Posted on 05/25/2019 11:46:39 AM PDT by E. Pluribus Unum
As President Trump ordered the intelligence community and others to fully cooperate with DOJ Attorney General William Barr in his investigation into the FBI’s probe of the 2016 presidential election, a key piece of evidence may reside in the early unmasking of Americans private communications, according to Sara Carter.
Carter pointed this out in her appearance Thursday night on Hannity, with guest host Dan Bongino.
Carter noted former UN Ambassador Samantha Power who unmasked nearly 300 people. These names will surprise Americans if they were to be made public, according to Carter.
Earlier, Carter reported on this news site that Trump’s order requires full cooperation from the intelligence community. “The review will be expansive,” Carter wrote.
Additionally, Carter said exculpatory evidence related to Trump campaign advisors Carter Page and George Papadopoulos will come to the surface.
(Excerpt) Read more at saraacarter.com ...
Not the call -every -Republican -every name -under -the -sun party
Because of the misapplication/overextension of the New York Times v. Sullivan decision, public officials are told they can’t sue for libel.But since journalists are cynical about society and naive about government - and since Democrats have no other principle than to go along and get along with journalism - Democrats don’t get libeled. Which means that Sullivan is taken to mean that Republicans can’t sue for libel, and Democrats are entitled, not only to their own opinions, but to their own facts.
That can only be changed if some Republican takes the bit in his teeth and sues in the face of the (unanimous) Sullivan decision, pointing out the above, and the fact that wire service journalism is inherently monopolistic, and that having all journalists going along and getting along with each other under the aegis of claimed “journalistic objectivity” (journalism is actually negative, and knows it) actually suppresses truth in contravention of the objective of freedom of speech and press.
The First Amendment does not eliminate libel and pornography restrictions because they were part of “the” freedom . . . of the press which predates and is protected by (not created by) 1A.
Really good analysis. 0bama probably started this early in his first term. He set up a template such that whoever opposed him would be targeted. I’m sure he would have done this to Romney but Romney was such a weak and non threatening candidate 0bama did not need to use it.
btt
If the little worm Sessions had one tenth the character some of you assign to him, he would have resigned immediately.
But no, he refused, so Trump had to fire his sorry ass the first time he could do it safely.
It does make sense.
I hope you are right.
I know a lot were disappointed and said it didnt match his character.
We shall see.
...300 lawsuits that put the taxpayer as well as black hats on the road to financial ruin, lots of people will rightly be angry at the black hats.
____________________
While it happened during their tenure as government officials, aren’t the individuals responsible, rather than the nation?
I hope the individuals are bankrupted, lose their pensions and spend their remaining years in federal custody.
Also, consider that prominent journos and their employers are at risk. I forget which hedge fund/investment bank is supporting CNN, but this could take care of those sorry b@$+@rd$, too.
I believe the impossible is happening: POTUS is leading a scorched earth campaign. It reaches across the world. The old order changeth. He’s truly the right man at the right time.
https://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3752144/posts
Report:Declassified Docs Will Show That Samantha Power’s 2016 Unmasking Efforts Were Related to
pjmedia.com ^ | 5/24/2019 | Debra Heine
He’s being handled and his handlers are keeping him “above” the fray.
______________
They can keep him quiet only so long.
Wonder how many of the *handlers* are themselves compromised?
The Republicans are STILL not supporting our president despite the fact that he was the choice of the voters in the party who they want to lead the nation. The hard truth is that most Republicans don’t respect the will of their voters which makes them disingenuous at best, and corrupt at worst.
__________________
The did not choose wisely.
They aligned themselves with those who perpetrated the illegal coup and committed myriad illegal acts against the nation, the Constitution and the people of the United States.
They themselves were very likely to have been surveilled and compromised and this will become public knowledge.
They are about to become people without a country, which is very fitting, since they are all globalists.
The wrong side of history, indeed.
Does that include 'Deep in the Huntgren Forest' and 'Classy Green-Eyed Blond' ?
How about the members who fled for Darwin Central?
The idea that an educated, entrenched elite would ever allow common citizens to control their political destiny is a ludicrous joke. The deep state goes way back; my preferred date is 1913, the year both the Federal reserve and the 16th & 17th amendments were passed. Pretty amazing, huh - monster, completely transformative legislation that changed the country as much (or more) than 1865. And 4 short years later, we're fully engaged in WWI.
Anyway, back to the present. The notion that some dumb ass with an incredibly murky past, who served just one term as senator and then was elected president, did this entirely of his own merit and initiative ranks up there with perhaps the flat earth society. However, if one considers what happened in 1913, and then reads and understands Goebbels' favorite author - who happened help lead US propaganda efforts during WWI - then the handling of Hussein actually isn't close to the deep state's greatest achievement.
So, when we step back and evaluate the big picture, one, Hussein is the least of it; two, our 5 eye allies are part & parcel; three, if Trump/patriots prevail, this will literally be like 1776 all over again, with a clean break from the past and traitors routed. One can only hope.
That is not why I, for one, dispute you - but you do not pay attention to anyone who disagrees.
He abused statutory law in recusing; he had no legal right to recuse. He did not require Rosenstein or Mueller to recuse for their own far more real conflicts. His motives fir doing either are as irrelevant as were Hillary Clinton’s in regard to the private email server.
Worst of all, he defended the prosecutors of Cliven Bundy, whose case was thrown out with prejudice - with prejudice! - by Gloria Navarro.
You and others apparently love Rule of Skullduggery, as long as you think it will enable your side to “win.”
I believe in Rule of Law, and in ethics and morals. I reject outdoing the Bad Guys in abusing the law.
There are other reasons, but those are key. You do not care about such realities - especially the Constitutional Rights of American Citizens who happen not to be anyone you regard as important (like Michael Caputo, Paul Manafort, Michael Flynn, Cliven Bundy, or, yes, Michael Cohen). I do.
American citizens can be ruined or destroyed in the name of your clever scheming, and as long as you are convinced Donald Trump will triumph, you are more than happy to clap with glee and pass the popcorn. I find it truly disgusting.
Like most in your camp, you smugly assume that anyone who disagrees with you is stupid and ignorant. That right there is a false starting premise.
How would anyone know if they left? We can’t confirm the life or death of RBG and she is a sitting SC Justice.
OUTSTANDING post; thread. BUMP!!!
“I’ll be curious to see who skates this time.”
You’re leaving out one very important variable in your thinking... Trump.
I hope the spygate thugs see Barr’s face in their mind’s eye all day and during the night when they can’t sleep.
Wonder if, we should start a stroke/and or CVA incident pool for ole Joe.
An incident that will force him to drop out of the 2020 rat carnival to spend more time with his criminal family.
My money is on Val J
Starboard...
Too nice and way too patient. Weakness invites aggression. Always has, always will. Standing up and pushing back are the only things that deter it. Its the old ‘peace through strength’ principle.
The Republicans are STILL not supporting our president despite the fact that he was the choice of the voters in the party who they want to lead the nation. The hard truth is that most Republicans don’t respect the will of their voters which makes them disingenuous at best, and corrupt at worst.
semantic...
The idea that an educated, entrenched elite would ever allow common citizens to control their political destiny is a ludicrous joke. The deep state goes way back; my preferred date is 1913, the year both the Federal reserve and the 16th & 17th amendments were passed. Pretty amazing, huh - monster, completely transformative legislation that changed the country as much (or more) than 1865. And 4 short years later, we’re fully engaged in WWI.
Anyway, back to the present. The notion that some dumb ass with an incredibly murky past, who served just one term as senator and then was elected president, did this entirely of his own merit and initiative ranks up there with perhaps the flat earth society. However, if one considers what happened in 1913, and then reads and understands Goebbels’ favorite author - who happened help lead US propaganda efforts during WWI - then the handling of Hussein actually isn’t close to the deep state’s greatest achievement.
So, when we step back and evaluate the big picture, one, Hussein is the least of it; two, our 5 eye allies are part & parcel; three, if Trump/patriots prevail, this will literally be like 1776 all over again, with a clean break from the past and traitors routed. One can only hope.
BUMP! BUMP!
People ask “how high does this go?” I want to know how far down it goes. How deep is it?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.