or nuclear secrets.

Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,963
Likes: 29
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
OP Offline
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,963
Likes: 29

Hal Lindsey had an interesting commentary on "The Deep State". I was unaware that John Kerry had made a comment to an Abbas/PLO confidante to "hold on and be strong, because Trump will not be in office long" and "will be out within a year". And that it is a manifestation of the "Deep State" that using power of federal agencies to stage a coup and usurp a democratically elected president. Weaponizing federal agencies against their own president.

We saw this begin in 2012 with the CIA and Lois Lerner, weaponizing the IRS, FBI, ATF, OSHA and other agencies against prominent Republican party donors and Tea Party groups.

Now we have seen the same with FBI, DOJ and the FISA court against president Trump. At the very least, the suspicious bias of Loretta Lynch, James Comey, Rod Rosenstein, Bruce Ohr, Andrew McCabe and others warrants a thorough investigation, and a separate independent agency, because these agencies clearly can't be trusted to investigate themselves.

Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,963
Likes: 29
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
OP Offline
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,963
Likes: 29
The second "Memo" from the Democrats, spearheaded by Rep. Adam Schiff, was released today, and it was at least as disappointing as the Nunes Republican memo.
Except that the Democrat memo exposed their own lying narrative, and opposite what Dems have alleged for 2 weeks, actually verified what Republicans have been saying: that the Christopher Steele "Russia dossier" was completely misrepresented to the FISA court to get surveillance on Trump officials, and ("salacious" and "unverified" as it was, according to what Comey and McCabe themselves said) was the primary if not only evidence they submitted for making the FISA request.

And unlike the Republican memo, the Dem memo exposed intelligence sources and practices. Sean Hannity on his program last night did an excellent job of eviscerating Adam Schiff for the liar he is.

Still waiting for the FISA court judges to come forward and express their outrage that they were deceived into issuing the warrants for surveillance.
That they HAVEN'T come forward makes me increasingly convinced that they, too, are pro-Hillary "deep state" operatives. All the evidence, the fruit of the poisonous tree of a falsely obtained FISA warrant, should be thrown out at this point.


  • from Do Racists have lower IQ's...

    Liberals who bemoan discrimination, intolerance, restraint of Constitutional freedoms, and promotion of hatred toward various abberant minorities, have absolutely no problem with discriminating against, being intolerant of, restricting Constitutional freedoms of, and directing hate-filled scapegoat rhetoric against conservatives.

    EXACTLY what they accuse Republicans/conservatives of doing, is EXACTLY what liberals/Democrats do themselves, to those who oppose their beliefs.
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,963
Likes: 29
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
OP Offline
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,963
Likes: 29


Since there's more than one memo in the public spotlight, I changed the topic title accordingly.


Here a Wikipedia look at the Nunes memo.

Everything Rep. Adam Schiff and other Democrats have said about the memo being dangerous to national security to release, and compromising intelligence methods and sources, has turned out to be a complete lie.

And the later Democrat/Schiff memo has turned out to confirm, not disprove, the Nunes memo that Christopher Steele's salacious and unproven/unreliable "Russia dossier" was the sole basis for the repeated FISA warrant surveillance of Carter Page and other Trump officials. A Russia dossier that James Comey and Andrew McCabe >>>>>KNEW<<<<<< to be unreliable when they submitted it to the FISA court to authorize surveillance. That the the FISA court would never have authorized without the Russia Dossier's KNOWN FALSE evidence.
Multiple people should go to jail for submitting this known false evidence.

And I'm still waiting for the FISA judges to come forward and rescind the warrants, and throw out all evidence obtained under false pretenses. And to express anger that they were deceived by Comey and McCabe. Unless of course, the judges were willing accomplices in the deception. And every day that they don't speak up makes me further convinced that is precisely the case.
I shit on the authority of the Meuller investigation.


  • from Do Racists have lower IQ's...

    Liberals who bemoan discrimination, intolerance, restraint of Constitutional freedoms, and promotion of hatred toward various abberant minorities, have absolutely no problem with discriminating against, being intolerant of, restricting Constitutional freedoms of, and directing hate-filled scapegoat rhetoric against conservatives.

    EXACTLY what they accuse Republicans/conservatives of doing, is EXACTLY what liberals/Democrats do themselves, to those who oppose their beliefs.

Link Copied to Clipboard
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5