THE REPORT, buttoned up (SCO Thread v. 33)

[Sketch]

When you refuse to discuss the topic and only respond with gifs, it's a clear indication that you are indeed heavily triggered.

 

[MikeMcMann]

Nope. To obstruct one must actually obstruct

Simply wishing things is not obstruction

False.

If I am to be the key witness testifying against you as I know you committed a illegal act and without my evidence they cannot nail in what ends up being an unsubstantiated accusation and you come to me and offer me money, or as my boss pressure me to lie, that is obstruction and you can and will be charged for it. The 'attempt' to obstruct is a crime.

This goes along the same lines of Barr's reach and ridiculousness of suggesting there can be no obstruction if there is no underlying crime.

one of the articles of Impeachment used by the Republican Senate to impeach Bill Clinton was "...one on obstruction related to his efforts to prevent information about his affair with Monica Lewinsky from coming to light — including encouraging her to give false testimony."

Bill's extramarital affair with Monica was perfectly legal but they said obstruction still occurred in trying to hide it from investigators.


Its all just partisan spin and nonsense.

Obstruction does not just occur when successfully executed. The ATTEMPT is considered a crime as well.

 

[BKMMAFAN]

? The US authorizes spying against foreign nations every day in accordance with US law.

People in the justice dep't and/or prosecutors don't refer to wiretaps and informants in a criminal investigation as spies. That's how the term is being used here.

My point is that Barr's doing so shows his goal is to protect Trump (who's been using this term for years). His going along with the term spy is telling to me. He's loyal to Trump, unlike Sessions (who I very much believe would have clarified this wasn't spying).

 

[SurferH2O]

When you refuse to discuss the topic and only respond with gifs, it's a clear indication that you are indeed heavily triggered.

Now you are just lying. My posts contain content outside of the memes directly relevant to your butthurt posts and crybaby claims. You are so triggered you are now lying about the content of my posts. Please try to stay on topic, don't tell obvious lies, and lose the rage of having your Conspiracy Theory being destroyed. There was no Trump Russia Collusion... .deal with it.

Only Conspiracy Theorists still believe in Trump Russia Collusion.

 

[Darkballs]

No. I think Trump himself chose the term because it's good politics to do so. I think the Democratic congresswoman, also for political reasons, asked Barr whether the federal government spied on the Trump campaign, and Barr answered yes but said the spying might have been properly predicated.

Translation: It was lawful.

Sounds a lot less dubious then "spying."

 

[BKMMAFAN]

This isn't quibbling at all. FISC approves something like 99% of surveillance applications. Oversight is weak. This is a major issue involving our privacy rights. If pro-Trump partisans get on board that train (along with you, me, the EFF...) as a result of the Carter Page surveillance, then we should celebrate.

I completely agree about FISC. Zero transparency and nearly total warrant approval.

 

[National Acrobat]

False. A Fox News and Trumpster lie.

The Russia investigation began after the FBI learned that George Papadopoulos had been approached by a Russian agent. The agent told Papadopoulos the Russians had incriminating information about Hillary Clinton, including emails. Papadopoulos then mentioned to an Australian diplomat that the Russians had "dirt" on Clinton, the Australians contacted the U.S. government, and the FBI began to take a look.

the Gang of 8 including Mitch McConnell authorized it.

So...

FISA warrant =/= Russia investigation

 

[Mondo Freaks]

Jesus, just downloaded the PDF of the report and immediately thought TL;DR.

 

[MikeMcMann]

Holy fucking shit!
@bobgeese . Set Homie straight

Be less stupid.

The background
The FBI's Russia investigation began in the summer of 2016 when investigators learned that a Trump campaign foreign policy aide, George Papadopoulos, had been importuned by Russian intelligence operatives in London. They offered him "dirt" on Hillary Clinton and "off-the-record" meetings with Russian officials.


Counterintelligence officers began to look into what was going on. By October, they were focusing on Page, who had left the Trump campaign earlier in the year after he, too, had served as a foreign policy aide.

 

[Mark Hunts FIST]

Proving that Trump did not collude with Russia gives me as much satisfaction as someone proving the Earth is round to a flat earther.

 

[panamaican]

So I assume we're all reading the report. Just the Introduction is extremely informative.

What stood out to me, so far, is that while the Trump campaign didn't actively conspire with the Russians, they were aware of, and expected to benefit from, the Russians intended course of action.

That is the narrowest exculpation ever, a true "letter of the law" situation. Johnny did not kill his wife or conspire with his lover to kill his wife. However, Johnny knew that his lover was going to kill his wife and expected to benefit from her death and his lover expected that she would also benefit from the death of Johnny's wife. However, Johnny is not guilty of murder or of conspiring to commit murder since Johnny has no duty to proactively interfere, report, stop, etc. his lover from committing that crime.

 

[SurferH2O]

False.

If I am to be the key witness testifying against you as I know you committed a illegal act and without my evidence they cannot nail in what ends up being an unsubstantiated accusation and you come to me and offer me money, or as my boss pressure me to lie, that is obstruction and you can and will be charged for it. The 'attempt' to obstruct is a crime.

This goes along the same lines of Barr's reach and ridiculousness of suggesting there can be no obstruction if there is no underlying crime.

one of the articles of Impeachment used by the Republican Senate to impeach Bill Clinton was "...one on obstruction related to his efforts to prevent information about his affair with Monica Lewinsky from coming to light — including encouraging her to give false testimony."

Bill's extramarital affair with Monica was perfectly legal but they said obstruction still occurred in trying to hide it from investigators.


Its all just partisan spin and nonsense.

Obstruction does not just occur when successfully executed. The ATTEMPT is considered a crime as well.

You try to go with that. I pray the Democrats in the U.S. House of Representatives attempts to Impeach Trump on it.

I remember when Republicans impeached Clinton after he actually lied to a Federal Judge under oath. The Republicans lost the House of Representatives because of it. It's going to be fun watching the Democrats make the same mistake, but even worse as there was no crime.

 

[National Acrobat]

Holy fucking shit!
@bobgeese . Set Homie straight

Not quite

 

[Anung Un Rama]

Chapter 34 should be named: Russian Illusion

 

[National Acrobat]

So I assume we're all reading the report. Just the Introduction is extremely informative.

What stood out to me, so far, is that while the Trump campaign didn't actively conspire with the Russians, they were aware of, and expected to benefit from, the Russians intended course of action.

That is the narrowest exculpation ever, a true "letter of the law" situation. Johnny did not kill his wife or conspire with his lover to kill his wife. However, Johnny knew that his lover was going to kill his wife and expected to benefit from her death and his lover expected that she would also benefit from the death of Johnny's wife. However, Johnny is not guilty of murder or of conspiring to commit murder since Johnny has no duty to proactively interfere, report, stop, etc. his lover from committing that crime.

What should the Trump campaign have done?

 

[waiguoren]

People in the justice dep't and/or prosecutors don't refer to wiretaps and informants in a criminal investigation as spies. That's how the term is being used here.

I agree with you.

My point is that Barr's doing so shows his goal is to protect Trump (who's been using this term for years). His going along with the term spy is telling to me. He's loyal to Trump, unlike Sessions (who I very much believe would have clarified this wasn't spying).

I think this is reaching a bit, though I agree with you about Sessions.

 

[SurferH2O]

So I assume we're all reading the report. Just the Introduction is extremely informative.

What stood out to me, so far, is that while the Trump campaign didn't actively conspire with the Russians, they were aware of, and expected to benefit from, the Russians intended course of action.

That is the narrowest exculpation ever, a true "letter of the law" situation. Johnny did not kill his wife or conspire with his lover to kill his wife. However, Johnny knew that his lover was going to kill his wife and expected to benefit from her death and his lover expected that she would also benefit from the death of Johnny's wife. However, Johnny is not guilty of murder or of conspiring to commit murder since Johnny has no duty to proactively interfere, report, stop, etc. his lover from committing that crime.

Everyone already knew that Russia was up to no good. But, we must all remember this video.

There is no serious person out there that could suggest that Russia could rig the U.S. Election. - Barack Obama

 

[MikeMcMann]

? The US authorizes spying against foreign nations every day in accordance with US law.

More useless spin by you to try and strip context. No surprise.

Within ones own country the law enforcement agencies are subject to their own laws. So they do not need to 'spy' on domestic entities. they get warranties and commence surveillance.

A US agency is not likely to get such permission from a foreign entity when wrongdoing is expected so what they do is considered Spying by the one being surveilled. If i am not a US citizen I do not care what justification a US agency thinks it has to surveil me as I am not a US citizen.

The connotation of the two terms is very different. You KNOW that.

All Spying includes surveillance. Not all surveillance is spying.

 

[SBJJ]

False.

If I am to be the key witness testifying against you as I know you committed a illegal act and without my evidence they cannot nail in what ends up being an unsubstantiated accusation and you come to me and offer me money, or as my boss pressure me to lie, that is obstruction and you can and will be charged for it. The 'attempt' to obstruct is a crime.

This goes along the same lines of Barr's reach and ridiculousness of suggesting there can be no obstruction if there is no underlying crime.

one of the articles of Impeachment used by the Republican Senate to impeach Bill Clinton was "...one on obstruction related to his efforts to prevent information about his affair with Monica Lewinsky from coming to light — including encouraging her to give false testimony."

Bill's extramarital affair with Monica was perfectly legal but they said obstruction still occurred in trying to hide it from investigators.


Its all just partisan spin and nonsense.

Obstruction does not just occur when successfully executed. The ATTEMPT is considered a crime as well.

What you just posted is ACTUAL obstruction. Demanding a witness lie to an agent/prosecutor.

Simply screaming someone should be fired is not obstruction.

You are getting lost

 

[SBJJ]

More useless spin by you to try and strip context. No surprise.

Within ones own country the law enforcement agencies are subject to their own laws. So they do not need to 'spy' on domestic entities. they get warranties and commence surveillance.

A US agency is not likely to get such permission from a foreign entity when wrongdoing is expected so what they do is considered Spying by the one being surveilled. If i am not a US citizen I do not care what justification a US agency thinks it has to surveil me as I am not a US citizen.

The connotation of the two terms is very different. You KNOW that.

All Spying includes surveillance. Not all surveillance is spying.

6 month warranties? 1 year?