Pages

Saturday, May 27, 2017

Do they have it backwards?

So many people are justifiably upset at all of the high level leaking that has been going on pretty much since the election was completed... Many of these same people are justifiably upset at what seems to be either illegal spying on American citizens, or the unmasking of American citizens caught up on otherwise legal spying of foreign agents.

Reality here folks:

  • All of the leaking is unethical and a decent portion of it is illegal.
  • Any spying of Americans without valid reason or warrant is illegal.
  • Any unmasking of American citizens is illegal if this information is leaked. 

But not only do many people on the left feel that these unethical and illegal activities are justified, they feel that somehow the intelligence community has some sort of "right" to do this. 

Such would be the only explanation for any outrage over the recent anonymous reports regarding Jared Kushner working with the Russians to try and establish a means of communications that would otherwise fall outside the scope of what they currently know as being monitored.

Now assuming this report is true (although it's likely not) who would blame the Trump administration for doing so. The reality here folks is that nobody within the IC has the right to monitor the communications of the President or the President's advisers. Not unless they have a legal warrant, which would require some form of probable cause to spy on them. 

But it certainly seems that the IC has been keeping close tabs on the President and his advisers, and have been quick to break the law in leaking a variety of information to the press. 

Yet... by the reaction of the left... they seem to believe that it must actually be illegal for the President and his staff to want to communication in a manner that doesn't get caught up in what is actually quite illegal behavior by our intelligence community.

The reality is that the President should be able to communicate with whoever he has to communicate with (foreign or domestic) without having those conversations monitored and leaked to the Press. It would be unfortunate if the President and our IC ended up playing some sort of cat and mouse game. But let's not lose sight of the fact that it wouldn't be because the President is acting unethically or breaking the law... it would be because the IC is.


115 comments:

wphamilton said...

Kushner's contacts were between April and November, 2016. Obviously not "the President's" normal contacts with foreign states - Trump was not President, CH.

Why did he lie about it, if there's no reason for concern? Why did Kushner lie about his contacts?

opie said...

Why did Kushner lie about his contacts?

CH may say.....Because a 60 year old man whooped a reporter in Montana. The SF 86 clearly delineates false information can result in penalties. Same can be asked about flynn and sessions. BTW, Jared failed to list millions of dollars of art work on his disclosure forms because he didn't think they were assets!! Imagine that, he has the keys to the WH and forgets contacts and assets. Makes me feel good about his qualifications to run the country.

C.H. Truth said...

WP - prior to November Kushner was a private citizen, not even part of an incoming administration. None of his communications should have been monitored and any monitoring or "unmasking" of those communications (if they were monitoring the other Party) would be illegal. The leaking of that information would be a second felony.


You suspect that Kushner's communications might be somehow incriminating (but without really being able to explain what crime might have been committed or in what manner they would be incriminating)...

But having suspicion should not excuse the blatant breaking of the law.

Why would you excuse the blatant abuse of power within our IC other than because you have personal animosity towards the current administration?

C.H. Truth said...

Not that the facts matter to you WP...

But the allegations are that Kushner asked about setting up private communications during a meeting that took place in early December of 2016.

More specifically, Kushner was said to have asked that either himself (or another American) be allowed to use Russian communications devices to contact other Americans... which to me tells me that even in December, the incoming Trump team already suspected that there private conversations between themselves were being monitored.

wphamilton said...

You suspect that Kushner's communications might be somehow incriminating (but without really being able to explain what crime might have been committed or in what manner they would be incriminating)...

Speak for yourself. YOU may be unable to explain "what crime might have been" committed, but I could describe any number of crimes that "might have been" committed, with reasonable suspicion given Kushner's actions.

This is being investigated by the FBI, among others, precisely because numerous unusual and dodgy contacts have occurred, and they indicate a pattern consistent with the commission of a number of possible crimes. I'll watch the investigation and see what arises before declaring that Kushner, his associates, or Trump himself is guilty or not guilty of any specific crime. The one I'm most interested in however is Obstruction of Justice, because no matter what crime (if any), or anticipated crime, that Kushner was trying to hide, impeding the investigation into it is still obstruction of justice.

And historically for US Presidents, the charge of obstruction is serious enough.

wphamilton said...

"Seven current and former U.S. officials who spoke to Reuters said these conversations between Kushner and Sergei Kislyak included two phone calls between April and November 2016." (google it).

The FBI probe is about possible collusion between the Trump campaign (yes, CH, private citizens) and Russian operatives to swing the election.

wphamilton said...

Now ask yourself the source of this (wrong and frankly stupid) excuse that Kushner just wanted a line to other Americans in Moscow.

Just the facts:

The intercepted intelligence is unambiguously clear: Kushner wanted a secret direct line with the Kremlin. Apparently to shield their pre-inaugural discussions from monitoring.

C.H. Truth said...

WP

You either don't acknowledge that the IC has been both breaking laws and acting well outside the ethical lines... or you don't have a good answer to why you believe this is okay.

Over the past several years we have seen the IRS, FBI, and now it would appear a larger cross section of the IC become politicized and quite frankly are eagerly doing whatever they can to influence our politics.

Seems hypocritical that we allow known illegal activity being done for political purposes to go without any attempt to even check it at this point...

while continue to chase conspiracy theories (with no evidence) of something similar happening by other Parties.

james said...

LOL Ch is feeling like a pretzel these days.

james said...

CIA Would Consider Kushner’s Actions Espionage

Former acting CIA director John McLaughlan responded to reports that Jared Kushner “discussed setting up a secret communications line between Trump’s transition team and the Kremlin, saying if such reports are true, it would be considered espionage,” The Hill reports.

Said McLaughlan: “I don’t want to overstate this because obviously there is a lot we don’t know… But I can’t keep out of my mind the thought that, if an American intelligence officer had done anything like this, we’d consider it espionage.”

Loretta Russo said...

No sermon to prepare pedo?

C.H. Truth said...

Kushner wanted a secret direct line with the Kremlin. Apparently to shield their pre-inaugural discussions from monitoring.

Such are the allegations... and let's assume the allegation to be true.

IT brings us right back to the same question.

Why would these discussions be monitored? Monitoring discussions when you know they involve Americans is against the law without a warrant. It would be a serious violation of the constitutional rights of American citizens (even if they are part of a transition team) and it would be criminal activity by the IC.

IF they were under warrant... then Trump's claims that he was being monitored and "wiretapped" would be 100% accurate and the Obama Administration's denials would be not only wrong... but possibly criminal as well.

So again... you act indignant. But the only thing that the Trump team would be attempting to do is get around ILLEGAL MONITORING by the IC that was possibly known about or authorized by Obama.

Loretta Russo said...

Spam by the pedo

C.H. Truth said...

Here is your pretzel James.


- Trump says he was being "wiretapped" by the Obama administration during the election and during the transition.

The left went crazy with indignation that such an accusation would ever be made. No way would the Obama administration be involved with monitoring an incoming administration of the other Party.

- Now there are allegations that Kushner sought a direct line of communications to get around any "monitoring".

The left goes crazy with indignation that the Trump team would make any attempts to get around surveillance that had previously been denied and would be effectively illegal.

_______

This is classic cognitive dissonance.

KD, Feckless Five of CHT, keep posting, YELL MORE said...

The Feckless Five are so funny, I am so happy that we have President Trump, no one could have forecasted this level of insanity This President has brought upon the little minds on the left.

Keep going, in fact riot harder, destroy private and public property more, shut down more free speech at the same time, keep losing elections.

Thanks. Enjoying this more then I ever thought possible and you Feckless Five are wonderful ill ilk.

KD, Did Dem$$$ win that Special Election in KS? said...

Hillary Clinton (cough, cough) said she WON ((cough, cough) the Primary over Bernie Sanders "fairly" ((cough, cough) and the General over President Trump.

This is the current leadershit of the Radicalized Dem party.

James said...

Trump Returns to a White House In Crisis

President Trump “headed home on Saturday to confront a growing political and legal threat, as his top aides tried to contain the fallout from reports that his son-in-law, Jared Kushner, is a focus of investigations into possible collusion between Russia and the president’s campaign and transition teams,” the New York Times reports.

“The White House canceled a presidential trip to Iowa in the coming days and was putting together a damage-control plan to expand the president’s legal team, reorganize his communications staff and wall off a scandal that has jeopardized his agenda and now threatens to engulf his family.”

Also interesting: White House counsel Donald McGahn “has been increasingly uneasy in his role since Mr. Trump ignored his advice to delay Mr. Comey’s dismissal.”
_______________________

They need Ch there to tell them they have nothing at all to worry about.

No problem. No crisis. Nothing wrong done at all.

James said...

Funny, Ch omits that it was WITH THE KREMLIN that Jared wanted secret communications.

Can't pretzel his way out of this:
CIA Would Consider Kushner’s Actions Espionage

"...if an American intelligence officer had done anything like this, we’d consider it espionage.”

Loretta Russo said...

Spam by the pedo with no job.

Loretta Russo said...

Spam by the pedo with no job.

Loretta Russo said...

"This is classic cognitive dissonance."

I'm pretty sure none of them have a clue what a 'back channel' actually means.

They're just mad doggonnit!

C.H. Truth said...

again James...

They get to have all the "secret" conversations that they want. It's not illegal to have "secret" conversations and certainly not espionage (did you bother to look up that word).

All Americans have the constitutional right to have discussions that would not be monitored (thus they have the right for them to be secret).

The President and his administration have every right to have secret communications with whom ever they would like to (including foreign leaders). The intelligence community has no right to monitor any of those conversations (without probably cause and a warrant).



James said...

No big deal. All Americans have the right to do this sort of thing.
___________


An array of former intelligence and national security officials reacted with astonishment to the report, stressing the seriousness of Kushner’s reported actions.

"Hard to fully convey the gravity of this,” said Susan Hennessey, a national security fellow at the Brookings Institution and a former lawyer for the National Security Agency, of the Washington Post report. “Unthinkable Kushner could stay in the White House,” she added.

"GOOD GRIEF. This is serious," Bob Deitz, an NSA and Central Intelligence Agency veteran who worked in both Clinton and Bush administrations, told Business Insider of the attempt to establish secretive Russian communications. "This is a big problem for the President."

wphamilton said...

CH, nothing illegal about monitoring American communications with foreign entities, no warrant needed. So you might as well forget about ILLEGAL WIRETAPS (your caps).

You want to know why it was being monitored? Communications with foreign intelligence are routinely monitored. It's how we catch spies, double agents and traitors.

wphamilton said...

BTW, the evidence is intercepted communications from Russians and their superiors. Hardly a "no evidence conspiracy theory."

wphamilton said...

Logan Act makes it illegal for a private citizen to negotiate with foreign powers. It could be treason, depending on the actual conversations. A one-off might be spun away as establishing a normal "back channel", but everything points to more. Frequent contacts with Russian Intelligence, wanting to bypass US State and security apparatus to name two.

Loretta Russo said...

Spam by the pedo with no job

KD, Jane do you have a 401k said...

The Unemployed Jane, you have time to spam, clearly, what about the question , Did Hillary "fairly" Beat both Bernie and Trump as she stated she did?

IF so , when does she begin her term as President?

Answer, to the above: Never

You go ahead and answer the top question in your bestest cut n paste.

KD, TOP 10 Percent is getting really Wealthier, I know I am one said...

I have a question for the Feckless Five of CHT.

Do you low life plan on Hating On Trump for all 8 years?

Because as it stands today the Radicalization of the Dem party by Obama is in full Flaming Denial. Your voices are Hillary (cough), Obama , Warren, Polosi and my fav Bernie.


opie said...

CH the obfuscator said...

None of his communications should have been monitored

Too bad they weren't, the russian's were being legally monitored. Jared made the mistake by calling them. Oh fucking well and another pile of CH horseshit flies onto the wall.

C.H. Truth said...

CH, nothing illegal about monitoring American communications with foreign entities, no warrant needed.

Actually FISA laws are very specific WP. You can monitor a foreign entity under specific circumstances. One of them being:

that there is no substantial likelihood that it will acquire the contents of any communication to which a United States person is a party,

If (by chance) an American is on the other side of the conversation, any information as to the identity of the American is required to be redacted and only "unmasked" under very specific purposes.

So for the IC to be monitoring conversations that they "know" would include American Parties would be against the FISA laws. In order for the IC to monitor conversations that they know include anyone in the Trump administration, they would need warrants on those members of the Trump administration.

You are wrong on fact.

KD, WP out classed by facts, great job CHT said...

WP how many US Citizens have been Convicted under you beloved Logan Act, my god your are an idiot , the Trump Win has caused you to become one of the Feckless Five of CHT

The Logan Act (1 Stat. 613, 18 U.S.C. § 953, enacted January 30, 1799) is a United States federal law that details the fine and/or imprisonment of unauthorized citizens who negotiate with foreign governments having a dispute with the United States. It was intended to prevent the undermining of the government's position.[2] The Act was passed following George Logan's unauthorized negotiations with France in 1798, and was signed into law by President John Adams on January 30, 1799. The Act was last amended in 1994, and violation of the Logan Act is a felony.

To date, only one person has ever been indicted for violating the Act's provisions.[2] However, no person has ever been prosecuted for alleged violations of the Act.[2]"

That is until now right, LOL @ WP, keep buying straw dumbass.

C.H. Truth said...

The Logan Act has never been used to charge anyone within the transition team of an incoming administration... nor has it ever (to my knowledge) been used to charge anyone from a Presidential campaign (win or lose).

wphamilton said...

Sorry, but you've misunderstood the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. When the surveillance target is a foreign power or an agent of a foreign power, no search warrant is necessary and the communications may be intercepted.

What you incorrectly refer to as "special circumstances" are in reality known as "minimization requirements" which seek to minimize collection, retention, and dissemination of information about United States persons.

Your "special requirements" apply when the target is a US citizen.

opie said...

C.H. Truth said...
The Logan Act has never been used to charge

Doesn't mean it can't happen here, does it phoney lawyer CH?

wphamilton said...

"The Logan Act has never been used to charge anyone within the transition team of an incoming administration"

As the former Intelligence professionals are telling you, this is off the map. Inconceivable that someone in that position would pull a stunt like this. It's never been used in this situation because the transgression has never happened. Until now.

As I said, it depends on the nature of the conversations.

wphamilton said...

Finally, regarding this "that there is no substantial likelihood that it will acquire the contents of any communication to which a United States person is a party,"

it refers to a condition where no court order is required. Your interpretation, that the surveillance is illegal, is incorrect.

opie said...

CH the BSer said.....

Actually FISA laws are very specific WP.

Do you actually think any russian diplomat stationed in the US does not have a FISA warrant in place for his phone. Because if you do, you are the fool I've known you be. Now you are defending russians who can't be trust as far as Giancona can choke them ......LOLOL

Loretta Russo said...

"The idea of working with the Russians to create a secret line of communications would be highly alarming for U.S. intelligence officials who actively seek to monitor such communications. Nevertheless, as I explained earlier, there is no Logan Act violation in such meetings.

There are a couple of serious questions however raised by the story (again if true). First, did Kushner reveal the contacts and particularly the effort to create a secret communication channel with the Russians as part of his security clearance? The failure to do so would be a major violation and raise issues of false statements to the government. Second, is there any evidence to suggest that the Russians disclosed or discussed the hacking of the email systems? If so, statements made by Trump officials could be challenged as knowingly false or misleading, including statements made to congressional members. Finally, it is doubtful that Kushner would simply take it upon himself to carry out such meetings. This last question will be dangerously reminiscent: “What did the President know and when did he know it?”

Once again, as I have stated repeatedly for weeks, this alleged cover up still lacks a clear crime. The most that Jeff Toobin could come up with on CNN this week when pressed was “It’s a crime, aiding and abetting, hacking, it’s a crime.” Sure, but it is a highly implausible crime to suggest that Trump or his associates played an active and direct role. Section 1030 of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act makes any unauthorized access into a protected network or computer a federal crime and permits harsh penalties for those convicted. However, there is little reason for the Russians to enlist the help or even inform Trump officials of any such effort. Indeed, intelligence officers are trained to avoid unnecessary disclosures and to compartmentize such information."

https://www.google.com/amp/s/jonathanturley.org/2017/05/27/washington-post-kushner-tried-to-set-up-secret-communications-channel-with-russians/amp/

James said...

Some [at the White House] what Kushner To Take A Leave
--politicalwire.com

Why? He's done nothing wrong.

Roger Amick said...

I knew that you would find a way, to justify the connection between the Presidential campaign and administration an illegal and dangerous to American national security, secret connection to the Kremlin, using Russian equipment

How many times are you going to be stupid?

Are you drinking his bath water?

James said...

Ch needs to lawyer up.
Wp has his number. :-)

C.H. Truth said...

Sorry, but you've misunderstood the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. When the surveillance target is a foreign power or an agent of a foreign power, no search warrant is necessary and the communications may be intercepted.

Seriously?

The President may authorize, through the Attorney General, electronic surveillance without a court order for the period of one year, provided that it is only to acquire foreign intelligence information,[5] that it is solely directed at communications or property controlled exclusively by foreign powers,[6] that there is no substantial likelihood that it will acquire the contents of any communication to which a United States person is a party...

Alternatively, the government may seek a court order permitting the surveillance using the FISA court.[18] Approval of a FISA application requires the court find probable cause that the target of the surveillance be a "foreign power" or an "agent of a foreign power", and that the places at which surveillance is requested is used or will be used by that foreign power or its agent.[2][19] In addition, the court must find that the proposed surveillance meet certain "minimization requirements" for information pertaining to U.S. persons.[20] Depending on the type of surveillance, approved orders or extensions of orders may be active for 90 days, 120 days, or a year.[21]

You are wrong on fact WP.

Not sure where you got the idea that an American's right to not be monitored by the Government disappears if they contact someone from a different country. It doesn't work that way, and the FISA laws are very clear on that.

Roger Amick said...

The President and his administration have every right to have secret communications with whom ever they would like to (including foreign leaders). The intelligence community has no right to monitor any of those conversations (without probably cause and a warrant).

As to the President, perhaps, but Kausner did not disclose his connection between him and the Russian government. That's a felony, according to everyone i have heard today. Conservative and liberal. Five years.









C.H. Truth said...

As to the President, perhaps, but Kausner did not disclose his connection between him and the Russian government. That's a felony, according to everyone i have heard today. Conservative and liberal. Five years.

Really... who specifically has stated that Jared Kushner committed felonies and what law did they say he has broken?

Roger Amick said...

Your attempt to turn it around to "Lock her Up" is fucking pathetic.

Kushner committed a felony by not disclosing two meetings with high profile Russians during his security clearance hearings.

Separately, there were at least 18 undisclosed calls and emails between Trump associates and Kremlin-linked people in the seven months before the Nov. 8 presidential election, including six calls with Kislyak, sources told Reuters earlier this month. . Two people familiar with those 18 contacts said Flynn and Kushner were among the Trump associates who spoke to the ambassador by telephone. Reuters previously reported only Flynn’s involvement in those discussions.

Six of the sources said there were multiple contacts between Kushner and Kislyak but declined to give details beyond the two phone calls between April and November and the post-election conversation about setting up a back channel. It is also not clear whether Kushner engaged with Kislyak on his own or with other Trump aides.

A CIA agent said that this was like if someone had used Saddam Husein's system. Russia is not our friend. But perhaps you like dictators too.

Loretta Russo said...

Spam by the pedo with no job

Loretta Russo said...

"perhaps you like dictators too."

Melodramatic drunken drag queen, LOL.

James said...

"The President may authorize, through the Attorney General, electronic surveillance without a court order for the period of one year, provided that it is only to acquire foreign intelligence information"

How about acquiring help in getting elected?

C.H. Truth said...

Roger - You didn't answer either question.

Which law(s) did Kushner break?
Which legal experts are making this argument?

Roger Amick said...

Your President said today, that his road trip was a knockout. The shove and the speech on NATO, where he ignored Rule 5, and misspoke on how many a lot of the members spend. Also these countries let us keep big bases throughout NATO.

They are going to set up a war room. I have to wonder if he will set up brown shirt groups to make sure he "Fake News" media is kept from questioning him. Seig Heil. Just like the congressman in Bozeman.

I enjoyed my eight years in Montana. I did the Yellowstone river run a few times. You get some friends in rafts, and went from Three Forks, where three rivers come together to make the Yellowstone. In a two night, three day trip down to Billings. The first time we had a raft carrying coolers full of beer. They go caught in a fast current and lost the beer. We cried. LOL> But one thing was fun, sometimes the girls would flash us with bare breasts. Life was good.

Roger Amick said...

I think, but I have to do more research is if he lied under oath, that is a crime. And you know that. He could face five years.

C.H. Truth said...

I think, but I have to do more research is if he lied under oath, that is a crime.

You stated earlier that multiple people (liberal and conservative) have argued that he committed a felony.

I would have thought that you would remember who these people were and what crime they would have been talking about.

You may want to research something else. Since the FBI has not spoken to Kushner, and since he has not testified before either Intelligence committee, and since he does not hold a position that would have required a hearing... when would he have had lied under oath?

______

BTW... Hillary blatantly lied under oath at both the Benghazi hearings and during the Email hearings. Nobody ever considered charging her for that.

Roger Amick said...

It's more important for me tonight. Getting my five year chip is so humbling. I was powerless. But I found help and I'm here tonight to remember.

Roger Amick said...

He swore under oath for his job in the White House. That is perjury if he left out his contacts with the Russians.

C.H. Truth said...

Roger...

What I am sure that people are referring to was the fact that he submitted his security clearance form without disclosing contacts he made with Russian diplomats.

The issue was considered a mistake (His attorneys were forthcoming that the form was prematurely sent in before it was completely filled out). They (Kushner's people) reached out to Authorities (FBI) the next day after it had been submitted and offered that they would provide the information in question.

This is similar to the situation with General Flynn who disclosed information about his business dealings with Turkey on certain forms, but failed to fill out a specific form he was required to do.

In other words, in neither situation were either of them actually attempting to hide information. Kushner reached out one day after the form was sent in saying they had made a mistake by turning it in incomplete... and Flynn had disclosed the Turkey ties on other forms.

"Intent" comes into play here. Neither person intended to deceive anyone. Both situations look like honest mistakes from people who are simply not used to dealing with Government paper work.

The problem is that "certain" people find out about this stuff well after the fact and then choose to report portions of the truth... as in Kushner didn't disclose meetings and Flynn didn't disclose Turkey ties... when both actually did disclose them.

Roger Amick said...

But seriously, CH. If he really did want to set up a secret communication system with the Kremlin is in the least, terrible judgement I have seen lawyers that worked as prosecutors said it was perjury and that is a crime. I have more important things on my mind. BTW, on Thursday, my birthday we got a letter. She is completely clean. I cried and I do not do that.

Later my friend.

C.H. Truth said...

More to the point Roger... I don't believe anyone has ever been charged with a crime for missing information on a Form 86, nor do I recall anyone ever even having security clearance taken away.

The only manner in which one could see either happening is if authorities could find sufficient reasons to believe that the person deliberately tried to hide information because the meetings in question were otherwise illegal or troubling.

Kushner didn't try to hide the "missing" contacts originally... and I doubt that reports of the phone calls between April and November that were supposedly undisclosed is going to rise to the level of charging him with any sort of crime. Especially since he claims that he never made any undisclosed calls (or otherwise doesn't recall them).

Otherwise, the FBI would not be so quick to say he is not a target.

But hey... could you imagine the outrage if the FBI let Hillary Clinton go without charges because in spite of doing a bunch of illegal things Comey claims that they couldn't prove "intent"... but then Mueller decides to charge a Trump aid for over a paperwork error?

Yeah... right.

C.H. Truth said...

Roger - the allegations at this point are hearsay of hearsay, and admittedly come from a Russian with a history of intentionally providing us with disinformation.

On a scale of innuendo to evidence it's 100% innuendo at this point, unless of course Kushner verifies the claims himself under questioning. But Kushner is no dummie. He is worth 300 million (separate from Trump) and I am sure has an army of attorneys.

But assuming Kushner does not confirm the claims with the FBI... then there is no claim. Not like the FBI is going to subpoena the Russians at the meeting to come answer questions under oath... and the Ambassador's statement is legally worthless.

C.H. Truth said...

That being said... I am still not convinced that it's even slightly illegal (or even improper) to request back channel communications with foreign governments. According to those in the know, we have them with many different countries.

So (if the assertions are true) it may just be that he does confirm that he did so along with the reasoning for it. Again, Kushner is no dummie and his attorneys will have him well advised.

rrb said...

You stated earlier that multiple people (liberal and conservative) have argued that he committed a felony.

I would have thought that you would remember who these people were and what crime they would have been talking about.
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________


all of the alky's conservative and liberal sources are anonymous.


opie said...

I am still not convinced that it's even slightly illegal (or even improper) to request back channel communications with foreign governments

LOLOLOL So what.. Like your legal opinion matters to the FBI or senate. His real problem is lying on his application for security clearance, a point you constantly avoid. Ever fill out one of those CH, you then might realize how little you really know when it comes to classifications. But. you will defend a fence post with an R painted on it.

opie said...

hearsay, and admittedly come from a Russian with a history of intentionally providing us with disinformation.


They got transcripts of the russian, CH. To think otherwise puts you in loretta's league for intellect....

opie said...

I don't believe anyone has ever been charged with a crime for missing information on a Form 86, nor do I recall anyone ever even having security clearance taken away.

Again, you speculate without a lick of backup.

I recall you buying camping equipment with your busch tax refund.

BTW.....my experience in govmt work, people are turned down for a clearance if they omit data or background checks find a problem. When was the last time you worked in a secure facility, CH????? Dayum you really are a know nothing.

Commonsense said...

Both Kushner and Flynn are not going to be charged because they notified the FBI of the contacts shortly after the form was submitted.

It's a non issue.

james said...

Trump Told Confidants U.S. Will Leave Paris Accord

“President Trump has privately told multiple people, including EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt, that he plans to leave the Paris agreement on climate change,” Axios reports.

“Pulling out of Paris is the biggest thing Trump could to do unravel Obama’s climate policies. It also sends a stark and combative signal to the rest of the world that working with other nations on climate change isn’t a priority to the Trump administration. And pulling out threatens to unravel the ambition of the entire deal, given how integral former President Obama was in making it come together in the first place.”
________________________

The coward had already decided this before meeting with the other six, but was too big a coward to say it to their faces.

We need to get this reactionary creep out of the White House before he makes the USA an even bigger pariah and rogue nation in the eyes of most of the world.

Commonsense said...

It's call diplomacy. Because the alternative would been, "We don't want to play your con game."

Good for him.

james said...

It's called crass cowardice. :-)

rrb said...

“Pulling out of Paris is the biggest thing Trump could to do unravel Obama’s climate policies.
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

i know. ain't it great?

LOL.

funny thing about the paris accord - it is an international environmental treaty hence, subject to our senate for ratification.

but 0linsky skipped this critical step, leaving the door open for trump to shitcan it with the stroke of a pen.

rrb said...

It's called crass cowardice
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________


crass cowardice is 0linsky letting putin do donuts on the white house lawn for his entire second term in office.

all trump is doing is erasing the failed policies of a failed president, as jimmy carter breathes a huge sigh of relief that he will not go down as the worst president in modern post war history.



Commonsense said...

Backing out of the Paris Climate Accord is the single most popular foreign policy move Trump has made.

Nothing cowardly about that.

opie said...

rrb said...
“Pulling out of Paris is the biggest thing Trump could to do

Pulling out of your mother would have been the biggest favor your old man could have done for mankind,,,,,,LOL

Commonsense said...

Erasing Obama's legacy one stroke of the pen at a time.

And it's driving James crazy.

opie said...


Both Kushner and Flynn are not going to be charged because they notified the FBI of the contacts shortly after the form was submitted.

And now you are a lawyer and expert on clearances???? LOL

james said...

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C) said on Sunday that if President Trump withdraws the U.S. from the Paris climate deal, it would affirm to the world that he believes climate change to be a "hoax" and would badly hurt the GOP and the country.

rrb said...

Blogger Commonsense said...
Erasing Obama's legacy one stroke of the pen at a time.
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

the incredible shrinking president.

LOL.

i love it.

rrb said...

Anonymous james said...
Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C) said on Sunday that if President Trump withdraws the U.S. from the Paris climate deal, it would affirm to the world that he believes climate change to be a "hoax" and would badly hurt the GOP and the country.
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________


that's nice.


Commonsense said...

And now you are a lawyer and expert on clearances?

You don't have to be an expert. Just nominally intelligent and informed.

Something you miss the boat on.

opie said...

Yep, its really nice that you are as stupid as trump....but, you don't count as our freedoms erode under the pen of donnie....like the press, and actual science. Subjects that don't matter to idiot R's while they put party before country. Perfect. LOL

Commonsense said...

Graham is way wrong on this.

Poll after poll has shown that to the extent people care about the issue at all, it's a very very low priority.

As opposed to ceding a competitive edge and jobs to foreign countries or paying higher energy bills.

That's something the care about very much.

opie said...

Mental midget said..


just nominally intelligent and informed.


BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!! Something you are not, child. LOLOLOL

opie said...


Poll after poll has shown that to the extent people

What do polls have to do with GW??? Polls versus science.....what cultists think is fact. Idiots..... When people are up to their assholes with rising oceans, than just maybe will they realize it is too late. Oh well, the party of stupid wins again.

Commonsense said...

t, you don't count as our freedoms erode under the pen of donnie..

Please specify the enumerated freedoms under the Constitution that have been eroded under Trump?

opie said...

Yer a mental midget.....I included two in my post. Learn to read before looking like the fool we know you to be. Idiot.

Loretta Russo said...

Spam by the pedo with no job

Loretta Russo said...

Spam by the pedo with no job

Loretta Russo said...

Spam by the pedo with no job

C.H. Truth said...

They got transcripts of the russian

Really... since only official certified documents (Foreign public documents) are allowed into court without a collaborating witness, I would have to wonder how American intelligence got a hold of an actual official Russian document?

A copy of such a memo would only be admissible it if was a "certified copy" - like as in they would have to have gone in and officially requested it.


But I have no doubt you believe this is what they got... ahem.

caliphate4vr said...

Pulling out of your mother would have been the biggest favor your old man could have done for mankind

Fatty and his visions of other men's junk

That's really fucked up, just come out fatty

opie said...

Really... since only official certified documents

Yeah they do..They have the transcripts from the wire tap of the russians, or do you deny they do??? LOLOLOL...where do you think the data came from....magic???? And again, your ability to act like a lawyer is abject failure.....You have no doubt.. Well la di dah!!!!......That and 2 bucks will get you a cup of coffee....You are losing.. WP stole your lunch money yesterday and your losing logic continues today. The investigation will prove your fallacies wrong. LOL

opie said...

Califart head shows his stupid side again said....
Fatty and his visions of other men's junk

The only person obsessed with junk is you pauline, you keep posting about it. Go away and take a dip at your lake house.....Oh I forgot, you don't have one LOLOL....

Commonsense said...

I included two in my post.

Well you are totally wrong about the press unless you think their anti-Trump hysteria is somehow eroding their freedom.

Despite Trump's rhetoric about "fake-news" he really has given them a free pass.

And "science" is not an enumerated freedom but again Trump has not done one thing to suppress scientific inquiry.

If fact he's insistent that government scientist follow the scientific method in their work.

C.H. Truth said...

They have the transcripts from the wire tap of the russians, or do you deny they do???

Are you suggesting that our Intelligence Community "WAS" knowingly wiretapping Trump officials during the transition? Even though everyone denied such things were happening? You know, because it would be illegal to do so?

The official word was that IC intercepted Russian communications referring to the meetings. In fact they admit that the meeting itself was not under surveillance.

"That was based on intercepts of Russian communications that were reviewed by U.S. officials, although neither the meeting nor the communications of the Americans involved were under U.S. surveillance, officials told the Post."

C.H. Truth said...

Opie -

You and WP have the same problem. The facts are not on your side. WP pretends that Americans can be legally monitored if they are talking to foreign agents and you believe meetings between Trump associates were being "wiretapped".

Both suggestions are wrong on fact. Period.

Loretta Russo said...

If only Obama had a son...

"Eight dead in Mississippi Shooting Spree"

http://www.thedailybeast.com/cheats/2017/05/28/eight-dead-in-mississippi-shooting-spree?via=mobile&source=copyurl

Loretta Russo said...

"Fatty and his visions of other men's junk

That's really fucked up, just come out fatty"

LOL.

wphamilton said...

CH there are almost certainly FISA warrants on Russian diplomatic personnel, and "no substantial likelihood" bar is met, so your objections of illegality are all just hand-waving. NON-factual.

Also note for the record that as presented in news reports, information about the content of Kushner's communications is derived from communications which did not involve Kushner. Which renders your whole argument irrelevant.

Just the facts.

wphamilton said...

Kushner is not likely to be charged with anything. I'm not saying this from the perspective of a lawyer nor expert on security (since I am neither), but from drilling down from the bigger picture, such as it is publicly known. Of course reading between the lines changes when there are more lines, not yet seen, but as it stands now I'm not too concerned on Kushner's behalf.

Mainly, Kushner isn't being treated as a target of investigation. He is being tasked for information, and it leads me to believe that the FBI has been led to believe that Kushner's efforts were acting on behalf of, or coordinating, other individuals in Trump's campaign and transition team. He didn't necessarily know precisely what it was all about, but he would have information that would aid the investigation(s).

caliphate4vr said...

Fatty I spent yesterday horseback riding near Dahlonega with my kids. Your fatass was here all day, trolling.


You're a fucking loser that had a hip replaced and a stroke because of morbid obesity with an obsession about their men's junk.

Bizarro

Make sure you get the last word, I'm out again for most of the day, since unlike you I have a life

LMAO

wphamilton said...

Nice weather here for outdoors isn't it, Paul? I'll be out for a 50-70 mile bike ride this afternoon.

caliphate4vr said...

It is really glorious. Wednesday afternoon on, once the rain passed, it's unbelievable. My yoga studio was complaining about how much they have to crank the heat for hot classes. lol

You heading toward Dawsonville? Have a great ride

james said...

Kushner is only a "person of interest" at present. If he becomes a "target," that would really be something.

caliphate4vr said...

BTW WP, USA rugby play Georgia, the country, June 17th at Kennesaw State. It will be a blast.

If interested let's set up a back channel, my old club has the best 2 tail gating spots

C.H. Truth said...

CH there are almost certainly FISA warrants on Russian diplomatic personnel, and "no substantial likelihood" bar is met, so your objections of illegality are all just hand-waving. NON-factual.

WP - You are like talking to a brick wall.

I have provided you the text of the FISA laws. With or without a warrant, the assumption is that monitoring a foreign agent can only be done if they are not likely to be talking to Americans. When they do intercept conversations with Americans, that information must legally be redacted.

That is the law... whether you acknowledge it or not.

The concept that a foreign diplomat would both be considered a spy and that there would be little likelyhood of speaking to Americans are both dubious claims as it would pertain to garnering a warrant.

Lastly... there are limits on these things. One year is he max. So for someone like the Russian Ambassador they would have to reapply for a warrant over and over again if they wanted to continue to monitor him... and one might think that if they found cause to continue to monitor them year after year after year, that we may ask for a different Ambassador that we don't consider a possible spy.

C.H. Truth said...

Kushner answers directly to the President, WP.

If your suggestion is that he is being used to squeeze information on a bigger fish, then it could only really be Trump himself. More realistically they are wanting clarification on supposed phone calls that were not listed on his security clearance form.

Reality is that this whole Russian collusion thing is falling apart. The media is desperate to keep this in the news, and they are smart enough to understand that many people want so badly to believe this that they will be willing to roll with anything and everything presented.

opie said...


I have provided you the text of the FISA laws

Which means what, WP is correct and has again kicked your scrawny white ass into next week. A lawyer you are not, a trump hack is what you are. You are correct, you are a brick wall of inanity. The collusion thing is not falling apart, when the investigation is over, then it is over. Until then, all your hand waving is like donnie waving goodbye to a crowd......LOL

Anonymous caliphate4vr said...
Fatty I spent yesterday horseback riding near Dahlonega with my kids.

Call someone who gives a shit... How's that lake house coming? Spending money on horses won't get you a down payment. And no, I haven't been on here all day and what difference does it make to your shitty life????? Being a drunk and liar is not how you get ahead in this world. LOL

caliphate4vr said...

Being a fat, miserable douchebag is no way to go through life

Smoke another bowl, eat another pie. It's all your good at

LMAO

caliphate4vr said...

Oh and make sure you troll me on every thread. I love knowing I live inside your fat cranium, rent free

LMAO

C.H. Truth said...

Opie

Either the FISA Laws are correct.
Or WP is correct.

None of this has anything to do with me.
I am just citing the law as it is stated.

wphamilton said...

CH - not necessarily Trump. The FBI is investigating the Trump Campaign contacts with Russia. It could be any number of people, and if Kushner was seeking to coordinate contacts, he reasonably could have more information about them. Without necessarily being implicated. Trump himself may or may not have been involved in Kushner's "secret channel" scheme.

If Trump or one or more of his close associates were involved, and Trump knew about it, then it tends to support the second issue possibly under investigation - obstruction of justice. As I've explained, obstruction doesn't necessarily depend on a crime, but a more dangerous case can be made if an actual crime has been committed, or what could potentially be prosecuted as a crime.

opie said...

None of this has anything to do with me.
I am just citing the law as it is stated.

Which means nothing but your lack of logic or skill at presenting a cogent argument . WP wins by KO.

Anonymous caliphate4vr said...
Oh and make sure you troll me on every thread. I love knowing I live inside your fat cranium, rent free

You live in your little fantasy island, thinking you are the grand poster and thinker. LOL. Keep living your drunken salesman existence as you add nothing to anything but your own massive ego. Keep toiling, maybe someday if you work hard enough and until your 70 you can afford that lake cabin, something I already own. Ass hole.

caliphate4vr said...

your

Fatty that'd be you're

Smoke another bowl and inhale another pie. It's all you're good at.

LMAO



wphamilton said...

Paul regrettably the 17th is my birthday so I have to stick with family, otherwise I'd love to tail gait at the Rugby match. Thank you for asking.

caliphate4vr said...

WP, my daughter's is the 15th.

Happy early birthday and I hope you had a great ride,today.

All the best

opie said...

califart head the drunken 4vr said...
your

Fatty that'd be you're

Smoke another bowl and inhale another pie. It's all you're good at.

Yer an idiot. But I should use you are according to our ace spell checker. Next to drinking, spelling is what you do best. LOLOLOL