Liberal Forum

Misty » 24 Oct 2019 4:03 pm » wrote: I miss a lot of those people.

Bigsky2 » 24 Oct 2019 4:06 pm » wrote:

Misty » 24 Oct 2019 4:03 pm » wrote:I miss a lot of those people.

and I am sure they miss you...I missed the hell out of you...im sorry for your political plight...we happen to be on opposite sides of the spectrum...but....

https://youtu.be/3JWTaaS7LdU

Italy Did Not Fuel U.S. Suspicion of Russian Meddling, Prime Minister Says

Casting holes in a Trump conspiracy theory, Prime Minister Giuseppe Conte revealed details of two visits to Rome by Attorney General William P. Barr.

ROME — Prime Minister Giuseppe Conte of Italy said his country’s intelligence services had informed the American attorney general, William P. Barr, that they played no role in the events leading to the Russia investigation, taking the air out of an unsubstantiated theory promoted by President Trump and his allies in recent weeks.

“Our intelligence is completely unrelated to the so-called Russiagate and that has been made clear,” Mr. Conte said in a news conference in Rome on Wednesday evening after spending hours describing Italy’s discussions with Mr. Barr to the parliamentary committee on intelligence.

Mr. Conte publicly acknowledged for the first time that Mr. Barr had twice met with the leaders of Italy’s intelligence agencies after asking them to clarify their role in a 2016 meeting between a Maltese professor and a Trump campaign adviser on a small college campus in Rome, Link Campus University.

During a subsequent meeting, the professor, Joseph Mifsud, told the adviser, George Papadopolous, that Russia had obtained damaging information about Hillary Clinton in the form of “thousands of emails,” according to the special counsel’s report into Russian meddling in the 2016 American election.

Mr. Papadopolous later shared that information with foreign diplomats, which eventually set off alarms among American intelligence officials about Russian interference.

Mr. Trump and his associates have asserted, without evidence, that Mr. Mifsud is not a professor with links to Russia, as the special counsel’s report states, but a Western intelligence asset working as part of an Obama administration plot to spy on the Trump campaign.

That theory, once relegated to the far-right margins, has become a frequent talking point of Mr. Trump’s as he seeks to undermine the special counsel’s report.

Mr. Barr at least twice visited Rome to investigate the allegations, on Aug. 15 and Sept. 27.

Mr. Conte said on Wednesday that Mr. Barr met on Aug. 15 with Gen. Gennaro Vecchione, who leads the agency coordinating Italy’s internal and external intelligence.

That meeting, he said, “was meant to decide the extent of the collaboration,” adding, “I didn’t take part in it, but was informed.”

Mr. Barr and the Italian general met again on Sept. 27 and were joined by two other senior Italian agents, the heads of internal and external intelligence, Mr. Conte said.

“The meeting clarified, after this was verified, that our intelligence is unrelated to the affair.”

“This extraneousness has been acknowledged,” he said, apparently referring to an acknowledgment by the Trump administration.

Mr. Barr also asked Italian authorities to “verify the operations of American agents,” Mr. Conte said.

“That is, his question was to verify what the American intelligence did.”

The Italian inquiry is only one aspect of Mr. Barr’s review of the origins of the investigation into Russian meddling.

American intelligence agencies unanimously concluded that the Kremlin had intervened in the presidential election to benefit Mr. Trump, and the special counsel’s report laid out those efforts in detail.

But Mr. Trump has questioned those conclusions and suggested, without evidence, that hostile American officials may have planted false information that led to the Russia inquiry.

Mr. Papadopolous, for his part, has insisted that Mr. Mifsud was actually a spy who was activated by the prime minister at the time, Matteo Renzi, at the behest of Mr. Obama to spread false information about Russian interference.

Mr. Renzi said he would sue Mr. Papadopolous for slander and has rejected the accusation, calling it ridiculous.

Mr. Mifsud has been described by his former bosses at Link Campus University as a “chatterbox” and a know-nothing who sought to leverage relationships to make money.

The revelations of Mr. Barr’s visits spurred controversy in Italy, where Mr. Conte’s critics argued he had inappropriately allocated the country’s intelligence resources to help Mr. Trump win domestic political advantage.

Italian officials have lamented that the unusual requests by the Trump administration complicated what has been a long-lasting collaboration between allies on issues of justice and national security.

On Wednesday, Mr. Conte insisted that “our national interest has not been compromised.”

Justice Dept. Is Said to Open Criminal Inquiry Into Its Own Russia Investigation

The move is likely to open the attorney general to accusations that he is trying to deliver a political victory for President Trump.

WASHINGTON — For more than two years, President Trump has repeatedly attacked the Russia investigation, portraying it as a hoax and illegal even months after the special counsel closed it. Now, Mr. Trump’s own Justice Department has opened a criminal investigation into how it all began.

Justice Department officials have shifted an administrative review of the Russia investigation closely overseen by Attorney General William P. Barr to a criminal inquiry, according to two people familiar with the matter.

The move gives the prosecutor running it, John H. Durham, the power to subpoena for witness testimony and documents, to impanel a grand jury and to file criminal charges.

The opening of a criminal investigation is likely to raise alarms that Mr. Trump is using the Justice Department to go after his perceived enemies.

Mr. Trump fired James B. Comey, the F.B.I. director under whose watch agents opened the Russia inquiry, and has long assailed other top former law enforcement and intelligence officials as partisans who sought to block his election.

Mr. Trump has made clear that he sees the typically independent Justice Department as a tool to be wielded against his political enemies.

That view factors into the impeachment investigation against him, as does his long obsession with the origins of the Russia inquiry.

House Democrats are examining in part whether his pressure on Ukraine to open investigations into theories about the 2016 election constituted an abuse of power.

The move also creates an unusual situation in which the Justice Department is conducting a criminal investigation into itself.

Mr. Barr’s reliance on Mr. Durham, a widely respected and veteran prosecutor who has investigated C.I.A. torture and broken up Mafia rings, could help insulate the attorney general from accusations that he is doing the president’s bidding and putting politics above justice.

It was not clear what potential crime Mr. Durham is investigating, nor when the criminal investigation was prompted.

A Justice Department spokeswoman declined to comment.

Mr. Trump is certain to see the criminal investigation as a vindication of the years he and his allies have spent trying to discredit the Russia investigation.

In May, Mr. Trump told the Fox News host Sean Hannity that the F.B.I. officials who opened the case — a counterintelligence investigation into whether his campaign conspired with Moscow’s election sabotage — had committed treason.

“We can never allow these treasonous acts to happen to another president,” Mr. Trump said.

He has called the F.B.I. investigation one of the biggest political scandals in United States history.

Federal investigators need only a “reasonable indication” that a crime has been committed to open an investigation, a much lower standard than the probable cause required to obtain search warrants.

However, “there must be an objective, factual basis for initiating the investigation; a mere hunch is insufficient,” according to Justice Department guidelines.

When Mr. Barr appointed Mr. Durham, the United States attorney in Connecticut, to lead the review, he had only the power to voluntarily question people and examine government files.

Mr. Barr expressed skepticism of the Russia investigation even before joining the Trump administration.

Weeks after being sworn in this year, he said he intended to scrutinize how it started and used the term “spying” to describe investigators’ surveillance of Trump campaign advisers.

But he has been careful to say he wants to determine whether investigators acted lawfully.

“The question is whether it was adequately predicated,” he told lawmakers in April.

“And I’m not suggesting that it wasn’t adequately predicated. But I need to explore that.”

Mr. Barr began the administrative review of the Russia investigation in May, saying that he had conversations with intelligence and law enforcement officials that led him to believe that the F.B.I. acted improperly, if not unlawfully.

The F.B.I. opened the investigation in late July 2016, code-named Crossfire Hurricane, after receiving information from the Australian government that a Trump campaign adviser had been approached with an offer of stolen emails that could damage Hillary Clinton’s campaign.

F.B.I. agents discovered the offer shortly after stolen Democratic emails were released, and the events, along with ties between other Trump advisers and Russia, set off fears that the Trump campaign was conspiring with Russia’s interference.

The F.B.I. did not use information from the C.I.A. in opening the Russia investigation, former American officials said.

But agents’ views on Russia’s election interference operation crystallized by mid-August, after the C.I.A. director at the time, John O. Brennan, shared intelligence with Mr. Comey about it.

The C.I.A. did contribute heavily to the intelligence community’s assessment in early 2017 that Russia interfered in the 2016 election and tried to tip it in Mr. Trump’s favor, and law enforcement officials later used those findings to bolster their application for a wiretap on a Trump campaign adviser, Carter Page.

The special counsel who took over the Russia investigation in 2017, Robert S. Mueller III, secured convictions or guilty pleas from a handful of Trump associates and indictments of more than two dozen Russians on charges related to their wide-ranging interference scheme.

In his report, Mr. Mueller said that he had “insufficient evidence” to determine whether Mr. Trump or his aides engaged in a criminal conspiracy with the Russians but that the campaign welcomed the sabotage and expected to benefit from it.

Mr. Barr is closely managing the Durham investigation, even traveling to Italy to seek help from officials there to run down an unfounded conspiracy that is at the heart of conservatives’ attacks on the Russia investigation — that the Italian government helped set up the Trump campaign adviser who was told in 2016 that the Russians had damaging information that could hurt Clinton’s campaign.

But Italy’s intelligence services told Mr. Barr that they played no such role in the events leading to the Russia investigation, Prime Minister Giuseppe Conte of Italy said in a news conference on Wednesday.

Mr. Barr has also contacted government officials in Britain and Australia about their roles in the early stages of the Russia investigation.

Revelations so far about Mr. Durham’s investigation have shown that he has focused in his first months on the accusations that Mr. Trump’s conservative allies have made about the origins of the Russia inquiry in their efforts to undermine it.

Mr. Durham’s efforts have prompted criticism that he and Mr. Barr are trying to deliver the president a political victory, though investigators would typically run down all aspects of a case to complete a review of it.

Mr. Durham is running the investigation with a trusted aide, Nora R. Dannehy, and a pair of retired F.B.I. agents.

Other prosecutors are also assisting, people familiar with the investigation said.

In interviewing more than two dozen former and current F.B.I. and intelligence officials, Mr. Durham’s investigators have asked about any anti-Trump bias among officials who worked on the Russia investigation and about one aspect of the investigation that was at the heart of highly contentious allegations that they abused their powers: the secret application seeking a court order for a wiretap on Mr. Page.

Law enforcement officials suspected Mr. Page was the target of recruitment by the Russian government, which he has denied.

Mr. Durham has also asked whether C.I.A. officials might have somehow tricked the F.B.I. into opening the Russia investigation.

Mr. Durham has indicated he wants to interview former officials who ran the C.I.A. in 2016 but has yet to question either Mr. Brennan or James R. Clapper Jr., the former director of national intelligence.

Mr. Trump has repeatedly attacked them as part of a vast conspiracy by the so-called deep state to stop him from winning the presidency.

Some C.I.A. officials have retained criminal lawyers in anticipation of being interviewed.

It was not clear whether Mr. Durham was scrutinizing other former top intelligence officials.

Adm. Michael S. Rogers, the former director of the National Security Agency, declined to say whether he had spoken with Mr. Durham’s investigators.

Mr. Durham also has yet to question many of the former F.B.I. officials involved in opening the Russia investigation.

As Mr. Durham’s investigation moves forward, the Justice Department inspector general is wrapping up his own inquiry into aspects of the F.B.I.’s conduct in the early days of the Russia investigation.

Among other things, the inspector general, Michael E. Horowitz, is scrutinizing the application for a warrant to wiretap Mr. Page.

Mr. Barr has not said whether Mr. Durham’s investigation grew out of the inspector general’s findings or something that prosecutors unearthed while doing interviews or reviewing documents.

But the inspector general’s findings, which are expected to be made public in coming weeks, could contribute to the public’s understanding of why Mr. Durham might want to investigate national security officials’ activities in 2016.

Though the inspector general’s report deals with sensitive information, Mr. Horowitz anticipates that little of it will be blacked out when he releases the document publicly, he wrote in a letter sent to lawmakers on Thursday and obtained by The New York Times.

Mr. Durham has delved before into the secret world of intelligence gathering during the Bush and Obama administrations.

He was asked in 2008 to investigate why the C.I.A. destroyed tapes depicting detainees being tortured.

The next year, Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. appointed Mr. Durham to spearhead an investigation into the C.IA. abuses.

Career prosecutors had already examined many of the same cases and declined to bring charges, and in an echo of the Russia investigation, they fumed that Mr. Holder was revisiting the issue.

Representative Peter Hoekstra of Michigan, then the top Republican on the House Intelligence Committee, said that the abuses had been “exhaustively reviewed” and that a new inquiry could put national security at risk.

After nearly four years, Mr. Durham’s investigation ended with no charges against C.I.A. officers, including two directly involved in the deaths of two detainees, angering human rights activists.

Misty » 12 Oct 2019 8:38 pm » wrote:There was never anything for me to give up.
You have been whining since 2009 that I rarely post in your threads.

Cannonpointer » 24 Oct 2019 9:28 pm » wrote:

Misty » 12 Oct 2019 8:38 pm » wrote:There was never anything for me to give up.
You have been whining since 2009 that I rarely post in your threads.

A little spank glue on your shoes isn't gonna kill you misty - and the smell of desperate beat-off in your clothes and hair washes out.
Don't be so finicky.

Misty » 19 Oct 2019 5:03 pm » wrote: Were the 11,000 Kurds who died fighting ISIS for us terrorists?

We didn't need to go to war to protect them.
Our very presence there was protecting them, until Trump told Ergogan that he would pull back our troops and gave him the green light to move in and slaughter them.

Misty » 24 Oct 2019 9:34 pm » wrote: EEEEEWW!
Thanks for that mental image CP.

Misty » 19 Oct 2019 5:03 pm » wrote: Almost every member of your party is against what Trump did.

Termin8tor » 25 Oct 2019 4:28 am » wrote:

Misty » 24 Oct 2019 3:51 pm » wrote:Answer the question you gutless coward.

Great idea. Why don't you answer these, that you've stonewalled for weeks now?
Why aren't you shrieking in outage that Hillary Clinton colluded with the Russians to interfere in the 2016 election?
That Obama officials IN THE WHITE HOUSE colluded with Ukrainian officials to interfere in the 2016 election?
That the DNC colluded with Ukraine to interfere in the 2016 election?

Trump said that only a few ISIS fighters have escaped and that they have been recaptured.

James Jeffrey testified under oath that over 100 ISIS fighters have escaped, and none of them have been recaptured.

Both of those things cannot be true.
So which one of them is lying Precious?
The orange skidmark, or the guy who testified under oath?

Answer the question you gutless coward.

Termin8tor » 25 Oct 2019 4:23 am » wrote:

Misty » 24 Oct 2019 4:01 pm » wrote:

Termin8tor » 24 Oct 2019 1:52 pm » wrote:There is zero chance that China will do that, wackjob. What, you expect them to say,"Yes, we bribed Biden through his son and many, many other Beltway politicians from both parties, too?"
Don't be utterly freaking stupid.

You must have been raised on a steady diet of lead paint chips.
It doesn't matter whether or not China would do it.
Him asking them to do it is a crime.

Of course it is, wackjob, just like a personal payment to Stormy Daniels is an indictable crime.

Termin8tor » 25 Oct 2019 4:25 am » wrote:

Misty » 24 Oct 2019 9:24 pm » wrote:Baghdad Barr is not giving up.

As usual, the psychopath is defending the criminals and attacking people of integrity.

Termin8tor » 25 Oct 2019 4:25 am » wrote:Your heroine Rachel Madcow was utterly clueless last night, babbling stupidly about how this makes us like a "banana republic."
No, Rachie, the massive abuse of power by Obama and his officials threatened to turn us into a banana republic.

Termin8tor » 26 Oct 2019 1:17 pm » wrote:

Misty » 26 Oct 2019 1:04 pm » wrote:Good for her.
That takes balls.

She's years late to the party, wackjob, so it takes no balls at all.
The conservative media were all over this a long time ago.

Termin8tor » 26 Oct 2019 1:22 pm » wrote:Hillary colluded with Russia including a former Russian intelligence officer via Steele, as he admitted in sworn testimony.

Russia: Trump’s Baghdadi Victory Lap Is Nothing But ‘Propaganda’

The Russian Defense Ministry also disputed claims that Russia provided access to U.S. air units entering airspace it controls.

At the White House Sunday morning, President Trump profusely thanked Russia for its alleged involvement in the killing of Islamic State leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi.

Trump said: "[The Russians] were very cooperative, they really were good... Russia treated us great.

They opened up, we had to fly over certain Russia areas, Russia-held areas. Russia was great."

Russia didn’t seem to see it the same way.

The Russian Defense Ministry’s spokesman, Major General Igor Konashenkov, refuted President Trump’s statement, stating in part: “The Russian Defense Ministry has no reliable information about U.S. servicemen conducting an operation for ‘yet another’ elimination of the former Daesh leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi in the Turkish-controlled part of the Idlib de-escalation zone.”

The Russian Defense Ministry also disputed President Trump’s claim that Russia provided access to U.S. air units entering the airspace over the Idlib de-escalation zone during that mission in Syria.

Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov declined to provide a comment about President Trump’s announcement, directing everyone to General Konashenkov’s statement.

Kremlin-controlled Russian state media shot down President Trump’s announcement, with headlines that read: “The Russian Defense Ministry does not believe in al-Baghdadi’s liquidation.”