• In total there are 4 users online :: 0 registered, 0 hidden and 4 guests (based on users active over the past 60 minutes)
    Most users ever online was 616 on Thu Jan 18, 2024 7:47 pm

The Coup against Donald Trump

A forum dedicated to friendly and civil conversations about domestic and global politics, history, and present-day events.
Forum rules
Do not promote books in this forum. Instead, promote your books in either Authors: Tell us about your FICTION book! or Authors: Tell us about your NON-FICTION book!.

All other Community Rules apply in this and all other forums.
User avatar
Interbane

1G - SILVER CONTRIBUTOR
BookTalk.org Hall of Fame
Posts: 7203
Joined: Sat Oct 09, 2004 12:59 am
19
Location: Da U.P.
Has thanked: 1105 times
Been thanked: 2166 times
United States of America

Re: The Coup against Donald Trump

Unread post

KS wrote:It looks as if Attorney General Barr is serious about investigating whether the Russiagate probe was legal. It wasn't, of course.
How is an investigation illegal? Even if an investigation turns up nothing, how is it illegal? Isn't the entire purpose of an investigation to find out the truth?

The further down this road you go, the more it looks like 1984. What happens to transparency if even the act of investigating is illegal? This is bonkers.

The probe kicked off on legitimate grounds, with a legal warrant obtained with respect to someone that had Russian ties. And all throughout the Mueller report, there is evidence that collusion was attempted. There was nothing wrong with the probe, give it up.
In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and has been widely regarded as a bad move.” - Douglas Adams
KindaSkolarly

1E - BANNED
Doctorate
Posts: 512
Joined: Thu Mar 30, 2017 3:53 pm
6
Location: Texas
Has thanked: 16 times
Been thanked: 104 times

Re: The Coup against Donald Trump

Unread post

Interbane wrote:
KS wrote:It looks as if Attorney General Barr is serious about investigating whether the Russiagate probe was legal. It wasn't, of course.
How is an investigation illegal? Even if an investigation turns up nothing, how is it illegal? Isn't the entire purpose of an investigation to find out the truth?

The further down this road you go, the more it looks like 1984. What happens to transparency if even the act of investigating is illegal? This is bonkers.

The probe kicked off on legitimate grounds, with a legal warrant obtained with respect to someone that had Russian ties. And all throughout the Mueller report, there is evidence that collusion was attempted. There was nothing wrong with the probe, give it up.
Not even the Attorney General is sure that the warrant obtained at the beginning of the investigation was legal. So how can you be sure?

The circumstances surrounding the granting of the first FISA warrant are crucial. The warrant was obtained based on misinformation. Atty Gen Barr wants to know if the warrant was granted solely because of the Steele dossier. Hillary Clinton and those around her paid for the dossier. And the dossier was known to be bogus before it was presented to the FISA court.

FISA shocker: DOJ official warned Steele dossier was connected to Clinton, might be biased

...The then-senior Department of Justice (DOJ) official briefed both senior FBI and DOJ officials in summer 2016 about Christopher Steele’s Russia dossier, explicitly cautioning that the British intelligence operative’s work was opposition research connected to Hillary Clinton’s campaign and might be biased.

Ohr’s briefings, in July and August 2016, included the deputy director of the FBI, a top lawyer for then-Attorney General Loretta Lynch and a Justice official who later would become the top deputy to special counsel Robert Mueller.

At the time, Ohr was the associate deputy attorney general. Yet his warnings about political bias were pointedly omitted weeks later from the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) warrant that the FBI obtained from a federal court, granting it permission to spy on whether the Trump campaign was colluding with Russia to hijack the 2016 presidential election....

thehill.com/opinion/white-house/425739- ... to-clinton

In any crime you first ask who benefits. In this crime (spying on Trump with an illegally obtained warrant), Clinton benefited. And since she helped pay for the fake dossier...well, things look bad for her.

Also, Atty Gen Barr wants to know why Clinton's buddy Comey didn't use his FBI to look more deeply into her illegal use of a private server while she was Sec of State. More criminal action there.

And Barr wants to know why the Obama administration didn't warn Trump and his people about "Russians" infiltrating his campaign. If the threat was there, then they should have been told. Instead, the swamp rats placed agents in the campaign to try to entrap good people. To the credit of the Trump team, nobody took the bribes, and nobody sought the proffered dirt on Clinton.

Barr just wants some answers. You should too.

Image
User avatar
Interbane

1G - SILVER CONTRIBUTOR
BookTalk.org Hall of Fame
Posts: 7203
Joined: Sat Oct 09, 2004 12:59 am
19
Location: Da U.P.
Has thanked: 1105 times
Been thanked: 2166 times
United States of America

Re: The Coup against Donald Trump

Unread post

KS wrote:The circumstances surrounding the granting of the first FISA warrant are crucial. The warrant was obtained based on misinformation. Atty Gen Barr wants to know if the warrant was granted solely because of the Steele dossier. Hillary Clinton and those around her paid for the dossier. And the dossier was known to be bogus before it was presented to the FISA court.
You're referring to this FISA Memo?

Sure, it confirms what you're saying. But what about this memo, correcting the record, released 11 days later?

It's an elegant spin to say the Steele dossier was the primary reason the warrant was granted, in spite of the facts. The DOJ used multiple sources and had probable cause to conduct surveillance.
KS wrote:Also, Atty Gen Barr wants to know why Clinton's buddy Comey didn't use his FBI to look more deeply into her illegal use of a private server while she was Sec of State. More criminal action there.
Yeah, sure. "Buddy" Comey who sent a letter to Congress on October 28, 2016 that arguably cost Clinton the election.

The rabbit holes are filled with cherries, and you appear to be picking them all the way to the bottom.
In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and has been widely regarded as a bad move.” - Douglas Adams
User avatar
DWill

1H - GOLD CONTRIBUTOR
BookTalk.org Hall of Fame
Posts: 6966
Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2008 8:05 am
16
Location: Luray, Virginia
Has thanked: 2262 times
Been thanked: 2470 times

Re: The Coup against Donald Trump

Unread post

Did not the FISA warrant acknowledge that the Steele dosier was generated by efforts of the Clinton campaign? Did the FBI need to say, further, that it might be biased? Does the possibility of bias mean that nothing the dossier contained could be followed up? I can't see how it would.

I have a nagging doubt myself, though, about the propriety of what the Clinton campaign did in ordering up the Steele dossier. Yes, I know that it was originally a Republican who started the relationship with Fusion GPS to get dirt on Trump for the primary season. But Clinton and co. took over from there. The fact that they didn't have their hands directly involved in questioning Russian sources doesn't seem to me all that exculpatory. I don't think they should have taken the action; it was out of bounds even if not illegal. It was a matter for law enforcement.
KindaSkolarly

1E - BANNED
Doctorate
Posts: 512
Joined: Thu Mar 30, 2017 3:53 pm
6
Location: Texas
Has thanked: 16 times
Been thanked: 104 times

Re: The Coup against Donald Trump

Unread post

The Deep State swamp creatures in DC are fortunate that Barr is looking into Spygate. The situation warrants a Special Prosecutor (Russiagate didn't warrant one, but an attempted coup against a president certainly does). Instead of a Special Prosecutor with far-reaching and nearly unlimited power, the swamp creatures get a mere Dept of Justice investigation. And the head of it, Atty Gen Barr, has set some pretty narrow parameters for himself. He merely wants to find out if the investigation into Russiagate was begun legally or illegally. Oh, and he wants to know why the head of the FBI didn't look at Hillary Clinton's servers. Reasonable enough.

A couple articles of interest. Four FISA warrants were issued during the Russiagate coup against Trump. The last 3 were illegal. The question now is whether the first one was illegal. And look at the FBI's sting operation against a Trump supporter:

IG Horowitz Has 'Concluded that the Final Three FISA Extensions Were Illegally Obtained,' diGenova Says

...On Thursday, Solomon reported that newly unearthed memos show that a high-ranking government official from the Obama State Department met with former British spy Christopher Steele in October of 2016, and figured out pretty quickly that his dossier was a political hit job intended to slime Donald Trump on behalf of Hillary Clinton’s campaign.

The written account of Deputy Assistant Secretary of State Kathleen Kavalec’s Oct. 11, 2016, meeting with Steele also shows that Steele admitted that his research was "political and facing an Election Day deadline," according to Solomon.

DiGenova said the inspector general was unaware of the memos, which were obtained last week through open-records litigation by the conservative group Citizens United.

"The Bureau hid those memos from Horowitz. As a result of that, they are doing some additional work on the first FISA," diGenova explained, adding: "It may be that all four FISAs will have been obtained illegally."

pjmedia.com/video/digenova-ig-horowitz- ... -obtained/



FBI Used Suitcase Stuffed With Cash During Papadopoulos Sting

...According to Toensing, Papa-D was vacationing with his then-fiance, Simona Mangiante, in Greece when he was approached by someone who was supposedly impressed with his credentials, and said he wanted to do business with him. The individual allegedly talked the then-29-year-old into traveling to Israel to make a deal, and invited him to his hotel room.

“And there on the bed, is $10,000 in cash in a suitcase,” she continued. Papadopoulos took the money and gave it to his lawyer, who has it still.

Toensing said when Papadopoulos returned to the United States, he was greeted by FBI agents at Dulles Airport and they started searching through everything that he had “the second he landed.”

She added, “in fact, they already had his baggage from the plane. He couldn’t believe they had his baggage.”

“It was a set up!” exclaimed Gorka.

“It was a complete set up,” agreed Toensing.

DiGenova explained that the Feds already knew that he hadn’t declared that he had $10,000 and were expecting to find the undeclared cash so they could arrest him and “put the thumbscrews on and make him squeal,” as Gorka put it.

Worst of all, according to Toensing, “one of the FBI agents said to him, ‘this is what happens when you work for Donald Trump.'”

Papadopoulos tweeted that he would like to see Congress investigate the money. “They are marked bills. They remain with my lawyer in Athens,” he said....

zerohedge.com/news/2019-05-10/fbi-used- ... ulos-sting
KindaSkolarly

1E - BANNED
Doctorate
Posts: 512
Joined: Thu Mar 30, 2017 3:53 pm
6
Location: Texas
Has thanked: 16 times
Been thanked: 104 times

Re: The Coup against Donald Trump

Unread post

Clearing out bookmarks. These relate to the Spygate coup against Trump:

VIDEO: Jeanine Pirro’s Opening Statement: Predicts Obama’s Downfall as They All Turn Against Him
investmentwatchblog.com/video-jeanine-p ... ainst-him/

Joe di Genova: Barack Obama Knew James Comey Was Going to Blackmail the incoming President
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VT2kR9O ... e=youtu.be

FBI texts: Obama 'wants to know everything we're doing'
nbcnews.com/politics/politics-news/fbi- ... ng-n845531

Trump Coup Biggest Violation of Constitution in History – Former CIA Officer
President Trump says the Deep State tried and failed to remove him from office in a coup. Former CIA Officer and whistleblower Kevin Shipp says the attempted coup on Trump was a global conspiracy. Shipp explains, “Yes, this is a coup. This is the most shocking violation of the Constitution and criminal activity in the history, not just of America, but of a western government. Much of this rises to the level of treason. People need to understand how shocking this is. It was a clear conspiracy. There will be arrests and indictments without question. . . . This was a coup. It was a conspiracy. It was criminal activity. These people need to be indicted, charged and need to be put in prison, and if they’re not, then our Constitution is nothing more than a sham. This was a coup against a duly elected President, and people need to understand how serious this is.”
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/51507.htm

The Russiagate Hoax and Uranium One
It was obvious the whole Russiagate thing was a complete Hoax a few days after Crowdstrike issued their ridiculous report in July 2016, which contained no evidence whatsoever of any hacking, except for some 4 year old Ukrainian malmare, freely available on the net, which anyone could have put on the DNC server (including Crowdstrike themselves as a False Flag / Red Herring).
investmentwatchblog.com/the-russiagate- ... anium-one/

We now understand some of the mechanics of what happened in the Intelligence services' coup against Trump. Under Obama the US intelligence community became politicized. Obama fired conservatives and replaced them with leftists, fired nationalists and replaced them with globalists. Because of their anti-American convictions, the heads of the intelligence agencies tried to prevent Trump (a nationalist) from gaining the White House, and then once he was there they tried to remove him by blatantly lying about him being a Russian spy.

It looks as if many people will go to jail because of the coup, and Obama could be impeached (yes, even FORMER presidents are subject to impeachment). Wouldn't that be the cherry on the double helping of crow, for OBAMA to be impeached rather than TRUMP? Hardee har har.
User avatar
DWill

1H - GOLD CONTRIBUTOR
BookTalk.org Hall of Fame
Posts: 6966
Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2008 8:05 am
16
Location: Luray, Virginia
Has thanked: 2262 times
Been thanked: 2470 times

Re: The Coup against Donald Trump

Unread post

Are you trying to claim the mantle of the late Harold Camping, shifting over to the political realm?
User avatar
LanDroid

2A - MOD & BRONZE
Comandante Literario Supreme
Posts: 2800
Joined: Sat Jul 27, 2002 9:51 am
21
Location: Cincinnati, OH
Has thanked: 195 times
Been thanked: 1166 times
United States of America

Re: The Coup against Donald Trump

Unread post

Drunk on the coup-laid again. Too late for an intervention.
Image
User avatar
Harry Marks
Bookasaurus
Posts: 1920
Joined: Sun May 01, 2011 10:42 am
12
Location: Denver, CO
Has thanked: 2335 times
Been thanked: 1020 times
Ukraine

Re: The Coup against Donald Trump

Unread post

Robert Tulip wrote: A key theme here is political attitudes toward cultural relativism, the idea that all cultures are equal, something only supported on the left as part of political correctness. For cultural relativism, the existence of the state of Israel is obnoxious due to Israel's rejection of equality between Jews and Arabs for existential security reasons. Conservatives tend to see Israel as a beacon of modernity in a backward region of the world, while leftists focus on the assumption of cultural equality, against which Israel's security policies are unacceptable, with progressives often tending to ignore the widespread overt Arab anti-Semitism.
I don't think cultural relativism usually asserts that all cultures are equal. Rather the idea is to oppose the pervasive process by which the "winners" write the history and the interpretations and the justifications. Power doesn't determine truth. Cultural relativism, to my understanding, was and is centrally aimed at assessing behavior within a cultural context, and it may or may not apologize for behavior we would rate as unacceptable in our own culture.

Is it wrong for calligraphy quality to help determine whether a scholar should be given a role in power? Is it wrong for Asians to be excluded from opportunities in the economy of America? Is it wrong for resources to be legally assigned as property of whoever first seizes them, rather than in the interest of the general public? Cultural factors can help us make sense of such actions, and we can decide whether we agree with the cultural choices, or indeed whether we approve of the practices, independently of understanding them. What would be fairly shortsided is to impose disapproval of foreign practices simply because they disagree with ours. Some deeper reason is required.
Robert Tulip wrote:The problem here is that people find it impolite to discuss cultural differences. This situation then means that false assumptions fester, while efforts to address festering problems cannot gain political traction. For example Arab illiteracy seems to have roots in Islamic culture, but the taboo on cultural criticism means this major problem is little understood or discussed.
I think you exaggerate the taboo. Among specialists I would be very surprised if anything of significance remains little understood or discussed. Among the general public, such discussions are likely to be largely about emotional expression rather than about gaining understanding.
Robert Tulip wrote:The result is that an evidence-based theory of change cannot be widely discussed, there is wide ignorance of facts, and when people look at the Middle East they jump to the simplistic conclusion of blaming Israel. Together with the growth of simplistic socialism, the result is that anti-Semitic prejudice now finds a natural home on the political left, as seen by the discomfort of Mr Corbyn in straddling the fence of contradictions that this all produces for British Labour.
I think it is only natural to hold the more powerful side in a conflict to a higher standard. "Because we can" is not a valid moral reason for behaving unjustly, but it is quite common for human groups to take that mistaken option, justifying themselves emotionally rather than morally. There is no question that Israel created an ethnic cleansing campaign at its birth, the Nakba. Nor that propagandists created an alternative version in which the village massacres were fictions created by Arab radio and the exodus of Arab Palestinians was entirely voluntary out of ginned-up fear. There is no question that Israel continues to dominate the water resources of the area and allocate them to Jewish farms. There is no question that Israel excludes land sales by Jews to Arabs, preventing the same kind of gradual change in the land status that was effected by Zionists in the first part of the 20th century, or that illegal settlements continue, and continue to be authorized and enforced by Israel on the West Bank.

Some of that is excused by desperation. But the claim that it is all necessitated by defensive needs has long since passed into lack of credibility, functioning as a rhetorical talking point like the original claims that the ethnic cleansing was an Arab fabrication. These talking points have now come to include branding anyone who is critical of Israeli "security" policy as anti-Semitic. I think it is often fair to label such criticism "one-sided", but to then evoke anti-Semitism is not nearly as credible. The criticism should be addressed directly, and if it is one-sided, explain why that is a reasonable conclusion. But unless the criticism of policy can be associated with antipathy toward jews and Judaism, regardless of the policy issues at stake, then it will rightly be seen as just rhetorical overstatement.

I have seen maps of "Judea and Samaria" that include parts of Jordan (across the Jordan river from the West Bank), Lebanon and Syria. This is the land that extremists believe they are entitled to. And that people like Netanyahu's father believe Israel must take possession of to be secure. Needless to say this means depriving the Arabs in these lands of the right to vote, if not ousting them outright. Just as there are Arab extremists, who get a lot of attention from the pro-Israel commentators, so there are Israeli extremists (which a lot of Israelis know first-hand) who include the assassin of Yitzhak Rabin. We should be doing all we legally can, for the sake of Israelis, to separate these extremists from power. And their enablers, who label any criticism of policies that enable these extremists as anti-Semitic, should be refuted thoroughly.
Robert Tulip wrote:That is not to ignore the problem of right wing extremism, only to note that neo-Nazism is a tiny problem by comparison to broad cultural trends that should be analysed at the level of mass opinion. My impression is that the current cultural and political trends are pushing Jews more into alliance with conservative politics, even though 71% of American Jewish voters supported Clinton in 2016.
One could as easily claim that current cultural and political trends are pushing Gentiles into resisting AIPAC and all other lobbying groups that are pro-Israel. It really depends on how far-sighted or paranoid each group behaves. Claiming that defensiveness is forced, and even more that deceptive rhetoric is forced, puts up a high bar of evidence to be satisfied. But then, that is the ace that extremists keep in the hole - the more they provoke, the more the equally short-sighted response gives them credibility. So far American Jews have been, in my opinion, exceedingly patient and far-sighted. Others see the matter differently, I expect.
vizitelly
Finally Comfortable
Posts: 53
Joined: Mon Nov 26, 2018 7:13 am
5
Has thanked: 38 times
Been thanked: 32 times

Re: The Coup against Donald Trump

Unread post

I don't think it's a good idea to go to Wikipedia for information; it's as likely to tell you that Genghis Khan was the father of Emily Dickinson as anything else. Usually best to go to primary sources.
Post Reply

Return to “Current Events & History”