Posted on 05/23/2019 10:09:59 PM PDT by Reverend Wright
Trump directed his attorney general to declassify documents in an effort to depict Donald Trumps campaign as a victim of improper surveillance in 2016. Trump tweeted that the attorney general requested these powers. That may even be true. But Trump has been demanding such an investigation of U.S. intelligence agencies since long before Barr got the top law-enforcement job. Barr is compliant and complicit, but the idea is all Trumps.
The declassification process will be selective, of course, in service to a predetermined narrative. ...
Who will trust or credit in any way the integrity of a Barr-led investigation? The intelligence agencies found evidence that alarmed them enough about the campaigns Russia connections to justify a request for warrants. A federal court reviewed that evidence and authorized and reauthorized it. Will that evidence be declassified?
(Excerpt) Read more at theatlantic.com ...
LOL... that’s great!
Cover up appears to be the phrase of the day.
He is, the commie SOB!
Okay, it’s clear this writer is on some hardcore street drugs, so I guess the real question is; does he smoke his crack pipe 10 times a day or 15 times and does he take his first puff before his morning piss or right after?
Bwahahahaha
Excellent points
Or something like that. :-P
The Democrats are all followers of the Prince of LIES....SATAN!
David Frump is a CANADIAN LOSER! He has DEAD EYES, also.
I am considering adding Ann Coulter to that list.
One misstatement after another:
: The intelligence agencies found evidence that alarmed them enough about the campaigns Russia connections to justify a request for warrants.
The intelligence agencies CREATED evidence by dangles, honeypots, and bogus "dossiers."
A federal court reviewed that evidence and authorized and reauthorized it.
A federal court was deceived by lies of omission and commission.
Will that evidence be declassified?
The idea that the FBI agents and Department of Justice officers who presented the evidence to the FISA court should be trusted but the William Barr investigation should not is preposterous on its face.
Barr mischaracterized the content of the Mueller report in his letter summarizing its conclusions.
No he did not. Nor has from cited a specific instance. Mother did not say that the content of the "summary" was inaccurate. Muller has subsequently remained silent, a condition impossible to believe if his investigation was being mischaracterized.
He set aside Muellers reluctance to interpret the evidence of obstruction of justice, instead taking the decision upon himselfand decided in his bosss favor.
Attorney General Barr corrected a violation of policy committed by Muller and only did his duty in making a decision which Muller had improperly refused to do.
He held his peace as the president used his bully pulpit to falsely claim over more than a month that a report nobody else was allowed to see absolved him of wrongdoing, when the report did no such thing.
A) the report did in fact absolved Trump of wrongdoing involving "collusion" and the Attorney General's conclusion, part of a report that was his and not Muller's, also absolved the president of wrongdoing.
B) So what? The Attorney General is under no obligation to parse presidential utterances. The whole report, absent less than 2% of the allegations concerning obstruction have been made public, so what is the harm? After two years of vilification of the president and leaks from the investigations, the president enjoyed two months to tell the truth.
And now Barr is now tasked to declassify documents as he thinks fit to support conclusions already whistled up by Trump?
There is prima facie evidence of wrongdoing which compels the release of these documents, contrary to illegally contrived "facts" which prompted Muller's investigation.
fight to suppress documents properly subpoenaed by Congress
Fight to protect the office of the presidency by claiming executive privilege which is done by presidents beginning with George Washington and extending through Barack Obama. This is a constitutional question and the current president has a duty to protect the office of the presidency for all future presidents.
then pick and choose U.S. national secrets to defame career professionals who sought to protect the integrity of the nations elections against foreign adversaries who manipulated those elections in Trumps favor.
The president, ex officio, has the power to declassify any and all secrets. It is unlikely that any useful or important national secrets will be unmasked, rather the nefarious actions of the CIA, the FBI, the State Department and the Department of Justice will be unmasked. If sources and methods are also unmasked, an unlikely event, it will be a small price to pay for exposing the biggest national scandal in American history.
There is no evidence that any foreign government actually manipulated any election in Trump's favor.
There is evidence, however, that at least two allied nations did manufacture evidence to throw the election in Hillary's favor.
Good writeup correcting the specific phrases that Washington insiders use to convince themselves of their own lies.
In his mind, Mueller , Comey, McCabe, McCain, Nadler, Shiff, are bravely standing up to an illegal hate-filled white capitalist pig.
David Frum. Pffft!
“WHAT did PDJT allegedly cover up? they never say of course.”
They never say. Of course, we expect that lie from her and her coven. But WHY doesn’t even one reporter ask Nancy what he covered up and how? Not even one! There must be one honest reporter in the crowd.
“He did not need this job. Our nation needed him.”
If he succeeds in exposing and prosecuting these vile traitors, he’ll be one of the few people who’ll be able to say he did his most important work after retirement.
Isn't he Canadian?
Excellent post!
Thank you for breaking it all down.
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.