Liberal Forum

Huey » 02 Mar 2017 5:39 pm » wrote:
I'm not arguing. I am laughing.

It must be hysterical laughter.

DRIP, DRIP, DRIP........

What will we learn tomorrow?

Are we supposed to believe that Michael Flynn and Jared Kushner met with the Russian Ambassador at Trump Tower in December and Trump knew nothing about It?



Seems like a lot of secrecy for people with supposedly nothing to hide.

I'm just sayin'.

Sadly, never.

#ShePersisted » 02 Mar 2017 10:35 pm » wrote: It must be hysterical laughter.

DRIP, DRIP, DRIP........

What will we learn tomorrow?

I dunno. But I am sure that it will reveal how desperate the left is too manufacture a crisis which will be trepeard by the sheep.

Trump Ally Drastically Changes Story About Altering GOP Platform On Ukraine

More Trump advisers disclose meetings with Russia's ambassador.

Another national security adviser to the Trump campaign, J.D. Gordon, also disclosed Thursday that he had met with Kislyak, this time during the Republican National Convention in Cleveland in July.

That meeting was first reported by USA Today.

Gordon had advocated for language in the GOP platform that the Ukrainians not be armed in their battle against pro-Russian separatists, an effort was ultimately successful.

But Gordon says he was simply advocating what Trump himself had expressed -- that he did not wish to see major war break out over the situation in Ukraine.

Didn't Trump say that he didn't know why that language about Ukraine was changed in the Republican Party platform?

Manafort said on NBC’s Meet the Press this past weekend that the change in language on Ukraine “absolutely did not come from the Trump campaign.”

But this account is contradicted by four sources in the room, both for and against the language.

According to two Republican delegates, the Trump campaign’s efforts were led in part by J.D. Gordon, a Trump campaign official and a former spokesman at the Pentagon.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2 ... ut-it.html

White House accused of blocking information on bank's Trump-Russia links.

New commerce secretary Wilbur Ross’s response about possible links between Bank of Cyprus, Russian agents and Trump officials wasn’t released to Senate.

A group of Democratic senators have been waiting for two weeks for Wilbur Ross, a billionaire investor who has served as vice-chairman of the Bank of Cyprus since 2014, to answer a series of questions about possible links between the bank, Russian officials, and current and former Trump administration and campaign officials.

But in a speech on Monday night, just before the Senate voted to approve Ross’s nomination as secretary of the commerce department, Senator Bill Nelson of Florida said the White House “has chosen to sit on” a written response by Ross to some of those questions even though Ross told the senator he was eager to release his response.

What I have learned recently.

Our new Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross, is a billionaire investor who has served as vice-chairman of the Bank of Cyprus since 2014.

The Bank of Cyprus is a big offshore haven, especially for Russians.
One of Ross’s partners in the bank was a Russian billionaire named Dmitry Rybolovlev.

In 2008 Rybolovlev bought a house in Palm Beach from Donald Trump for $95 million.
(He has never lived in the house and applied for and received a permit to demolish it last year.)
Trump had only paid $40 million for the property.

Throughout the campaign Rybolovlev's private plane has been seen at airports in cities like Concord, NC, Las Vegas, NV and Miami, FL at the same time that Trump was in those cities.

And his plane made 7 trips to New York while Trump was there.

DRIP....DRIP....DRIP.

#ShePersisted » 02 Mar 2017 2:03 pm » wrote: Debunked how?

They just declare it debunked, and so it is.

Fake newsers.

#ShePersisted » 02 Mar 2017 10:31 pm » wrote:LOCK HIM UP! LOCK HIM UP!

Pence used personal email for state business — and was hacked

Did he earn 10's of millions of dollars for selling access and favors to foreigners and Special Interests, psycho?

#ShePersisted » 02 Mar 2017 1:40 pm » wrote:Whoopsy, Looks Like Jeff Sessions Lied Under Oath About Talking To The Russians!

Judge Napolitano expressed the strong opinion that Sessions was answering the question in the context of talking about campaign issues to the Russians;

that Sessions did not commit perjury.


But a Democrat Talking Point Liar will lie and lie and lie and lie and lie.........

#ShePersisted » 02 Mar 2017 1:50 pm » wrote: No Larry.
It would be the Social Security Administration who has deemed that these people have a mental disorder so severe that they cannot work and need a representative to manage their benefits.
Not me, and not Rachel Maddow.
That sounds a little more serious than just having 'bad dreams.'

Maybe you should do a little research before you open your piehole.

You cannot violate someone's Constitutional rights on that basis, Dim.


Especially not with yet another illegal, unConstitutional Obama action.

You should do a little research before opening your piehole.

#ShePersisted » 02 Mar 2017 2:01 pm » wrote: I don't believe a word out of the mouths of anyone in this administration.
Serial liars, every one of them.

Really ironic coming from someone who never heard Hillary, Bill or Obama tell any of their countless lies.

#ShePersisted » 02 Mar 2017 3:46 pm » wrote: Which is why Sessions just recused himself.
It is yet to be determined whether or not this is a non story.

.

#ShePersisted » 02 Mar 2017 1:50 pm » wrote: No Larry.
It would be the Social Security Administration who has deemed that these people have a mental disorder so severe that they cannot work and need a representative to manage their benefits.

Oh, well gee....the SSA. Nothing but a government agency deciding who can have firearms and who can't, who has this "severe mental disorder"...based on irrelevant factors no less. Tell me, how many of these "incompetents" have been shooting people?

Not me, and not Rachel Maddow.
That sounds a little more serious than just having 'bad dreams.'

No matter, it's PEOPLE making judgments...and based on what? And what assures you that "bad dreams" doesn't equate to a "severe mental disorder" so judged by some **** government power grabber?

Maybe you should do a little research before you open your piehole.

Maybe you ought to THINK past your NOSE before getting behind government ****.

#ShePersisted » 02 Mar 2017 10:31 pm » wrote:LOCK HIM UP! LOCK HIM UP!

Pence used personal email for state business — and was hacked

Yes, lock him up - IF that personal email of his was holding classified information jeopardizing national security and the lives of operatives. You bet! Was it?

He's really losing it now.

#ShePersisted » 04 Mar 2017 8:49 am » wrote:He's really losing it now.

You lost it 6 Nov 2016 when your whore got shellacked.

#ShePersisted » 04 Mar 2017 8:49 am » wrote:He's really losing it now.

Is he?:

In June, an initial FISA affidavit (obviously prepared by the FBI and the Justice Department’s National Security Division) was submitted to the FISA court. It is said to have “named Trump” — but we don’t know whether that means (a) his name merely came up somewhere in the text of the affidavit or (b) he was an actual target whom the government wanted to investigate under FISA (meaning eavesdrop, read e-mail, and the like).

Even though the FISA standard is generally thought to be less demanding than the traditional wiretap standard (it is easier to show that someone may be colluding in some way with a foreign government than that he has committed a crime), the FISA court rejected the application that “named Trump.”

Five months later, the Justice Department and FBI submitted a second, more “narrowly” drawn affidavit to the FISA court. The way the Heat Street report is written intimates that Trump is not named in this October application for FISA surveillance. The tie to Trump also appears weak: Heat Street says the FISA court was presented with evidence of a server “possibly related” to the Trump campaign and its “alleged links” to two Russian banks.

To summarize, it appears there were no grounds for a criminal investigation of banking violations against Trump. Presumably based on the fact that the bank or banks at issue were Russian, the Justice Department and the FBI decided to continue investigating on national-security grounds. A FISA application in which Trump was “named” was rejected by the FISA court as overbroad, notwithstanding that the FISA court usually looks kindly on government surveillance requests. A second, more narrow application, apparently not naming Trump, may have been granted five months later; the best the media can say about it, however, is that the server on which the application centers is “possibly” related to the Trump campaign’s “alleged” links to two Russian banks — under circumstances in which the FBI has previously found no “nefarious purpose” in some (undescribed) connection between Trump Tower and at least one Russian bank (whose connection to Putin’s regime is not described).

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/4 ... mp-wiretap

You sure he is losing it?

FBI ‘Granted FISA Warrant’ Covering Trump Camp’s Ties To Russia

Long time since I’ve blogged here. Or done anything here. But I thought this maybe merited some attention. The site itself is conservative, mostly full of crap, but the author is a reliable #NeverTrump type. Day late and dollar short. Make of it what you will.

link

The FISA warrant was granted in connection to investigate suspected activity between the server and two banks, SVB Bank and Alfa Bank. However, it is thought in the intelligence community that the warrant covers any ‘US person’ connected to this investigation, and thus covers Donald Trump and at least three further men who have either formed part of his campaign or acted as his media surrogates. The warrant was sought, they say, because actionable intelligence on the matter provided by friendly foreign agencies could not properly be examined without a warrant by US intelligence as it involves ‘US Persons’ who come under the remit of the FBI and not the CIA. Should a counter-intelligence investigation lead to criminal prosecutions, sources say, the Justice Department is concerned that the chain of evidence have a basis in a clear warrant.

In June, when the first FISA warrant was denied, the FBI was reportedly alarmed at Carter Page’s trip to Moscow and meetings with Russian officials, one week before the DNC was hacked. Counter intelligence agencies later reported to both Presidential candidates that Russia had carried out this hack; Donald Trump said publicly in the third debate that ‘our country has no idea’ if Russia did the hacking.

To further complicate the story, the FISA warrant was allegedly granted in part because of the involvement of Vladimir Putin’s own daughters. One is married to a senior official at Gazprom, where Carter Page and Paul Manafort reportedly have holdings; another to Kirill Shamalov, a banking official.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2016/11/7 ... -To-Russia

Huey » 04 Mar 2017 8:56 am » wrote: Is he?:

That's right.
We don't know.

It is 'said' to have named Trump?
Who said that?

From your link:

FISA wiretap requires no showing of a crime, just evidence amounting to probable cause that the target of the wiretap is an agent of a foreign power.

I'd say he fits the standard for probable cause.
If there is a FISA court warrant naming him, he could prove that, no?
If there isn't there should have been considering his and his people's cozy relationship with the Russians.
He said that Obama tapped his phone and never said anything about any warrant, or the FISA court.
If that were true, it would be a big **** deal.
Then an hour later he's Tweeting about The Apprentice.

#ShePersisted » 04 Mar 2017 9:34 am » wrote: That's right.
We don't know.

It is 'said' to have named Trump?
Who said that?

From your link: I'd say he fits the standard for probable cause.
If there is a FISA court warrant naming him, he could prove that, no?
If there isn't there should have been considering his and his people's cozy relationship with the Russians.

He said that Obama tapped his phone and never said anything about any warrant, or the FISA court.
If that were true, it would be a big **** deal.
Then an hour later he's Tweeting about The Apprentice.

As usual you ignore the warrant that was issued in October.

Hello, misty, a FISA warrant allows the tapping or listening in.

Duh.

This has been news for quite some time. If you would broaden your information sources beyond twitter and left wing propaganda **** you might be just a little more informed.

Just admit you are wrong for once misty.