This is a forum based out of Pensacola Florida.


You are not connected. Please login or register

What a selfish idiot

Go to page : Previous  1, 2

View previous topic View next topic Go down  Message [Page 2 of 2]

26 Re: What a selfish idiot on 6/24/2017, 10:03 am

zsomething wrote:
2seaoat wrote:Look, I do not like the man, but the body shaming is really something in this context which is probably wrong.  Now if he was body shaming someone else like Rosie, I could see this response, but I got uncomfortable seeing Hillary the grandmother being body shamed because of her weight and her pants suits.

We need to stop disrespecting our Presidents with the hateful crap.  How about just talking about how people in a decade will deal with their elderly family members when Medicaid may be reduced by over 30% to give a few thousand families capital gains tax cuts.  I could care less that President Trump has a few extra pounds, I am more concerned that his heart is non existence.

Yeah, I don't disagree with that.  It's a cheap shot I wouldn't usually go for, but given how much Trump seems to value people based on their appearance, while being totally oblivious to his own flaws in that area, I couldn't resist.  But, I'll lay off of that.

Gotta admit, though, that for a guy who prides himself on "making the best decisions," wearing translucent shorts isn't really the wisest thing to do, even if he had the body for it.  Even without the extra pounds, those would be some bad shorts.

I won't back off.  This "president" has personally shamed whole swathes of the population...women...Mexican Americans...Muslims...Gold Star families...the former President...his GOP opponents...Hillary Clinton...anyone who attended his rallies in protest...world leaders...

View user profile

27 Re: What a selfish idiot on 6/24/2017, 10:39 am

del.capslock wrote:
PkrBum wrote:"Medicaid may be reduced by over 30%"?

If you disagree with that statement, why don't you show some data that refutes it, instead of just pulling a question mark out of your ass?

That, by the way, is right out of the Bolshevik playbook: Always create doubt about your opponent, never explain your own agenda.

Very nice, Comrade Bolshevik, very nice. Iosif Vissarionovich taught you well.

Since hardly anyone has read it... all I've heard is that there's a federal reduction in mcaid's growth.

Not an actual cut to the obamacaid expansion. But it does shift control to the states. Oh nooos..!!

I wonder how long leftists can keep their hair on fire... lol.

View user profile

28 Re: What a selfish idiot on 6/24/2017, 11:09 am

2seaoat wrote:Look, I do not like the man, but the body shaming is really something in this context which is probably wrong.  Now if he was body shaming someone else like Rosie, I could see this response, but I got uncomfortable seeing Hillary the grandmother being body shamed because of her weight and her pants suits.

We need to stop disrespecting our Presidents with the hateful crap.  How about just talking about how people in a decade will deal with their elderly family members when Medicaid may be reduced by over 30% to give a few thousand families capital gains tax cuts.  I could care less that President Trump has a few extra pounds, I am more concerned that his heart is non existence.

Technically you are correct. 45 has lowered the quality of public discourse to 144 character tweets and a flurry of "I can tell you that's"; "very, very's" and verbal insults. It is no wonder that I rejoiced in seeing him get a little of what he's been dishing out.

This brings up another observation. The Republicans lead by Trump, McConnell, Putin and Wikileaks, have been a team of thugs bent on winning at any cost while the Democrats seem to be tied to the Marquis of Queensberry rules. One thing the Democrats have to learn is how the fight is fought in the 21st century with an opposing team made up of street fighters.

I know, I know, body shaming is not the way to go but I gotta admit Z's posts were pretty funny.

View user profile

29 Re: What a selfish idiot on 6/24/2017, 11:45 am

othershoe1030 wrote: One thing the Democrats have to learn is how the fight is fought in the 21st century with an opposing team made up of street fighters.

What's that suppose to mean? New talkingpoint? Who takes to the streets in violent mobs?

View user profile

30 Re: What a selfish idiot on 6/24/2017, 12:58 pm

2seaoat wrote:Look, I do not like the man, but the body shaming is really something in this context which is probably wrong.  Now if he was body shaming someone else like Rosie, I could see this response, but I got uncomfortable seeing Hillary the grandmother being body shamed because of her weight and her pants suits.


Body shaming is only bad when it's a woman being shamed by a man. It's perfectly acceptable for women to comment on a man's or another woman's appearance.

Sorry, them's the rules. Just ask any chick, she'll tell you.

What she won't tell you is why men make up over 90% of combat casualties, workplace deaths and workplace suicides as well as over 80% of ALL suicides.

View user profile http://www.flickr.com/photos/btraven/

31 Re: What a selfish idiot on 6/24/2017, 1:43 pm

del.capslock wrote:
2seaoat wrote:Look, I do not like the man, but the body shaming is really something in this context which is probably wrong.  Now if he was body shaming someone else like Rosie, I could see this response, but I got uncomfortable seeing Hillary the grandmother being body shamed because of her weight and her pants suits.


Body shaming is only bad when it's a woman being shamed by a man. It's perfectly acceptable for women to comment on a man's or another woman's appearance.

Sorry, them's the rules. Just ask any chick, she'll tell you.

What she won't tell you is why men make up over 90% of combat casualties, workplace deaths and workplace suicides as well as over 80% of ALL suicides.

View user profile

32 Re: What a selfish idiot on 6/24/2017, 1:49 pm


The Twit of Our Time

Listen up kids, here is a story,
it’s neither pretend, nor allegory,
sadly it’s true, a tale of our times,
the tale of the Twit, who twat all the time.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

There once was a Twit who hated to lose,
so it cried all the time as it tweeted ‘fake news’.
The problem of course was the news wasn’t fake,
it was news that its huge ego couldn’t take.

The job Twit had won, or rather, it stole,
(with help from the Russians, bots, and ugly trolls)
was much bigger and harder than its tiny brain thought
and the decisions it made were the ones that were bought.

Twit made up excuses for its job poorly done.
It blamed lots of others, in its twitter tantrums.
But Twit was to blame for all that it said,
for the lies and the hate it liked to spread.

Most of the country despised the Twit,
and the majority of people, didn’t vote for it.
They started a resistance to put up a fight,
challenging policies with all of their might.

Judges ruled too, putting Twit in its place,
then came the Pope, the look on his face...
captured the feeling of most of the nation;
defiance kept fueling Twit’s indignation.

Fast and more frequent Twit’s tweets did become.
Displaying the depth to which its mind was undone.
As Twit’s lies were unraveled, it grew more and more weak
the facts kept on coming, truth had started to leak.

Growing more desperate, the bitter Twit brewed,
especially when the investigations ensued.
Obstruction of justice and campaign collusion
spiraled Twit further, into its own disillusion.

Such a sore loser, Twit tried to project
onto others its weakness, in hopes to deflect.
Twit like to cry out, this is a ‘witch hunt’,
a pathetic attempt, a bait and switch stunt.

This story’s still going with no end in sight,
as crazy as it is, my advice is hang tight.
The twittering Twit has so much to say
though it really can’t say it in any rational way.

And where would I be without all this fodder,
I never wrote before, I didn’t even bother.
At the rate this is going I’ll be back in due time
reporting how the Twit, once again crossed the line.

by Heidi Wiley

(from Robert Reich's FB page...Fact Check: Trump makes misleading claims at Iowa Rally...as reported by USAToday).

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2017/06/23/fact-check-trump-makes-misleading-claims-iowa-rally/103131784/

View user profile

33 Re: What a selfish idiot on 6/25/2017, 12:09 pm

Not much difference than the below the belt attacks on Clinton, Bush, Obama, and now Trump. When will we focus on their bad policies rather than sophomoric 7th grade bullying of appearances. I find what is in the new health care bill to be obscene, yet people want to laugh at trump and how he looks. There is nothing funny about medicaid cuts and throwing disabled and elderly to the wolves so some rich people get more money.......why is there not more outrage across the board. Partially, because we have all become Fox News and Msnbc pawns......turn that chit off and start thinking for yourself.

View user profile

34 Re: What a selfish idiot on 6/25/2017, 12:17 pm

2seaoat wrote:Not much difference than the below the belt attacks on Clinton, Bush, Obama, and now Trump.  When will we focus on their bad policies rather than sophomoric 7th grade bullying of appearances.   I find what is in the new health care bill to be obscene, yet people want to laugh at trump and how he looks.  There is nothing funny about medicaid cuts and throwing disabled and elderly to the wolves so some rich people get more money.......why is there not more outrage across the board.  Partially, because we have all become Fox News and Msnbc pawns......turn that chit off and start thinking for yourself.

I don't watch Fox and rarely watch MSNBC. It's the fact that I'm outraged that fuels this ridicule...it's the only way I can keep my blood pressure from skyrocketing into the ether. Policy discussions are useless against brainwashed individuals and Russian trolls...they just call everything "fake news". Trump set himself up for this. I'm more than happy to oblige.

View user profile

35 Re: What a selfish idiot on 6/25/2017, 12:20 pm

http://www.cnn.com/2017/06/23/politics/editors-note/index.html

View user profile

36 Re: What a selfish idiot on 6/25/2017, 12:24 pm

2seaoat wrote: throwing disabled and elderly to the wolves

HA! You're using inflammatory language like that and you criticize sophomoric humor? If you want a rational discussion perhaps you should set the example by listing specifics about the bill instead of "crying wolf".

Besides, this ain't exactly the Oxford debating society here. It's the internet, home of the lowest common denominators.

View user profile http://www.flickr.com/photos/btraven/

37 Re: What a selfish idiot on 6/25/2017, 12:27 pm

PkrBum wrote:http://www.cnn.com/2017/06/23/politics/editors-note/index.html

If you have a point to make, why don't you try to make instead of just posting links?

What's the matter, too stupid to write your own words?

PkrBoy... lol

View user profile http://www.flickr.com/photos/btraven/

38 Re: What a selfish idiot on 6/25/2017, 5:31 pm

del.capslock wrote:
PkrBum wrote:http://www.cnn.com/2017/06/23/politics/editors-note/index.html

If you have a point to make, why don't you try to make instead of just posting links?

What's the matter, too stupid to write your own words?

PkrBoy...   lol

http://m.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/jun/22/susan-rice-records-intelligence-committee-wants-ar/

House intelligence committee sources say career officials at the National Security Council are slow-walking the delivery of subpoenaed records on former National Security Adviser Susan E. Rice’s handling of classified information and the “unmasking” of Trump campaign workers — material from the Russian hacking probe that middle-level NSC managers claim was transferred to President Obama’s library and could “remain closed to the public for five years.”

One source, speaking only on the condition of anonymity, called the transfer curious and appeared to reflect an effort by former administration officials to obscure evidence on whether Ms. Rice and other top officials in the Obama White House illegally tried to identify which Trump campaign and transition aides had been caught up in the U.S. intelligence intercepts of Russian interference in the presidential race.

The two high-level intelligence committee sources told The Washington Times that they are confident the panel’s investigators, despite the delays, will eventually get their hands on the records shipped to a heavily secure archive for Mr. Obama’s yet-to-be-built presidential library.

A spokesman at the National Security Council would not directly address questions on the Rice case, saying only that the council’s staff is “still in the process of reviewing record requests” to ensure that any “executive privilege concerns” are taken into account.

The spokesman, Michael N. Anton, said the intelligence committee subpoenas were not submitted directly to the NSC, but to other agencies within the U.S. intelligence community. He did not respond to a request for specifics on which agencies.

The Barack Obama Presidential Library in Hoffman Estates, Illinois, declined to comment Thursday on the handling of Ms. Rice’s documents.

Rep. Devin Nunes, California Republican and chairman of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, has been an outspoken proponent of the panel’s focus on the unmasking allegations. He also declined to comment.

Tom Fitton, president of the legal activist group Judicial Watch, said the sealing of unmasking records was an example of how U.S. intelligence agencies are stonewalling.

It was first revealed in a recent Freedom of Information Act exchange between Judicial Watch and the NCS that the records had been moved to the Obama library’s secure archive.

“Having to subpoena this information indicates the insanity of the situation when the nation’s top intelligence agencies are withholding information — basic information — that could bring to an end the controversy raging across this country,” Mr. Fitton said in an interview Thursday.

He said he is considering other legal options to obtain the records.

“We are having to sue to get basic information,” he said. “It is a shell game of documents being shifted over to the library. These documents are the smoking gun that investigators are looking for, and everyone knows it.”

Mr. Fitton said President Trump “could get the [Rice] records himself.”

“They are restricted access,” he said. “But there are ways that he could get them because they are executive branch records and he can get him.”

In March, Ms. Rice admitted to requesting the unmasking of the names of some Americans redacted in raw intelligence reports on the U.S. surveillance intercepts, but argued that the requests were well within her job duties as national security adviser and were in no way driven by political motivations to know which figures from the Trump campaign were being discussed.

Mr. Trump on Twitter has repeatedly complained that the unmasking efforts and the Obama White House’s handling of the Russian hacking probe have not received sufficient attention in the various investigations on Capitol Hill and by Justice Department special counsel Robert Mueller.

On May 31, Republicans and Democrats on the House intelligence committee issued a series of subpoenas related to the Russia investigations. Three of the subpoenas — sent to intelligence community agencies — sought records relating to alleged unmasking requests made by senior Obama administration figures, including Ms. Rice, CIA Director John O. Brennan and U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Samantha Power.

Democrats want the probes to stay tightly focused on possible obstruction of justice by Mr. Trump and collusion between his associates and the Kremlin. The U.S. intelligence community has unanimously concluded that the Kremlin was behind an organized cyberattack campaign to interfere in the U.S. election and undermine the candidacy of Democrat Hillary Clinton last year.

But since the Russia probes launched earlier this year, Mr. Trump and his aides have argued that the real scandal lies elsewhere. They contend that senior Obama administration officials, including Ms. Rice, inappropriately unmasked and perhaps illegally leaked to the media the names of Trump campaign officials swept up in the hacking probe, and failed to take sufficient steps to stop the hacking once it was uncovered.

Judicial Watch sent a Freedom of Information Act request to the NSC in April seeking records concerning Ms. Rice’s communications on a range of subjects.

NSC Access Management Director John Powers responded on May 23 — roughly a week before the House intelligence committee began seeking the records.

“Documents from the Obama administration have been transferred to the Barack Obama Presidential Library,” Mr. Powers wrote. “You may send your request to the Obama Library. However, you should be aware that under the Presidential Records Act, presidential records remain closed to the public for five years after an administration has left office.”

View user profile

39 Re: What a selfish idiot on 6/25/2017, 5:44 pm

PkrBum wrote:
del.capslock wrote:
PkrBum wrote:http://www.cnn.com/2017/06/23/politics/editors-note/index.html

If you have a point to make, why don't you try to make instead of just posting links?

What's the matter, too stupid to write your own words?

PkrBoy...   lol

http://m.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/jun/22/susan-rice-records-intelligence-committee-wants-ar/

House intelligence committee sources say career officials at the National Security Council are slow-walking the delivery of subpoenaed records on former National Security Adviser Susan E. Rice’s handling of classified information and the “unmasking” of Trump campaign workers — material from the Russian hacking probe that middle-level NSC managers claim was transferred to President Obama’s library and could “remain closed to the public for five years.”

One source, speaking only on the condition of anonymity, called the transfer curious and appeared to reflect an effort by former administration officials to obscure evidence on whether Ms. Rice and other top officials in the Obama White House illegally tried to identify which Trump campaign and transition aides had been caught up in the U.S. intelligence intercepts of Russian interference in the presidential race.

The two high-level intelligence committee sources told The Washington Times that they are confident the panel’s investigators, despite the delays, will eventually get their hands on the records shipped to a heavily secure archive for Mr. Obama’s yet-to-be-built presidential library.

A spokesman at the National Security Council would not directly address questions on the Rice case, saying only that the council’s staff is “still in the process of reviewing record requests” to ensure that any “executive privilege concerns” are taken into account.

The spokesman, Michael N. Anton, said the intelligence committee subpoenas were not submitted directly to the NSC, but to other agencies within the U.S. intelligence community. He did not respond to a request for specifics on which agencies.

The Barack Obama Presidential Library in Hoffman Estates, Illinois, declined to comment Thursday on the handling of Ms. Rice’s documents.

Rep. Devin Nunes, California Republican and chairman of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, has been an outspoken proponent of the panel’s focus on the unmasking allegations. He also declined to comment.

Tom Fitton, president of the legal activist group Judicial Watch, said the sealing of unmasking records was an example of how U.S. intelligence agencies are stonewalling.

It was first revealed in a recent Freedom of Information Act exchange between Judicial Watch and the NCS that the records had been moved to the Obama library’s secure archive.

“Having to subpoena this information indicates the insanity of the situation when the nation’s top intelligence agencies are withholding information — basic information — that could bring to an end the controversy raging across this country,” Mr. Fitton said in an interview Thursday.

He said he is considering other legal options to obtain the records.

“We are having to sue to get basic information,” he said. “It is a shell game of documents being shifted over to the library. These documents are the smoking gun that investigators are looking for, and everyone knows it.”

Mr. Fitton said President Trump “could get the [Rice] records himself.”

“They are restricted access,” he said. “But there are ways that he could get them because they are executive branch records and he can get him.”

In March, Ms. Rice admitted to requesting the unmasking of the names of some Americans redacted in raw intelligence reports on the U.S. surveillance intercepts, but argued that the requests were well within her job duties as national security adviser and were in no way driven by political motivations to know which figures from the Trump campaign were being discussed.

Mr. Trump on Twitter has repeatedly complained that the unmasking efforts and the Obama White House’s handling of the Russian hacking probe have not received sufficient attention in the various investigations on Capitol Hill and by Justice Department special counsel Robert Mueller.

On May 31, Republicans and Democrats on the House intelligence committee issued a series of subpoenas related to the Russia investigations. Three of the subpoenas — sent to intelligence community agencies — sought records relating to alleged unmasking requests made by senior Obama administration figures, including Ms. Rice, CIA Director John O. Brennan and U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Samantha Power.

Democrats want the probes to stay tightly focused on possible obstruction of justice by Mr. Trump and collusion between his associates and the Kremlin. The U.S. intelligence community has unanimously concluded that the Kremlin was behind an organized cyberattack campaign to interfere in the U.S. election and undermine the candidacy of Democrat Hillary Clinton last year.

But since the Russia probes launched earlier this year, Mr. Trump and his aides have argued that the real scandal lies elsewhere. They contend that senior Obama administration officials, including Ms. Rice, inappropriately unmasked and perhaps illegally leaked to the media the names of Trump campaign officials swept up in the hacking probe, and failed to take sufficient steps to stop the hacking once it was uncovered.

Judicial Watch sent a Freedom of Information Act request to the NSC in April seeking records concerning Ms. Rice’s communications on a range of subjects.

NSC Access Management Director John Powers responded on May 23 — roughly a week before the House intelligence committee began seeking the records.

“Documents from the Obama administration have been transferred to the Barack Obama Presidential Library,” Mr. Powers wrote. “You may send your request to the Obama Library. However, you should be aware that under the Presidential Records Act, presidential records remain closed to the public for five years after an administration has left office.”

So what, what's your point? If you're trying to make a point, you're going to have to say what it is in complete sentences not just a link to someone else's stuff...   lol

Are you too ignorant to write out words of your own...   lol

View user profile http://www.flickr.com/photos/btraven/

40 Re: What a selfish idiot on 6/25/2017, 6:06 pm

del.capslock wrote:
PkrBum wrote:
del.capslock wrote:
PkrBum wrote:http://www.cnn.com/2017/06/23/politics/editors-note/index.html

If you have a point to make, why don't you try to make instead of just posting links?

What's the matter, too stupid to write your own words?

PkrBoy...   lol

http://m.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/jun/22/susan-rice-records-intelligence-committee-wants-ar/

House intelligence committee sources say career officials at the National Security Council are slow-walking the delivery of subpoenaed records on former National Security Adviser Susan E. Rice’s handling of classified information and the “unmasking” of Trump campaign workers — material from the Russian hacking probe that middle-level NSC managers claim was transferred to President Obama’s library and could “remain closed to the public for five years.”

One source, speaking only on the condition of anonymity, called the transfer curious and appeared to reflect an effort by former administration officials to obscure evidence on whether Ms. Rice and other top officials in the Obama White House illegally tried to identify which Trump campaign and transition aides had been caught up in the U.S. intelligence intercepts of Russian interference in the presidential race.

The two high-level intelligence committee sources told The Washington Times that they are confident the panel’s investigators, despite the delays, will eventually get their hands on the records shipped to a heavily secure archive for Mr. Obama’s yet-to-be-built presidential library.

A spokesman at the National Security Council would not directly address questions on the Rice case, saying only that the council’s staff is “still in the process of reviewing record requests” to ensure that any “executive privilege concerns” are taken into account.

The spokesman, Michael N. Anton, said the intelligence committee subpoenas were not submitted directly to the NSC, but to other agencies within the U.S. intelligence community. He did not respond to a request for specifics on which agencies.

The Barack Obama Presidential Library in Hoffman Estates, Illinois, declined to comment Thursday on the handling of Ms. Rice’s documents.

Rep. Devin Nunes, California Republican and chairman of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, has been an outspoken proponent of the panel’s focus on the unmasking allegations. He also declined to comment.

Tom Fitton, president of the legal activist group Judicial Watch, said the sealing of unmasking records was an example of how U.S. intelligence agencies are stonewalling.

It was first revealed in a recent Freedom of Information Act exchange between Judicial Watch and the NCS that the records had been moved to the Obama library’s secure archive.

“Having to subpoena this information indicates the insanity of the situation when the nation’s top intelligence agencies are withholding information — basic information — that could bring to an end the controversy raging across this country,” Mr. Fitton said in an interview Thursday.

He said he is considering other legal options to obtain the records.

“We are having to sue to get basic information,” he said. “It is a shell game of documents being shifted over to the library. These documents are the smoking gun that investigators are looking for, and everyone knows it.”

Mr. Fitton said President Trump “could get the [Rice] records himself.”

“They are restricted access,” he said. “But there are ways that he could get them because they are executive branch records and he can get him.”

In March, Ms. Rice admitted to requesting the unmasking of the names of some Americans redacted in raw intelligence reports on the U.S. surveillance intercepts, but argued that the requests were well within her job duties as national security adviser and were in no way driven by political motivations to know which figures from the Trump campaign were being discussed.

Mr. Trump on Twitter has repeatedly complained that the unmasking efforts and the Obama White House’s handling of the Russian hacking probe have not received sufficient attention in the various investigations on Capitol Hill and by Justice Department special counsel Robert Mueller.

On May 31, Republicans and Democrats on the House intelligence committee issued a series of subpoenas related to the Russia investigations. Three of the subpoenas — sent to intelligence community agencies — sought records relating to alleged unmasking requests made by senior Obama administration figures, including Ms. Rice, CIA Director John O. Brennan and U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Samantha Power.

Democrats want the probes to stay tightly focused on possible obstruction of justice by Mr. Trump and collusion between his associates and the Kremlin. The U.S. intelligence community has unanimously concluded that the Kremlin was behind an organized cyberattack campaign to interfere in the U.S. election and undermine the candidacy of Democrat Hillary Clinton last year.

But since the Russia probes launched earlier this year, Mr. Trump and his aides have argued that the real scandal lies elsewhere. They contend that senior Obama administration officials, including Ms. Rice, inappropriately unmasked and perhaps illegally leaked to the media the names of Trump campaign officials swept up in the hacking probe, and failed to take sufficient steps to stop the hacking once it was uncovered.

Judicial Watch sent a Freedom of Information Act request to the NSC in April seeking records concerning Ms. Rice’s communications on a range of subjects.

NSC Access Management Director John Powers responded on May 23 — roughly a week before the House intelligence committee began seeking the records.

“Documents from the Obama administration have been transferred to the Barack Obama Presidential Library,” Mr. Powers wrote. “You may send your request to the Obama Library. However, you should be aware that under the Presidential Records Act, presidential records remain closed to the public for five years after an administration has left office.”

So what, what's your point? If you're trying to make a point, you're going to have to say what it is in complete sentences not just a link to someone else's stuff...   lol

Are you too ignorant to write out words of your own...   lol

http://www.cnn.com/2017/06/23/politics/judiciary-committee-loretta-lynch-clinton-emails/index.html

(CNN)The Senate judiciary committee sent a letter Friday to former Attorney General Loretta Lynch asking her to disclose any conversations with Hillary Clinton's campaign and the Democratic National Committee about the FBI's investigation into the 2016 Democratic presidential nominee's use of a private email server.

The committee asked Lynch about any conversations she had with Clinton staffer Amanda Renteria or former DNC Chairwoman Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz about the email investigation.
The panel also asked for Renteria and Leonard Benardo and Gail Scovell of the Open Society Foundations to disclose about their conversations with the FBI and Lynch over the Clinton investigation.
The Washington Post reported last month there was a document claiming that Schultz sent a letter to Bernado claiming Lynch had been in private communication with Renteria about the investigation claiming the she would not let the FBI investigation go too far.
The document, however, was believed to be bad intelligence, according to the Post.
The request for information from Lynch and the others is the judiciary committee's newest element of its investigation into political interference at the FBI, one that may also probe whether President Donald Trump committed obstruction of justice in his firing of former FBI Director Jim Comey.
By requesting information from Lynch as well, the judiciary committee is expanding its probe on political interference to cover both the Obama and Trump administrations.
Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley and top Democrat on the panel, Dianne Feinstein, reached an agreement this week on the scope of their investigation, which includes political interference as well as Russia's election meddling.
Grassley and Feinstein -- as well as Sens. Lindsey Graham and Sheldon Whitehouse, who lead the subcommittee looking into Russia's meddling -- met with Justice Department special counsel Robert Mueller on Wednesday to discuss de-conflicting his probe with the Senate investigation.
They said afterward they had a productive discussion to ensure the two investigations can proceed without impeding the other.

View user profile

41 Re: What a selfish idiot on 6/25/2017, 6:47 pm

PkrBum wrote:
del.capslock wrote:
PkrBum wrote:
del.capslock wrote:
PkrBum wrote:http://www.cnn.com/2017/06/23/politics/editors-note/index.html

If you have a point to make, why don't you try to make instead of just posting links?

What's the matter, too stupid to write your own words?

PkrBoy...   lol

http://m.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/jun/22/susan-rice-records-intelligence-committee-wants-ar/

House intelligence committee sources say career officials at the National Security Council are slow-walking the delivery of subpoenaed records on former National Security Adviser Susan E. Rice’s handling of classified information and the “unmasking” of Trump campaign workers — material from the Russian hacking probe that middle-level NSC managers claim was transferred to President Obama’s library and could “remain closed to the public for five years.”

One source, speaking only on the condition of anonymity, called the transfer curious and appeared to reflect an effort by former administration officials to obscure evidence on whether Ms. Rice and other top officials in the Obama White House illegally tried to identify which Trump campaign and transition aides had been caught up in the U.S. intelligence intercepts of Russian interference in the presidential race.

The two high-level intelligence committee sources told The Washington Times that they are confident the panel’s investigators, despite the delays, will eventually get their hands on the records shipped to a heavily secure archive for Mr. Obama’s yet-to-be-built presidential library.

A spokesman at the National Security Council would not directly address questions on the Rice case, saying only that the council’s staff is “still in the process of reviewing record requests” to ensure that any “executive privilege concerns” are taken into account.

The spokesman, Michael N. Anton, said the intelligence committee subpoenas were not submitted directly to the NSC, but to other agencies within the U.S. intelligence community. He did not respond to a request for specifics on which agencies.

The Barack Obama Presidential Library in Hoffman Estates, Illinois, declined to comment Thursday on the handling of Ms. Rice’s documents.

Rep. Devin Nunes, California Republican and chairman of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, has been an outspoken proponent of the panel’s focus on the unmasking allegations. He also declined to comment.

Tom Fitton, president of the legal activist group Judicial Watch, said the sealing of unmasking records was an example of how U.S. intelligence agencies are stonewalling.

It was first revealed in a recent Freedom of Information Act exchange between Judicial Watch and the NCS that the records had been moved to the Obama library’s secure archive.

“Having to subpoena this information indicates the insanity of the situation when the nation’s top intelligence agencies are withholding information — basic information — that could bring to an end the controversy raging across this country,” Mr. Fitton said in an interview Thursday.

He said he is considering other legal options to obtain the records.

“We are having to sue to get basic information,” he said. “It is a shell game of documents being shifted over to the library. These documents are the smoking gun that investigators are looking for, and everyone knows it.”

Mr. Fitton said President Trump “could get the [Rice] records himself.”

“They are restricted access,” he said. “But there are ways that he could get them because they are executive branch records and he can get him.”

In March, Ms. Rice admitted to requesting the unmasking of the names of some Americans redacted in raw intelligence reports on the U.S. surveillance intercepts, but argued that the requests were well within her job duties as national security adviser and were in no way driven by political motivations to know which figures from the Trump campaign were being discussed.

Mr. Trump on Twitter has repeatedly complained that the unmasking efforts and the Obama White House’s handling of the Russian hacking probe have not received sufficient attention in the various investigations on Capitol Hill and by Justice Department special counsel Robert Mueller.

On May 31, Republicans and Democrats on the House intelligence committee issued a series of subpoenas related to the Russia investigations. Three of the subpoenas — sent to intelligence community agencies — sought records relating to alleged unmasking requests made by senior Obama administration figures, including Ms. Rice, CIA Director John O. Brennan and U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Samantha Power.

Democrats want the probes to stay tightly focused on possible obstruction of justice by Mr. Trump and collusion between his associates and the Kremlin. The U.S. intelligence community has unanimously concluded that the Kremlin was behind an organized cyberattack campaign to interfere in the U.S. election and undermine the candidacy of Democrat Hillary Clinton last year.

But since the Russia probes launched earlier this year, Mr. Trump and his aides have argued that the real scandal lies elsewhere. They contend that senior Obama administration officials, including Ms. Rice, inappropriately unmasked and perhaps illegally leaked to the media the names of Trump campaign officials swept up in the hacking probe, and failed to take sufficient steps to stop the hacking once it was uncovered.

Judicial Watch sent a Freedom of Information Act request to the NSC in April seeking records concerning Ms. Rice’s communications on a range of subjects.

NSC Access Management Director John Powers responded on May 23 — roughly a week before the House intelligence committee began seeking the records.

“Documents from the Obama administration have been transferred to the Barack Obama Presidential Library,” Mr. Powers wrote. “You may send your request to the Obama Library. However, you should be aware that under the Presidential Records Act, presidential records remain closed to the public for five years after an administration has left office.”

So what, what's your point? If you're trying to make a point, you're going to have to say what it is in complete sentences not just a link to someone else's stuff...   lol

Are you too ignorant to write out words of your own...   lol

http://www.cnn.com/2017/06/23/politics/judiciary-committee-loretta-lynch-clinton-emails/index.html

(CNN)The Senate judiciary committee sent a letter Friday to former Attorney General Loretta Lynch asking her to disclose any conversations with Hillary Clinton's campaign and the Democratic National Committee about the FBI's investigation into the 2016 Democratic presidential nominee's use of a private email server.

The committee asked Lynch about any conversations she had with Clinton staffer Amanda Renteria or former DNC Chairwoman Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz about the email investigation.
The panel also asked for Renteria and Leonard Benardo and Gail Scovell of the Open Society Foundations to disclose about their conversations with the FBI and Lynch over the Clinton investigation.
The Washington Post reported last month there was a document claiming that Schultz sent a letter to Bernado claiming Lynch had been in private communication with Renteria about the investigation claiming the she would not let the FBI investigation go too far.
The document, however, was believed to be bad intelligence, according to the Post.
The request for information from Lynch and the others is the judiciary committee's newest element of its investigation into political interference at the FBI, one that may also probe whether President Donald Trump committed obstruction of justice in his firing of former FBI Director Jim Comey.
By requesting information from Lynch as well, the judiciary committee is expanding its probe on political interference to cover both the Obama and Trump administrations.
Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley and top Democrat on the panel, Dianne Feinstein, reached an agreement this week on the scope of their investigation, which includes political interference as well as Russia's election meddling.
Grassley and Feinstein -- as well as Sens. Lindsey Graham and Sheldon Whitehouse, who lead the subcommittee looking into Russia's meddling -- met with Justice Department special counsel Robert Mueller on Wednesday to discuss de-conflicting his probe with the Senate investigation.
They said afterward they had a productive discussion to ensure the two investigations can proceed without impeding the other.

Tough shit! So what? Nobody cares about last years news, you sniveling crybaby. Get some help for your obsession, they have medication for that, you know?

View user profile http://www.flickr.com/photos/btraven/

Sponsored content


View previous topic View next topic Back to top  Message [Page 2 of 2]

Go to page : Previous  1, 2

Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum