Even if that weren't some serious hyperbole, that shouldn't stop you from finding something - anything - to be critical of on the left.
Memo looks like a nothing burger... Read it here
- Thread starter Cuddles
- Start date
Even if that weren't some serious hyperbole, that shouldn't stop you from finding something - anything - to be critical of on the left.
Hyperbole? You VOTED for hyperbole. So please let's not talk about hyperbole.
As I have noted to you before, I had been critical in the past of what some Democrats had said or done. It was rare and I cannot recall when, but I am not going to look for it. You, however, are welcome to do so.
You who voted for Trump schooling me on hyperbole. Priceless.
I'll bet!
Having a meaningful representation is important. If the democrats had 17 candidates, as the republicans did, then there would have been a much more diverse pool of serious candidates.
Don’t mistaken symbolism for substance either. Having a Hispanic candidate doesn’t mean that candidate will govern in a way Hispanics would prefer.
I see.
The dems would have had representation except they didn't. Once you got your white girl who is entitled to be coronated you did not need any more representation because she will speak for all them minority types because she knows whats best for them.
That spiel did not exactly work out on the campaign trail. Might want to work on that a little before the next election. Putting that white boy kennedy kid out there is a bad sign that you the demtards are still stuck on stupid.
I see. Unless a Hispanic comes off the Dem Plantation he/she is not a real Hispanic.
As Condi Rice said- when she took so much heat for being black but not a dem- "I have been black a long time. I don't need anyone telling me how to be black."
If more Hispanics had thought that Hillary would have "governed the way Hispanics prefer" she would be president today- exceot quite a few them had more important things to do than be taken down off the shelf on election day, only to be put back up there again the next day.
Howz that bit about having white boy schumer and white girl Pelosi negotiate a daca deal working out for Hispanics? Most likely your ilk will not take yes for an answer from trump and will screw it up so that you will have something to campaign on. It is never about the Hispanics for the dems. You just want their votes and then for them to go away and not embarrass you by pointing out that you haven't accomplished anything.
Senate documents show FBI trying to suppress release of new Trump dossier info
BY SHARYL ATTKISSON, OPINION CONTRIBUTOR - 02/05/18 11:05 AM EST
THE VIEWS EXPRESSED BY CONTRIBUTORS ARE THEIR OWN AND NOT THE VIEW OF THE HILL
0
© Greg Nash
Republican senators Charles Grassley (Iowa) and Lindsey Graham (S.C.) on Monday released a letter they sent to the FBI asking that ex-British spy Christopher Steele be investigated for possible criminal violations. Steele authored the anti-Trump “dossier” that was full of false or unverified information, provided to the FBI and leaked to the press in 2016.
The FBI secretly used the Steele dossier to convince a Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court to permit one of the most sensitive invasions of privacy against a U.S. citizen: electronic surveillance by the government. Top Obama and Trump officials signed four wiretap applications against Trump adviser Carter Page starting in fall of 2016 — a month before the presidential election — relying, in part, on the dossier. That’s according to House Republicans who, on Friday, released a summary of classified documents they reviewed.
The FBI’s reliance on the anti-Trump dossier is questionable because while the judge was reportedly told the author had political motivations, the FBI allegedly did not disclose who funded it: Donald Trump’s chief opponent in the presidential race — the Hillary Clinton campaign — and the Democratic National Committee.
Not only that, the newly-released criminal referral says Steele actually incorporated information that was funneled to him through Clinton associates and the U.S. State Department where Clinton had served as Secretary of State from 2009 to early 2013. In a memo dated Oct. 19, 2016, Steele wrote that a foreign source who was in touch with “a friend of the Clintons” passed him material through a U.S. State Department connection.
Even more problematic, the FBI may have violated strict rules — Woods Procedures — that forbid it from presenting even a single unverified fact to the special court, let alone a lengthy dossier full of them.
The criminal referral unveiled today says Steele's possible violations involve claims he reportedly made about his dealings with the media. Conflicting accounts arose as part of a lawsuit in Great Britain where Steele is defending a libel claim made by a Russian businessman. Steele publicly accused him of hacking the Democratic Party. The criminal referral is not a formal accusation of wrongdoing against Steele, but a request for an investigation.
Conflicts of interest?
In the bigger picture, the criminal referral highlights conflicts of interest questions emerging in the wide-ranging investigations:
The Steele criminal referral in essence asks the FBI to investigate a source with whom FBI officials collaborated, and whose evidence they used in a fashion that’s under congressional investigation.
The referral was addressed to Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosensteinwho himself signed at least one of the questionable wiretap applications using the Steele dossier.
It was also addressed to FBI Director Christopher Wray whose choice for general counsel, Dana Boente, also signed at least one of the wiretap applications. Boente replaced James Baker, a confidante of former FBI Director James Comey, who signed three of the wiretap applications. (Baker was reassigned in December after questions arose about leaks promoting the anti-Trump material in the dossier. Last June, Comey admitted that he secretly orchestrated a leak to the press to prompt a special counsel investigation of any Trump-Russia ties. Robert Mueller was appointed two days later.)
Other potential conflicts of interest became apparent when senators Grassley and Graham asked the FBI for permission to release the Steele criminal referral last month. Grassley says the FBI stonewalled — then claimed that unclassified information was actually classified and said it could not be released.
Unlike the House of Representatives, which has processes allowing members to release formerly classified material without FBI approval, the Senate requires the FBI’s permission.
That’s why the documents released today still contain significant blacked out or redacted portions. The FBI’s explanation for that is also partly redacted. FBI Assistant Director for Congressional Affairs Gregory Bower stated “the FBI cannot and will not weaken its commitment to protecting [redacted]. Public reporting about [redacted] does not affect the FBI’s policy with respect to classification [redacted] nor does it diminish our obligations [redacted].”
Page, the target of at least four secret government wiretaps, has not been accused of any wrongdoing.
Sharyl Attkisson (@SharylAttkisson) is an Emmy-award winning investigative journalist, author of The New York Times bestsellers “The Smear” and “Stonewalled,” and host of Sinclair’s Sunday TV program “Full Measure.”
BY SHARYL ATTKISSON, OPINION CONTRIBUTOR - 02/05/18 11:05 AM EST
THE VIEWS EXPRESSED BY CONTRIBUTORS ARE THEIR OWN AND NOT THE VIEW OF THE HILL
0
© Greg Nash
Republican senators Charles Grassley (Iowa) and Lindsey Graham (S.C.) on Monday released a letter they sent to the FBI asking that ex-British spy Christopher Steele be investigated for possible criminal violations. Steele authored the anti-Trump “dossier” that was full of false or unverified information, provided to the FBI and leaked to the press in 2016.
The FBI secretly used the Steele dossier to convince a Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court to permit one of the most sensitive invasions of privacy against a U.S. citizen: electronic surveillance by the government. Top Obama and Trump officials signed four wiretap applications against Trump adviser Carter Page starting in fall of 2016 — a month before the presidential election — relying, in part, on the dossier. That’s according to House Republicans who, on Friday, released a summary of classified documents they reviewed.
The FBI’s reliance on the anti-Trump dossier is questionable because while the judge was reportedly told the author had political motivations, the FBI allegedly did not disclose who funded it: Donald Trump’s chief opponent in the presidential race — the Hillary Clinton campaign — and the Democratic National Committee.
Not only that, the newly-released criminal referral says Steele actually incorporated information that was funneled to him through Clinton associates and the U.S. State Department where Clinton had served as Secretary of State from 2009 to early 2013. In a memo dated Oct. 19, 2016, Steele wrote that a foreign source who was in touch with “a friend of the Clintons” passed him material through a U.S. State Department connection.
Even more problematic, the FBI may have violated strict rules — Woods Procedures — that forbid it from presenting even a single unverified fact to the special court, let alone a lengthy dossier full of them.
The criminal referral unveiled today says Steele's possible violations involve claims he reportedly made about his dealings with the media. Conflicting accounts arose as part of a lawsuit in Great Britain where Steele is defending a libel claim made by a Russian businessman. Steele publicly accused him of hacking the Democratic Party. The criminal referral is not a formal accusation of wrongdoing against Steele, but a request for an investigation.
Conflicts of interest?
In the bigger picture, the criminal referral highlights conflicts of interest questions emerging in the wide-ranging investigations:
The Steele criminal referral in essence asks the FBI to investigate a source with whom FBI officials collaborated, and whose evidence they used in a fashion that’s under congressional investigation.
The referral was addressed to Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosensteinwho himself signed at least one of the questionable wiretap applications using the Steele dossier.
It was also addressed to FBI Director Christopher Wray whose choice for general counsel, Dana Boente, also signed at least one of the wiretap applications. Boente replaced James Baker, a confidante of former FBI Director James Comey, who signed three of the wiretap applications. (Baker was reassigned in December after questions arose about leaks promoting the anti-Trump material in the dossier. Last June, Comey admitted that he secretly orchestrated a leak to the press to prompt a special counsel investigation of any Trump-Russia ties. Robert Mueller was appointed two days later.)
Other potential conflicts of interest became apparent when senators Grassley and Graham asked the FBI for permission to release the Steele criminal referral last month. Grassley says the FBI stonewalled — then claimed that unclassified information was actually classified and said it could not be released.
Unlike the House of Representatives, which has processes allowing members to release formerly classified material without FBI approval, the Senate requires the FBI’s permission.
That’s why the documents released today still contain significant blacked out or redacted portions. The FBI’s explanation for that is also partly redacted. FBI Assistant Director for Congressional Affairs Gregory Bower stated “the FBI cannot and will not weaken its commitment to protecting [redacted]. Public reporting about [redacted] does not affect the FBI’s policy with respect to classification [redacted] nor does it diminish our obligations [redacted].”
Page, the target of at least four secret government wiretaps, has not been accused of any wrongdoing.
Sharyl Attkisson (@SharylAttkisson) is an Emmy-award winning investigative journalist, author of The New York Times bestsellers “The Smear” and “Stonewalled,” and host of Sinclair’s Sunday TV program “Full Measure.”
They have Joe Kennedy on the bench, so they are covered.
This is idiocy.
