He said, she said. The ONLY current crime here is PJ spewing his lies and filth. When the real truth is fully revealed PJ will have to eat his insulting words.
He said, she said. The ONLY current crime here is PJ spewing his lies and filth. When the real truth is fully revealed PJ will have to eat his insulting words.
". . . And every Democrat and media pundit who accuses Trump of treason for considering taking dirt from, say, Norway in 2020 has now, by extension, accused the Obama administration of committing treason in 2016."
From The Hill 14 June 2019
(Poor old DonDiego recommends a read of this piece for a fine summary of the nefarious goings-on initiated by the Hillary Mobsters.)
During the waning days of the 2016 election campaign not only did the Obama Administration accept false dirt on candidate Trump from associates of the Clinton Syndicate twice, they initiated an official Counter Intelligence case against President Trump based on the bogus information.
Bingo, DOnDiego! You are 100% correct. The Obama Administration....not the Clinton Campaign...investigated foreign sources of information.
Unfortunately for your point that is a big, fat "so what?"...the FBI and CIA are not political campaigns. There is nothing the least bit unethical, controversial, let alone illegal about our intelligence agencies getting information from foreign sources. They also got information from foreign sources about Bin Laden's whereabouts....which played a crucial role in how he was ultimately captured. But the FOX News punditry has now desperately tried to conflate that dynamic with a political campaign accepting information from foreign sources in the context of helping them win an election.
The Republican FEC head made it very clear this week the latter example is a federal crime.
So..uh....I'm afraid you'll have to find some other way to rationalize your endorsement of felonious behavior.
PJ Stroh writes: "Bingo, DOnDiego! You are 100% correct. The Obama Administration....not the Clinton Campaign...investigated foreign sources of information."
From poor old DonDiego's link to The Hill:
"In October 2016, less than three weeks from Election Day, the Obama Justice Department approved a Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act warrant to spy on the Trump campaign through its former adviser, Carter Page. The primary evidence supporting the warrant? A dossierwritten by a foreign friendly named Christopher Steele, a retired MI6 intelligence agent from Great Britain. Of course, the Justice Department and the FBI forgot to tell the courts that Steele actually was working on behalf of the Clinton campaign, but that’s a small detail for the purpose of this column."
boldface added - DD
Well, well, welly, well, . . . well. The Obama Administration knew the author was working for The Despicable One, and failed to notify the Courts. Pr'bly just an oversight.
Again...whats the issue? You keep trying to apply laws pertaining to political campaigns to the Fedral Law Enforcement agencies.. The FBI is not a political campaign. The FEC does not have jurisdiction of the FBI..
So when you claim the FBI is guilty of the same alleged crimes as a political campaign you are making a very desperate comparison from an apple to an orange.
Here is a more recent example of the US Intelligence agencies (under DOnald Trump) legally utilizing foreign information as part of an investigation...
Russian documents reveal desire to sow racial discord — and violence — in the U.S
And gaining this information is perfectly legal - because Trump's Department of Justice is not bound by the same laws that rule his campaign. And that is pretty obvious, isn't it?
PJStroh keeps missing the point, . . . perhaps intentionally.
DonDiego has no problem with the Government Agencies involved in the investigation.
DonDiego does have a problem with the competitor in a Political Campaign influencing those Government Agencies to investigate her opponent during a campaign by contracting/paying for a false document, the Steele Dossier, and providing it to those agencies.
The Hill (3 June):
"Never before — until 2016 — had the apparatus of a U.S. presidential candidate managed to sic the weight of the FBI and U.S. intelligence community on a rival nominee during an election, and by using a foreign-fed, uncorroborated political opposition research document.
But Clinton’s campaign, in concert with the Democratic Party and through their shared law firm, funded Christopher Steele’s unverified dossierwhich, it turns out, falsely portrayed Republican Donald Trump as a treasonous asset colluding with Russian President Vladimir Putin to hijack the U.S. election.
Steele went to the FBI to get an investigation started and then leaked the existence of the investigation, with the hope of sinking Trump’s presidential aspirations.
On its face, it is arguably the most devious political dirty trick in American history and one of the most overt intrusions of a foreigner into a U.S. election."
DonDiego recommends the interested reader, if any, look at The Hill piece. It provides some details as to how the Hillary Campaign disguised their involvement in the scheme; it ties together some of the folks involved, e.g. Christopher Steele, Bruce Ohr, Nellie Ohr, Peter Strzok, and Lisa Page.
The write-up concludes with 10 questions directed to Hillary Clinton, the answers to which would completely clarify the matter.
DonDiego does not expect Hillary to answer.
Don Diego forgot to quote the most relevant part of the article he cited. I don't know how he missed it as it is right at the top of the article.
By John Solomon
Opinion Contributor
I do applaud the Hill for making sure everyone knows at the start of their articles if they were written as an opinion piece. If only FOX News could find it within their ethics code to be as up front and honest.
Originally posted by: Mark
Don Diego forgot to quote the most relevant part of the article he cited. I don't know how he missed it as it is right at the top of the article.
By John Solomon
Opinion Contributor
I do applaud the Hill for making sure everyone knows at the start of their articles if they were written as an opinion piece. If only FOX News could find it within their ethics code to be as up front and honest.
The only thing that is an opinion in the articles Don Diego posted is: "On its face, it is arguably the most devious political dirty trick in American history and one of the most overt intrusions of a foreigner into a U.S. election." ...a very informed (and correct) opinion. The rest of it is factual, not an opinion. Damn those facts!
DonDiego's opinion writer claims this:
""Never before — until 2016 — had the apparatus of a U.S. presidential candidate managed to sic the weight of the FBI and U.S. intelligence community on a rival nominee during an election, and by using a foreign-fed, uncorroborated political opposition research document.
But Clinton’s campaign, in concert with the Democratic Party and through their shared law firm, funded Christopher Steele’s unverified dossierwhich, it turns out, falsely portrayed Republican Donald Trump as a treasonous asset colluding with Russian President Vladimir Putin to hijack the U.S. election.
Steele went to the FBI to get an investigation started and then leaked the existence of the investigation, with the hope of sinking Trump’s presidential aspirations."
And the fact checkers say "bullpucky" ! The Steele Dossier did not prompt the investigation - Trump's advisor who bragged about Russian ties did
There's a reason why Mueller's investigation yielded indictments and convictions. And there is a reason why Bengazhi, Email-Gate, and the new FBI-gate did not. And its the same reason thats held true on this board for years. The "Liberal-media" bases their information on facts. The "Conservative-Media" uses opinion writers and bloggers.
Originally posted by: PJ Stroh
DonDiego's opinion writer claims this:
""Never before — until 2016 — had the apparatus of a U.S. presidential candidate managed to sic the weight of the FBI and U.S. intelligence community on a rival nominee during an election, and by using a foreign-fed, uncorroborated political opposition research document.
But Clinton’s campaign, in concert with the Democratic Party and through their shared law firm, funded Christopher Steele’s unverified dossierwhich, it turns out, falsely portrayed Republican Donald Trump as a treasonous asset colluding with Russian President Vladimir Putin to hijack the U.S. election.
Steele went to the FBI to get an investigation started and then leaked the existence of the investigation, with the hope of sinking Trump’s presidential aspirations."
And the fact checkers say "bullpucky" ! The Steele Dossier did not prompt the investigation - Trump's advisor who bragged about Russian ties did
There's a reason why Mueller's investigation yielded indictments and convictions. And there is a reason why Bengazhi, Email-Gate, and the new FBI-gate did not. And its the same reason thats held true on this board for years. The "Liberal-media" bases their information on facts. The "Conservative-Media" uses opinion writers and bloggers.
PJ, how many Trump associates were indicted for Russian Collusion?
