US Politics Mega-thread - Page 1315

Well Sean, let’s just, let me make it as clear as I possibly can. Okay, and now, thank God, we have an attorney general who calls spying for what it is.

In late 2015, early 2016, spying began on the Trump campaign.

That information leaked; that led to, what they consider to be, “legal spying” that began, that they’ve acknowledged that they started doing in the end of July; you just had Carter Page on; they considered that all “legal spying.

They then leaked that information, right, shortly after the election all through the spring that was leaking out; why? To create a narrative that Donald Trump shouldn’t have been President that he’s a Russian asset, etc. etc. So ‘spying’ and ‘leaking'.

Then you have the culmination of the ultimate spying, where you have the FBI Director spying on the president, taking notes, illegally leaking those notes of classified information; why? So they could appoint a special counsel to spy on an acting president again. So there’s a lot of spying and a lot of leaking, and that’s as clear as I can put it.

On April 12 2019 23:03 xDaunt wrote:
Nunes has made his criminal referrals to Barr. He's going to brief Barr with Representative Ratcliffe.

+ Show Spoiler +

Here's how Nunes describes the allegedly criminal conspiracy(ies):



Applying what we know from public information, the "2015, early 2016, spying" has to be something that the CIA and other intelligence services did. We don't know a lot about this because that information has been kept strictly confidential and little has leaked. However, Nunes notes at the very end of the video that the "DNI has transcripts" of other testimony and interviews that were taken, so I have no doubt that Nunes, as a ranking member on the intelligence committee, knows exactly what happened and has plenty to pass to Barr. The "end of July" spying is Crossfire Hurricane and the Carter Page FISA warrant. Then the last piece, the "ultimate spying," appears to be an allegation that Comey and others were trying to entrap the president with an obstruction charge. This certainly adds a little more context to Trump publicly talking about all of this being a "coup attempt." The significance of the allegations Nunes is making speaks for itself. We'll see what Barr does with it.

On April 13 2019 00:07 FueledUpAndReadyToGo wrote:

You know if it really was a creation of narrative against Trump, why wasn't any info released BEFORE the election? That would be a whole lot more effective. In fact that rather happened to Hillary with Comey doing his 'extreme carelessness' story on the emails. But that doesn't fit the conspiracy because life long republican Comey is so so biased /s

Taking personal notes of a conversation is now spying and entrapment. Calling the memos 'classified information' is a real stretch too.

Denying Trumps personal responsibility for the special counsel being created, and instead calling it a ultimate spying move by entrapment is just madness. Trump said on TV that he fired Comey because of 'the Russia thing' . He could have also not asked for preferential treatment for Flynn. He was the one initiating the dinner with Comey asking for his 'loyalty'. It's not hard to not do those things.

President Trump’s top aides considered an idea to pressure immigration agencies to release apprehended migrants into so-called sanctuary cities represented by Democratic lawmakers, according to several people familiar with the proposal.

The idea was floated in an email by a top White House policy adviser in November, when Mr. Trump was furiously condemning migrant caravans from Central America headed toward the southwestern border, the people, including two government officials, said.

In the email dated Nov. 16, with the subject line “Sanctuary City Proposal,” May Davis, the deputy White House policy coordinator, raised the idea with officials from the Department of Homeland Security, Immigration and Customs Enforcement and Customs and Border Protection.

Ms. Davis suggested that migrants who had been apprehended and were slated to be released into border towns could instead be taken to one of several sanctuary cities, which limit how local law enforcement can cooperate with federal immigration officers.

The proponents of the idea inside the White House argued at the time that it would help with overcrowding at nonprofit shelters in border towns by transferring the migrants to cities that already embrace the idea of having more immigrants, one official said.

Once there, the migrants would be released onto the streets — potentially sending a message to the Democratic politicians who oppose Mr. Trump’s immigration agenda and his demands for a wall along the border with Mexico.

Matthew Albence, the acting deputy director of ICE, objected to the idea, telling the White House that there would be liability issues if a migrant were injured during transport. He also raised concerns that the agency’s budget had not been appropriated for that purpose.

In an email, Mr. Albence responded that the proposal would create “an unnecessary operational burden” on the department and added that he did not know how paying extra to transport migrants to another location was “a justified expenditure.”

On April 13 2019 00:22 xDaunt wrote:
I'm all for dumping illegal immigrants into sanctuary cities and other liberal bastions that support illegal immigration. I'm a strong believer in the power of NIMBYism.

On April 13 2019 00:23 IyMoon wrote:


Don't you live in CA?

On April 13 2019 00:24 xDaunt wrote:

I'm in Colorado, but we have sanctuary cities here as well.

On April 13 2019 00:22 xDaunt wrote:
I'm all for dumping illegal immigrants into sanctuary cities and other liberal bastions that support illegal immigration. I'm a strong believer in the power of NIMBYism.

On April 13 2019 00:26 IyMoon wrote:


Are you sure you want to be for the policy of going after the local population of a state to get back at the opposition leadership?

You really want to be behind that? Because this is about using people as pawns to get back at his political opponents

On April 13 2019 00:26 IyMoon wrote:


Are you sure you want to be for the policy of going after the local population of a state to get back at the opposition leadership?

You really want to be behind that? Because this is about using people as pawns to get back at his political opponents

On April 13 2019 00:31 xDaunt wrote:


I want people who pursue and advocate stupid policies to bear the consequences of those policies. That's far more fair than making others who oppose those policies bear the burden.

On April 13 2019 00:07 xDaunt wrote:
The casual dismissals from you guys are hilarious in light of the breathtaking scope and severity of the allegations, the known evidence, and the fact that the AG just testified this week that he does believe that Trump was spied upon. When the indictments start coming down, I suspect that Trump supporters are going to be having more fun than they did on election night 2016.

On April 13 2019 00:22 xDaunt wrote:
I'm all for dumping illegal immigrants into sanctuary cities and other liberal bastions that support illegal immigration. I'm a strong believer in the power of NIMBYism.

On April 13 2019 00:22 xDaunt wrote:
I'm all for dumping illegal immigrants into sanctuary cities and other liberal bastions that support illegal immigration. I'm a strong believer in the power of NIMBYism.

On April 13 2019 00:35 Danglars wrote:

The northeast would start talking "crisis" in a week if they even received 10% of the result of catch-and-release policies.