[general_re]

So you're saying that the White House does in fact know exactly who and what Saffuri is including his support of terrorists/terrorist organizations and then they knowingly let him visit the POTUS and WH. Is that right?

There's two possibilities here. One, they knew who he was, and let him in anyway for reasons currently unknown. Two, they didn't know who he was, in which case, the people whose job it is to know things like that in order to prevent people like that from getting in, have failed. They failed. If Saffuri is such a bad guy, somebody up there was supposed to know about it, and that somebody ain't Grover Norquist.

[philman_36]

Well, thanks for your opinion. Now, back to what I was asking you about...
...I for one appreciate the hell out of your efforts to ask hard questions about the apparatus that is ostensibly - but apparently not actually - in place to prevent foreign agents from gaining influence.
Ummm...where exactly do you see that happening?

[philman_36]

If Saffuri is such a bad guy, somebody up there was supposed to know about it, and that somebody ain't Grover Norquist.
And another question, and I'll pose it as a hypothetical.
If you had high level access to the WH and the POTUS would you personally take it upon yourself to ensure that whoever you brought in for a visit was on the up and up beforehand, no matter if it was supposed to be "someone else's job" or not?

[philman_36]

If Saffuri is such a bad guy, somebody up there was supposed to know about it, and that somebody ain't Grover Norquist.
And another thing...there is, and was, no "if" about it. It was known for a long time that he was, indeed, "a bad guy".
Why these "if"'s keeps coming up in these various conversations is beyond me!