It Has Begun

Discussion in 'Politics' started by CoinOKC, Jan 22, 2025.

  1. GeneWright

    GeneWright Well-Known Member

    Commuted sentence for Maxwell conveniently as she delivers a statement "exonerating" Trump from Epstein crimes incoming?

    Screenshot_20250722_214827_Bluesky.jpg
     
  2. GeneWright

    GeneWright Well-Known Member

    The Epstein thing is becoming even more of a liability for Rs. Shut down all legislation when you have full control over the house because you're afraid to vote on Epstein files?

    They're letting dems kill their ability to pass legislation. That's a choice, they have the numbers to not do this.

    Screenshot_20250723_012428_Bluesky.jpg
     
  3. Mopar Dude

    Mopar Dude Well-Known Member

    I wish there were an iota of this much feigned interest in the money the Biden’s took from enemy nations forever compromising our national security. I suppose that wasn’t quite as salacious…. Or more to the point.. A Trump wasn’t involved….
     
  4. GeneWright

    GeneWright Well-Known Member

    It's not feigned and it's bipartisan. Why don't they just exonerate themselves by releasing the files? He campaigned on doing it, so do it.
     
  5. Mopar Dude

    Mopar Dude Well-Known Member

    Yes he did. And frankly I don’t care anymore than I cared about Bill and Monica. None of that salacious crap has a damn thing to do with the state of our nation.
     
  6. GeneWright

    GeneWright Well-Known Member

    You don't think giving transparency about one of the most high profile pedophile rings in human history is important?
     
  7. Mopar Dude

    Mopar Dude Well-Known Member

    Not for a POTUS. His attention needs to be on making things better tomorrow for my kids and grandkids. Yes it should come to light but not at the expense of his time and energy. POTUS cannot do anything about yesterday but he can certainly have an affect on tomorrow.
     
  8. Profiler
    Inspired

    Profiler Well-Known Member

  9. GeneWright

    GeneWright Well-Known Member

    To be honest, I assumed it would be stupid to release the files if there was any ongoing investigations or potential for them to open up. However, Biden didn't campaign on releasing them, and the Trump DOJ has said there's nothing in them to implicate new parties. If that's true, what's the hold up?
     
  10. Profiler
    Inspired

    Profiler Well-Known Member

    So where is your proof that they haven’t provided evidence that has been unsealed and is still left?

    “Dershowitz reiterated he cannot disclose more information due to judge’s orders, but said Attorney General Pam Bondi and Trump were “not responsible” for missing information.
    “I don’t know of any information that they could disclose that they haven’t disclosed. Now maybe there is some, but I’m simply not aware of it,” he said. “And so, I think it’s important to place the blame where the blame deserves to be placed.”

    https://thehill.com/homenews/admini...ein-information-not-trump-administration/amp/

    As I said before:
    So, many of the things that are being suppressed are being suppressed by two judges in Manhattan, and they’re doing it largely to protect the alleged accusers who are, in the view of the judges, victims, even though we don’t know what their actual status is,” he added.
     
  11. GeneWright

    GeneWright Well-Known Member

    It doesn't matter if there's anything. MAGAs have been hammering for the release of Epstein files for years, making broad conspiracy theories about it. Even Trump called for it. People (largely MAGA people) are pretty upset he's just saying "nothings on there, don't worry about it." At the end of the day, I don't know if there's anything interesting. Certainly I wouldn't be able to do anything personally with the information. I simply want him to reap what he's sewn.
     
  12. GeneWright

    GeneWright Well-Known Member

  13. GeneWright

    GeneWright Well-Known Member

    Since he's bringing up potential rebate checks for tariff collections now, it feels appropriate to circle back to DOGE. Any of you get your promised rebate check for that yet?
     
  14. toughcoins

    toughcoins Rarely is the liberal viewpoint tainted by realism

    Promised? Who promised? Got a quote?
     
  15. CoinOKC
    Fiendish

    CoinOKC T R U M P

  16. GeneWright

    GeneWright Well-Known Member

    That's not my read on the situation. Please explain
     
  17. GeneWright

    GeneWright Well-Known Member

    Okay, "baited" "teased" "implied" "foreshadowed" if you insist on pedantry.
     
  18. CoinOKC
    Fiendish

    CoinOKC T R U M P

    Dude, you need to check your news sources then. It's coming out now that Obama personally directed and perpetuated the manufactured lies. Yes, Hillary paid for the Steele dossier which, as we all know, was complete fabrication. But, now it's being revealed that Obama took that lie and ran with it. Below is just a very small excerpt of all the news articles that are revealing what actually happened. The part outlined in red is emphasis mine. Enlighten yourself, man. Don't remain blind.

    One instance was on Dec. 7, 2016, weeks after the election. Then-Director of National Intelligence James Clapper’s talking points stated, "Foreign adversaries did not use cyberattacks on election infrastructure to alter the U.S. presidential election outcome."

    Fox News Digital obtained a declassified copy of the Presidential Daily Brief, which was prepared by the Department of Homeland Security, with reporting from the CIA, Defense Intelligence Agency, FBI, National Security Agency, Department of Homeland Security, State Department and open sources, for Obama, dated Dec. 8, 2016.

    "We assess that Russian and criminal actors did not impact recent U.S. election results by conducting malicious cyber activities against election infrastructure," the Presidential Daily Brief stated. "Russian Government-affiliated actors most likely compromised an Illinois voter registration database and unsuccessfully attempted the same in other states."

    But the brief stated that it was "highly unlikely" the effort "would have resulted in altering any state’s official vote result."

    "Criminal activity also failed to reach the scale and sophistication necessary to change election outcomes," it stated.

    The brief noted that the Office of the Director of National Intelligence assessed that any Russian activities "probably were intended to cause psychological effects, such as undermining the credibility of the election process and candidates."

    The brief stated that cyber criminals "tried to steal data and to interrupt election processes by targeting election infrastructure, but these actions did not achieve a notable disruptive effect."

    Fox News Digital obtained declassified, but redacted, communications from the FBI in the Presidential Daily Brief, stating that it "should not go forward until the FBI" had shared its "concerns."

    Those communications revealed that the FBI drafted a "dissent" to the original Presidential Daily Brief.

    OBAMA ADMIN 'MANUFACTURED' INTELLIGENCE TO CREATE 2016 RUSSIAN ELECTION INTERFERENCE NARRATIVE, DOCUMENTS SHOW

    The communications revealed that the brief was expected to be published Dec. 9, 2016, the following day, but later communications revealed the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, "based on some new guidance," decided to "push back publication" of the Presidential Daily Brief.

    "It will not run tomorrow and is not likely to run until next week," wrote the deputy director of the Presidential Daily Brief at the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, whose name is redacted.

    The following day, Dec. 9, 2016, a meeting convened in the White House Situation Room, with the subject line starting: "Summary of Conclusions for PC Meeting on a Sensitive Topic (REDACTED.)"

    The meeting included top officials in the National Security Council, Clapper, then-CIA Director John Brennan, then-National Security Advisor Susan Rice, then-Secretary of State John Kerry, then-Attorney General Loretta Lynch, then-Deputy FBI Director Andrew McCabe, among others, to discuss Russia.

    The declassified meeting record, obtained by Fox News Digital, revealed that principals "agreed to recommend sanctioning of certain members of the Russian military intelligence and foreign intelligence chains of command responsible for cyber operations as a response to cyber activity that attempted to influence or interfere with U.S. elections, if such activity meets the requirements" from an executive order that demanded the blocking of property belonging to people engaged in cyber activities.

    After the meeting, according to the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, Clapper’s executive assistant emailed intelligence community leaders tasking them to create a new intelligence community assessment "per the president’s request" that detailed the "tools Moscow used and actions it took to influence the 2016 election."

    "ODNI will lead this effort with participation from CIA, FBI, NSA, and DHS," the record states.

    Later, Obama officials "leaked false statements to media outlets" claiming that "Russia has attempted through cyber means to interfere in, if not actively influence, the outcome of an election."

    https://www.foxnews.com/politics/dni-tulsi-gabbard-declassified-trump-russia-docs-heres-what-say
     
  19. GeneWright

    GeneWright Well-Known Member

    In your own words, what do you think happened here. What's confusing me, is that like other articles I've read on the Obama thing, it contains very little meat. Seems like an anemic distraction at best.
     
  20. toughcoins

    toughcoins Rarely is the liberal viewpoint tainted by realism

    Seems to me that just enough pieces of the puzzle are still in hiding.

    One Mississippi, two Mississippi . . .
     
    Mopar Dude likes this.

Share This Page