That’s treason

T

Tranquillus in Exile

New member
“If you look at Comey; if you look at McCabe; if you look at probably people – people higher than that; if you look at Strzok; if you look at his lover, Lisa Page, his wonderful lover, they talked openly.” Trump concluded: “That’s treason.”
- White House press conference, May 23, 2019.

So Barr got his orders from Big Don and co-opted Durham; they’ve been probing the origins of the Trump Russia investigation ever since. Have they found evidence of treason that the IG missed?

Well, a junior FBI lawyer, Kevin Clinesmith, admitted altering an email in the Carter Page saga. That isn’t treason, but as Townhall put it on Aug 19 this year:

“The first guilty plea as a result of U.S. Attorney John Durham's criminal investigation into the origins of the Obama administration's phony Russia investigation has arrived.”

And:
“In an interview with Fox News host Sean Hannity, Attorney General Bill Barr said there would be a development in the Durham probe today [there wasn’t], adding more is on the way before the presidential election.”

Oh no! MORE?
 
There's an entire mountain of evidence against Trump, but Faux News and Trump's cronies will focus on one tiny irrelevant email in a desperate attempt to fire up the base.

I bet Hannity came up with this idea when he had one of his private chats with "The Don" and Rush Limbaugh.
 
Joe Hiden said:
Trump was wrong. It wasn’t treason. But what we see from the new information is that it was sedition
Click to expand...

Sedition is more accurate, but not as understandable.

It's like the difference between "wire tap" and "electronic surveillance". "Shell shock" and "post traumatic stress syndrome". "Dead" and "non-responsive".

"Trump talk" is direct and simple- easy to to understand. People know that "Treason" is a crime and is wrong and is devious. "Sedition" could be anything to the regular guy. Might be getting to first base on a date.

Still, I appreciate the clarification.
 
Michael_Panetta said:
There's an entire mountain of evidence against Trump, but Faux News and Trump's cronies will focus on one tiny irrelevant email in a desperate attempt to fire up the base.

I bet Hannity came up with this idea when he had one of his private chats with "The Don" and Rush Limbaugh.
Click to expand...

Evidence in regard to what?
 
Michael_Panetta said:
There's an entire mountain of evidence against Trump, but Faux News and Trump's cronies will focus on one tiny irrelevant email in a desperate attempt to fire up the base.

I bet Hannity came up with this idea when he had one of his private chats with "The Don" and Rush Limbaugh.
Click to expand...

There are no shortage of demagogues the likes of Hannity and Limbaugh, and there is no shortage of intellectually deficient individuals to believe them.
 
Old'N'Retired said:
Sedition is more accurate, but not as understandable.

It's like the difference between "wire tap" and "electronic surveillance". "Shell shock" and "post traumatic stress syndrome". "Dead" and "non-responsive".

"Trump talk" is direct and simple- easy to to understand. People know that "Treason" is a crime and is wrong and is devious. "Sedition" could be anything to the regular guy. Might be getting to first base on a date.

Still, I appreciate the clarification.
Click to expand...

What do yo call Trump's self serving relationship with Putin????????????
 
Tranquillus in Exile said:
What new information? Someone at the FBI incited rebellion against the state?
Click to expand...


So you haven't read the newly released text messages within the FBI? Here is one for you.

FBI agents were playing hypothetical games making fun of the bogus collusion story that you fucking fell for. How does it make you feel knowing you were duped into believing Russian Collusion? Or is your psyche so fragile that you have to continue to believe it because unraveling that thread would be too painful?

https://twitter.com/x/status/1309360150357127168
 
Tranquillus in Exile said:
What new information? Someone at the FBI incited rebellion against the state?
Click to expand...

People always throw around terms like sedition and treason without regard to its meaning.

Sedition is illegal if it incites imminent (immediate) violence against lawful authority. (violence had to actually occur).

Treason is giving aid and comfort to the enemy in time of war.

"The Brandenburg v. Ohio (1968) U.S. Supreme Court decision maintains that seditious speech—including speech that constitutes an incitement to violence—is protected by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution as long as it does not indicate an "imminent" threat."
 
Joe Hiden said:
So you haven't read the newly released text messages within the FBI? Here is one for you.
Click to expand...

Here is the full report of the interview with agent Barnett, whom I’ve never heard of, but apparently he was involved in the Flynn investigation which is what the interview was about. (It was part of the Barr Justice Department's attempt to get the charges against Flynn dropped.)

https://www.scribd.com/document/477421887/Flynn-filing-9-24-2020

I could find nothing about “sedition” in this document. I did note on page 8:

“Barnett believed there were grounds to investigate the other three subjects in Crossfire Hurricane; however, he thought Flynn was the ‘outlier’.”

Would you care to point out which part you regard as evidence of “sedition”?
 
Tranquillus in Exile said:
Here is the full report of the interview with agent Barnett, whom I’ve never heard of, but apparently he was involved in the Flynn investigation which is what the interview was about. (It was part of the Barr Justice Department's attempt to get the charges against Flynn dropped.)

https://www.scribd.com/document/477421887/Flynn-filing-9-24-2020

I could find nothing about “sedition” in this document. I did note on page 8:

“Barnett believed there were grounds to investigate the other three subjects in Crossfire Hurricane; however, he thought Flynn was the ‘outlier’.”

Would you care to point out which part you regard as evidence of “sedition”?
Click to expand...

They used the federal government’s investigation to target an opponent. It wasn’t because there were underlying crimes. They were trying to take Trump and Flynn out
 
The Inspector General’s report, released in December 2019, found that there was an "authorized purpose" and "adequate factual predication" for launching Crossfire Hurricane.

https://apps.npr.org/documents/document.html?id=6571534-OIG-Russia-Investigation-Report

Some posters here “explained” this by saying that Horowitz, and presumably his staff, were in on the conspiracy.


I have never held a strong view one way or the other on Trump-Russia collusion. But the facts as known in the summer of 2016 needed to be investigated. There were links between some members of Trump’s campaign and dubious Russians. Russia was trying to interfere in the election.

This put the FBI leadership in an extraordinarily exposed position - they were actually investigating the presidential candidates of both major parties at the same time. Then Trump won, and they paid the price in terms of their careers and (in some quarters) their reputations.

But Trump wants more.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top