Liberal Forum

Misty » 10 May 2019 5:49 pm » wrote: This is why I have no patience with you Trump supporters.
You are fact averse and you take the word of a chronic, habitual liar over everyone else.

In September 2016, Obama took the intelligence about Russian interference to the Gang of Eight to cook up a bipartisan statement informing the public.

All the members of the Gang of Eight agreed to a statement, except for Mitch McConnell, who balked, claiming he doubted the intel.

And before he left office Obama placed sanctions on Russia for their interference in the election.

OTOH the orange skidmark gave Putin a tongue bath in Helsinki, and took his word over the word of his own intelligence agencies.


And he has done nothing to stop it from happening again, so who ya gonna blame when it happens in 2020?
Obama?

crimsongulf » 10 May 2019 7:07 pm » wrote:

Misty » 10 May 2019 6:13 pm » wrote:Once again, Mueller did NOT deal with the issue of 'collusion' because 'collusion' is not a crime.
He dealt with the issue of 'conspiracy' which is a crime.
I have read a lot of the report.
Have you?

Introduction to Volume One of the Mueller report......page 2.

Why was the fake assed witch hunt launched?
Why did 95% of the media obsess over DJT collusion for two years?
You can't in any way try and pull that lie off with a smidgen of credibility.

Misty » 10 May 2019 7:19 pm » wrote: I don't know how you call it a fake assed witch hunt.

Russia was **** with our election and members of the Trump campaign were meeting with Russians and lying about it.

Mueller identified 251 contacts with members of the campaign and Russia.

Trump was waving around the DNC's hacked and stolen emails, praising Wikileaks, and giving Putin regular tongue baths.

His son, son-in-law and his campaign manager took a meeting with Russians offering dirt on Hillary.

His son-in-law tried to set up a secret back channel to communicate with Moscow.

The FBI would have been delinquent not to investigate that stuff.

Federal judge to fast-track ruling on House subpoena for Trump accounting records.

A federal judge will fast-track a decision on President Trump’s bid to quash a House subpoena for financial records from his accounting firm, saying he will decide the full case, not just whether to temporarily block the subpoena while the case proceeds, after a hearing Tuesday.

U.S. District Judge Amit P. Mehta made his announcement Thursday in a brief notice to both sides after receiving a first round of written arguments in the case.

The lawsuit was brought April 22 by Trump and several of his businesses against House Oversight Committee Chairman Elijah E. Cummings (D-Md.) and Trump’s accounting firm.

“The sole question before the court — Is the House Oversight Committee’s issuance of a subpoena to Mazars USA LLP for financial records of President Donald Trump and various associated entities a valid exercise of legislative power? — is fully briefed, and the court can discern no benefit from an additional round of legal arguments,” Mehta said.
[.....]
The announcement means that any appeal of a decision in the case could reach an appeals court by the summer.

Titties N Beer » 10 May 2019 7:52 pm » wrote:Lets be honest. We all become extremely angry and bitter when we are proved wrong. It is a hard thing to take, especially when it is a life time of wrongs. 40% of this country are so so so angry. lashing out clinging to a lie. So much anger coming out. Just wait and see how mad you are really going to be.

Misty » 10 May 2019 8:07 pm » wrote: Who are you talking to?

Misty » 10 May 2019 9:18 pm » wrote:The Mueller report concluded that Russia’s interference in the election was “sweeping and systematic.”
The report identified 251 contacts between members of the Trump campaign and Russian linked operatives.

And Trump supporters are okay with that.
I'm not, and will never be.

Titties N Beer » 10 May 2019 7:52 pm » wrote:Lets be honest. We all become extremely angry and bitter when we are proved wrong. It is a hard thing to take, especially when it is a life time of wrongs. 40% of this country are so so so angry. lashing out clinging to a lie. So much anger coming out. Just wait and see how mad you are really going to be.

These people have no shame.

Under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 6(e) — passed by Congress — it is illegal to release grand-jury materials except for a specified list of purposes, and congressional investigations do not appear on this list.
https://www.nationalreview.com/2019/05/ ... s-general/

OOOPS!
Looks like the orange skidmark's plans to stonewall everything in order to run out the clock until 2020 might not work out so well for him.

Federal judge to fast-track ruling on House subpoena for Trump accounting records.

Starr’s account went into intimate and prurient detail about Clinton’s encounters with Monica Lewinsky, to a degree that exceeded anything necessary to support the essential claim that he had lied about his sex life in a sworn deposition in an unrelated case, and later in grand jury testimony, as one sober observer later explained:

The Starr Report, however, went far beyond establishing that the President lied when he denied having sexual relations with Lewinsky, and included sexual details of various encounters that suggest the Report also had as its purpose to embarrass Clinton and thus limit his effectiveness as President.

Perhaps no detail revealed in the Starr Report better illustrates this prosecutorial overkill than the decision to include a description of Clinton putting a cigar in Lewinsky’s vagina, then putting it in his own mouth and saying that it “tastes good” (3-31-96).

The cigar incident would inspire countless jokes by late-night comics and greatly weakened the ability of the President to ever again be seen as “presidential.”

Much later it became a matter of considerable interest that at least one Starr staffer who argued for the humiliating level of sexual detail was a young attorney named Brett Kavanaugh.

http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2019/04/ ... eport.html

Termin8tor » 11 May 2019 11:07 am » wrote:

The Mueller report concluded that Russia’s interference in the election was “sweeping and systematic.”
The report identified 251 contacts between members of the Trump campaign and Russian linked operatives.
And Trump supporters are okay with that.
I'm not, and will never be.

But you're perfectly fine with the countless felonies committed in the biggest abuse of power in US history:
the attempt to steal the election, then topple Trump in a coup on false, Hillary-planted charges.

crimsongulf » 10 May 2019 9:23 pm » wrote:

Misty » 10 May 2019 9:18 pm » wrote:The Mueller report concluded that Russia’s interference in the election was “sweeping and systematic.”
The report identified 251 contacts between members of the Trump campaign and Russian linked operatives.
And Trump supporters are okay with that.
I'm not, and will never be.

And not one single connection to DjT or his organization.

crimsongulf » 10 May 2019 9:23 pm » wrote:Babe, you are making a fool of yourself. Mueller says you are full of **** and he was yer boy.

But you're perfectly fine
with the countless felonies committed in the biggest abuse of power in US history:


the attempt to steal the election, then topple Trump in a coup on false, Hillary-planted charges.

Same old ****.
Different day.
From the biggest liar and propaganda artist on the World Wide Web.

If they really wanted to hurt Trump in the election they would have leaked the fact that his campaign was under investigation.
But they didn't.
They kept that a secret.

Termin8tor » 11 May 2019 9:38 am » wrote:You accused me of lying when I noted that it is illegal to release the full Mueller Report, as Nadler is demanding.

Under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 6(e) — passed by Congress — it is illegal to release grand-jury materials except for a specified list of purposes, and congressional investigations do not appear on this list.
https://www.nationalreview.com/2019/05/ ... s-general/

In Haldeman V Sirica the D.C. Circuit ruled that the district court judge, Judge John Sirica, “ha[d] dealt at length with” the grand-jury-disclosure question and that the D.C. Circuit was “in general agreement with his handling of [the] matter.”

Judge Sirica, for his part, held that district courts have inherent authority to release grand jury materials.

Also, in a recent case on this issue (McKeever V Barr) the majority said that in its view, the disclosure in Haldeman was made pursuant to the Rule 6 exception that permits district court judges to release grand jury materials “preliminarily to or in connection with a judicial proceeding."

https://www.theusconstitution.org/news/ ... er-report/

The “judicial proceedings” exception came into play the two times in the 20th century a sitting president was subject to independent investigation.

The first time was in the 1970s, when Watergate Special Prosecutor Leon Jaworski sent his “Road Map” of President Richard Nixon’s involvement in Watergate to Congress.

The second time was in the 1990s, when Independent Counsel Ken Starr delivered his report on President Bill Clinton’s misconduct to Congress.

It could come into play again soon, if the House Judiciary Committee petitions Chief Judge Beryl Howell of the D.C. federal court for access to Mueller’s grand jury material. (Judge Howell has been presiding over all legal matters arising from Mueller’s grand jury.)

In 1974, Jaworski’s team argued that the disclosure was permissible under Rule 6(e) because the Judiciary Committee’s impeachment inquiry was equivalent to a judicial proceeding.

Chief Judge John Sirica, Howell’s predecessor, allowed the disclosure.

Some might argue that for Congress to access grand jury material under the judicial proceedings exception, it must have a formal impeachment inquiry underway.

But that argument overlooks another key historical precedent: the Starr Report. Starr got judicial approval, using the judicial proceedings exception, to send his report to the House Judiciary Committee BEFORE the committee had done any investigation of its own into Clinton’s alleged wrongdoing.

In fact, it was the Starr Report itself that eventually prompted impeachment proceedings for Clinton.

Even more telling, the judicial proceedings exception allowed the final report on the Iran-Contra investigation to reach the public in 1994.

Obviously, the court of public opinion is not a “judicial proceeding,” but the D.C. federal appeals court didn’t let that stand in the way of the enormous public interest in the investigation’s findings.

The court concluded that its own adjudication of whether to release the report constituted the “judicial proceeding” required by the rule.

Here, the House Judiciary Committee is exercising its constitutional authority to investigate allegations of the Trump administration’s obstruction of justice and other abuses of power.

It launched its investigation on March 4, and authorized a subpoena for the full Mueller report on April 3.

The full House of Representatives, moreover, has passed a resolution 420-0 calling on the Justice Department to make Mueller’s complete report available to Congress.

The constitutional imperatives are clear.

https://www.politico.com/magazine/story ... ort-226577

Misty » 11 May 2019 12:37 pm » wrote:

Termin8tor » 11 May 2019 9:38 am » wrote:You accused me of lying when I noted that it is illegal to release the full Mueller Report, as Nadler is demanding.

Quick, brownshirt, censor this post before anyone sees the truth!

This is the last time I will respond to that **** lie.

Nadler is NOT asking Barr to illegally release grand jury material without first obtaining a court order.

Democrats Bully Barr
By DEROY MURDOCK
Lawless lawmakers want lawman to break the law
Democrats have lashed Attorney General William Pelham Barr to the horns of a dilemma: He must choose either to violate or to obey federal law, and then await the consequences.


House Judiciary Committee chairman Jerrold Nadler of New York and other Democrats subpoenaed Barr for a pristine copy of Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s Russiagate report, complete with grand-jury testimony. Barr did not budge. The committee then voted 24–16 Wednesday to hold Barr in contempt of Congress.


Alas for Barr, he is bound by the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. Rule 6(e)(2)(b)(vi) states: “Unless these rules provide otherwise, the following persons must not disclose a matter occurring before the grand jury . . . an attorney for the government.” Even more ominous, under Rule 6(e)(7), “A knowing violation of Rule 6 . . . may be punished as a contempt of court.”


....Contempt of Congress or contempt of court? Barr is like a restaurant patron staring at a menu with just two choices: arsenic salad or cream of cyanide.


Assistant Attorney General for Legislative Affairs Stephen E. Boyd reminded Nadler about this. “As we have repeatedly explained, the Attorney General could not comply with your subpoena in its current form without violating the law, court rules, and court orders, and without threatening the independence of the Department of Justice’s prosecutorial functions,” Boyd wrote Wednesday. “Rule 6(e) contains no exception that would permit the Department to provide grand-jury information to the Committee in connection with its oversight role.”
https://www.nationalreview.com/2019/05/democrats-bully-william-barr/

Termin8tor » 11 May 2019 11:56 am » wrote:

Misty: If they really wanted to hurt Trump in the election they would have leaked the fact that his campaign was under investigation.
But they didn't.
They kept that a secret.

What a stupid freaking lie. Steele and his allies did his absolute best to spread this to the MSM.