Congress Agrees on a Tax Bill. What Does Proposed Tax Bill Mean for Older Americans? Learn More.

Reply
Valued Social Butterfly

Re: More DEEP STATE Exposed...

97 Views
Message 311 of 397

rk9152 wrote:

Panjandrum wrote:

rk9152:  Did Mueller undo the corrupt actions?

 

 

Yes he did....he made him stand at a chalkboard and write "I did not mean what I said" 500 times. Then he made him rub down with ashes & don a hair shirt. If you think my answer is ridiculous, it's because I calibrated it to the question asked.


And his actions to undo the coverups of Clinton and her staff......??


He said he didn't cover up anything so, following the lead of the Republicans, it is obvious he didn't cover up anything.

Report Inappropriate Content
Valued Social Butterfly

Re: More DEEP STATE Exposed...

91 Views
Message 312 of 397

Centristsin2010 wrote:

rk9152 wrote:

Centristsin2010 wrote:

rk9152 wrote:.

No "losing it", no "intellectual dishonesty" merely a rational reading of the opinions offered.


TOTAL Intellectual Dishonesty and near zero "rational reading" of the topic as you claimed it addresses "corruption in the DOJ"....but it doesn't now, does it? I was giving you the benefit of the doubt by suggesting you were "losing it".  But I'll accept your claim that you aren't "losing it"; then your comment is just another lie. Sadly and pathetically, it's become quite the common ploy from some Conservatives.


But, since it does show the corruption in the DOJ leadership, there is no "losing it" involved.

 

Ahhhhh, so you admit it was totally intellectually dishonest.  That's good.  Now that we have that settled, where's the corruption in the DOJ leadership (now) that you claim exists?  Please be totally honest here from the beginning as it'll save you some time claiming fictitious games are being played.


Now you know that is a ........oops, I almost fell into your trap. Close call!!

 

As to current corruption - not fixing the problems of the recent past and continuing the fishing expedition.

Report Inappropriate Content
Valued Social Butterfly

Re: More DEEP STATE Exposed...

87 Views
Message 313 of 397

rk9152 wrote:

Snoopy48 wrote:

rk9152 wrote:

Snoopy48 wrote:

rk9152 wrote:

Snoopy48 wrote:

rk9152 wrote:

Snoopy48 wrote:

jimc91 wrote:

 

I am so proud. And in awe. Thank you so much. All my deepest respects’ –

 

Andrew Weissmann, then-Chief of Justice Department Criminal Fraud Section

(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch today released two productions (335 pages and 44 pages) of Justice Department (DOJ) documents showing strong support by top DOJ officials for former Acting Attorney General Sally Yates’ refusal to enforce President Trump’s Middle East travel ban executive order. In one email, Andrew Weissmann, one of Robert Mueller’s top prosecutors and formerly the Obama-era Chief of the Justice Department’s Criminal Fraud Section, applauds Yates writing: “I am so proud. And in awe. Thank you so much. All my deepest respects.”

 

Judicial Watch obtained the documents through a May 2017 Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit filed after the Justice Department failed to respond to a February FOIA request seeking Yates’ emails from her government account (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of Justice (No. 1:17-cv-00832)) for the time period she served as Acting Attorney General for President Trump.

The emails, several sent from official Justice Department email addresses, show strong support for Yates, who was fired for disobeying a direct order from the President:

 

Thomas Delahanty, then the United States Attorney for Maine wrote: “You are my hero.”


Liz Aloi, a career service employee and Chief of the Justice Department’s Special Financial Investigations Unit told Yates she was “Inspirational and heroic.”


Emily Gray Rice, then the U.S. Attorney for New Hampshire and an Obama appointee said: “AAG Yates, thank you, as always, for making us proud. It is truly an honor to work for you.”


Obama appointee Barbara McQuade, U.S. oAttorney for the Eastern District of Michigan told Yates, “Thank you for your courage and leadership. This is wonderful news.”


DOJ Civil Division Appellate Attorney Jeffrey Clair wrote: “Thank you AG Yates. I’ve been in civil/appellate for 30 years and have never seen an administration with such contempt for democratic values and the rule of law. The President’s order is an unconstitutional embarrassment and I applaud you for taking a principled stand against defending it.”


“This is an astonishing and disturbing find. Andrew Weisman, a key prosecutor on Robert Mueller’s team, praised Obama DOJ holdover Sally Yates after she lawlessly thwarted President Trump,” stated Judicial Watch president Tom Fitton. “How much more evidence do we need that the Mueller operation has been irredeemably compromised by anti-Trump partisans? Shut it down.”

 

Yates was appointed by President Obama as U.S. Attorney in northern Georgia and was later confirmed as Deputy Attorney General. In January 2017 she became acting Attorney General for President Trump.

 

Yates was involved in the controversy concerning Gen. Michael Flynn, allegedly warning the Trump White House in early January about General Flynn’s contacts with the Russian ambassador, Sergei Kislyak. (Judicial Watch is separately suing for records concerning the surveillance and subsequent leaks regarding General Flynn.)

 

On January 30, Yates ordered the Justice Department not to defend President Trump’s January 27 executive order seeking a travel ban from seven Middle Eastern countries. That same day, President Trump fired her for refusing to defend the action.

 

In a late October article describing Andrew Weissmann as Robert Mueller’s “Pit Bull,” The New York Times wrote, “He is a top lieutenant to Robert S. Mueller III on the special counsel investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election and possible links to the Trump campaign.

 

Significantly, Mr. Weissmann is an expert in converting defendants into collaborators — with either tactical brilliance or overzealousness, depending on one’s perspective.” Weissman oversaw the pre-dawn home raid of former Trump aide Paul Manafort in what one former federal prosecutor described as “textbook Weissmann terrorism.”

 

 

 https://www.judicialwatch.org/press-room/press-releases/judicial-watch-new-justice-department-record...

 

+++++++++++++

 

Tic Toc...  One day at a time, the swamp is being drained!

 

 

 


You seem to have forgotten that the courts supported Yates in that the January 27 EO was unConstitutional.


You seem to have forgotten that SCOTUS has overruled the lower Court.


Not on the January 27th EO. They did not review the lower court decision since the EO had already expired.


I don't know what you are nit-picking about. SCOTUS has approved the President's plan for increases scrutiny for people from certain countries. Yates is just an example of the left over corruption the President has to deal with - and I doubt you can find SCOTUS supporting that..


I don't know why you are still lying about the EO that Yates refused to support. Can't you stand honest people working for the Justice Department?


What I object to is people allowing partisanship stand in the way of what is best for our Nation and her citizens.


You object to OTHER people being partisan while you push partisanship that supports your opinion.


Both Obama and Trump agreed that certain Nations required additional scrutiny. So, where is the partisanship you see in this?


Obama found a way to provide the additional scrutiny which was working very well and he didn't have to tromp all over the US Constitution to do it. 

 

Report Inappropriate Content
Valued Social Butterfly

Re: More DEEP STATE Exposed...

72 Views
Message 314 of 397

rk9152 wrote:

Snoopy48 wrote:

rk9152 wrote:


  Did Yates not opposed the ban; did SCOTUS not approve the ban.

Yes, Yates opposed the ban.

 

No, SCOTUS did NOT approve that ban.


How petty!! The SCOTUS approved the intent after required adjustments - Yates fought the intent.


What a lie!! If calling out your repeated lies about this is what you consider 'petty' I will continue to be petty.

 

Try being truthful for a change and maybe you won't find people being "petty".

Report Inappropriate Content
Valued Social Butterfly

Re: More DEEP STATE Exposed...

74 Views
Message 315 of 397

Panjandrum wrote:

rk9152:  Did Mueller undo the corrupt actions?

 

 

Yes he did....he made him stand at a chalkboard and write "I did not mean what I said" 500 times. Then he made him rub down with ashes & don a hair shirt. If you think my answer is ridiculous, it's because I calibrated it to the question asked.


And his actions to undo the coverups of Clinton and her staff......??

Report Inappropriate Content
Valued Social Butterfly

Re: More DEEP STATE Exposed...

60 Views
Message 316 of 397

Panjandrum wrote:

rk9152:  Integrity would be undoing what the guy did to further his biases, not just moving him to another office.

 

 

Again: when you're in a hole, quit digging. You're sinking deeper with each post.


Again integrity would undoing what the guy did - not just changing his office.

Report Inappropriate Content
Valued Social Butterfly

Re: More DEEP STATE Exposed...

66 Views
Message 317 of 397

Panjandrum wrote:

rk9152:  When an official showing heavy partisan bias is assigned to a position where he can influence an investigation of his "favorite" and then is involved in an investigation of one he opposes, that is a strong indication of the sort of corruption I am talking about. 

 

 

You seem to be assuming his bias was known at the time of hiring. Nonsense. It was discovered at a later date & he was let go, which is as it should be. My advice to you on this topic.....when you're in a hole, quit digging. You look more clueless with each attempt at a rebuttal.



Panjandrum wrote:

rk9152:  When an official showing heavy partisan bias is assigned to a position where he can influence an investigation of his "favorite" and then is involved in an investigation of one he opposes, that is a strong indication of the sort of corruption I am talking about. 

 

 

You seem to be assuming his bias was known at the time of hiring. Nonsense. It was discovered at a later date & he was let go, which is as it should be. My advice to you on this topic.....when you're in a hole, quit digging. You look more clueless with each attempt at a rebuttal.


I have no idea when he was hired - do you? I was referring to his actions on the job, the sort of thing that should be known by the leadership.

Report Inappropriate Content
Valued Social Butterfly

Re: More DEEP STATE Exposed...

69 Views
Message 318 of 397

Snoopy48 wrote:

rk9152 wrote:

Snoopy48 wrote:

rk9152 wrote:

Snoopy48 wrote:

rk9152 wrote:

Snoopy48 wrote:

jimc91 wrote:

 

I am so proud. And in awe. Thank you so much. All my deepest respects’ –

 

Andrew Weissmann, then-Chief of Justice Department Criminal Fraud Section

(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch today released two productions (335 pages and 44 pages) of Justice Department (DOJ) documents showing strong support by top DOJ officials for former Acting Attorney General Sally Yates’ refusal to enforce President Trump’s Middle East travel ban executive order. In one email, Andrew Weissmann, one of Robert Mueller’s top prosecutors and formerly the Obama-era Chief of the Justice Department’s Criminal Fraud Section, applauds Yates writing: “I am so proud. And in awe. Thank you so much. All my deepest respects.”

 

Judicial Watch obtained the documents through a May 2017 Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit filed after the Justice Department failed to respond to a February FOIA request seeking Yates’ emails from her government account (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of Justice (No. 1:17-cv-00832)) for the time period she served as Acting Attorney General for President Trump.

The emails, several sent from official Justice Department email addresses, show strong support for Yates, who was fired for disobeying a direct order from the President:

 

Thomas Delahanty, then the United States Attorney for Maine wrote: “You are my hero.”


Liz Aloi, a career service employee and Chief of the Justice Department’s Special Financial Investigations Unit told Yates she was “Inspirational and heroic.”


Emily Gray Rice, then the U.S. Attorney for New Hampshire and an Obama appointee said: “AAG Yates, thank you, as always, for making us proud. It is truly an honor to work for you.”


Obama appointee Barbara McQuade, U.S. oAttorney for the Eastern District of Michigan told Yates, “Thank you for your courage and leadership. This is wonderful news.”


DOJ Civil Division Appellate Attorney Jeffrey Clair wrote: “Thank you AG Yates. I’ve been in civil/appellate for 30 years and have never seen an administration with such contempt for democratic values and the rule of law. The President’s order is an unconstitutional embarrassment and I applaud you for taking a principled stand against defending it.”


“This is an astonishing and disturbing find. Andrew Weisman, a key prosecutor on Robert Mueller’s team, praised Obama DOJ holdover Sally Yates after she lawlessly thwarted President Trump,” stated Judicial Watch president Tom Fitton. “How much more evidence do we need that the Mueller operation has been irredeemably compromised by anti-Trump partisans? Shut it down.”

 

Yates was appointed by President Obama as U.S. Attorney in northern Georgia and was later confirmed as Deputy Attorney General. In January 2017 she became acting Attorney General for President Trump.

 

Yates was involved in the controversy concerning Gen. Michael Flynn, allegedly warning the Trump White House in early January about General Flynn’s contacts with the Russian ambassador, Sergei Kislyak. (Judicial Watch is separately suing for records concerning the surveillance and subsequent leaks regarding General Flynn.)

 

On January 30, Yates ordered the Justice Department not to defend President Trump’s January 27 executive order seeking a travel ban from seven Middle Eastern countries. That same day, President Trump fired her for refusing to defend the action.

 

In a late October article describing Andrew Weissmann as Robert Mueller’s “Pit Bull,” The New York Times wrote, “He is a top lieutenant to Robert S. Mueller III on the special counsel investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election and possible links to the Trump campaign.

 

Significantly, Mr. Weissmann is an expert in converting defendants into collaborators — with either tactical brilliance or overzealousness, depending on one’s perspective.” Weissman oversaw the pre-dawn home raid of former Trump aide Paul Manafort in what one former federal prosecutor described as “textbook Weissmann terrorism.”

 

 

 https://www.judicialwatch.org/press-room/press-releases/judicial-watch-new-justice-department-record...

 

+++++++++++++

 

Tic Toc...  One day at a time, the swamp is being drained!

 

 

 


You seem to have forgotten that the courts supported Yates in that the January 27 EO was unConstitutional.


You seem to have forgotten that SCOTUS has overruled the lower Court.


Not on the January 27th EO. They did not review the lower court decision since the EO had already expired.


I don't know what you are nit-picking about. SCOTUS has approved the President's plan for increases scrutiny for people from certain countries. Yates is just an example of the left over corruption the President has to deal with - and I doubt you can find SCOTUS supporting that..


I don't know why you are still lying about the EO that Yates refused to support. Can't you stand honest people working for the Justice Department?


What I object to is people allowing partisanship stand in the way of what is best for our Nation and her citizens.


You object to OTHER people being partisan while you push partisanship that supports your opinion.


Both Obama and Trump agreed that certain Nations required additional scrutiny. So, where is the partisanship you see in this?

Report Inappropriate Content
Valued Social Butterfly

Re: More DEEP STATE Exposed...

62 Views
Message 319 of 397

Snoopy48 wrote:

rk9152 wrote:


  Did Yates not opposed the ban; did SCOTUS not approve the ban.

Yes, Yates opposed the ban.

 

No, SCOTUS did NOT approve that ban.


How petty!! The SCOTUS approved the intent after required adjustments - Yates fought the intent.

Report Inappropriate Content
Highlighted
Valued Social Butterfly

Re: More DEEP STATE Exposed...

80 Views
Message 320 of 397

rk9152 wrote:

ChasKy53 wrote:

rk9152 wrote:

ChasKy53 wrote:

Look over here, look over here, look over here. Distract distract distract.

 

The funny thing is that every time the Right makes a 'look over here' posting, trump or someone connected to him does something else that they need to distract from, it's never-ending !  

 

The "Deep State" is actually the Trump administration itself, Bannon and all. Mueller is uncovering more and more and getting closer and closer to Trump. All the distractions and 'look over here' posts in the world won't change that.

 

The surveillance and investigations rightly continue. Tic toc closer to trump, tic toc closer to trump, tic toc closer to trump.


Apparently you understanding of the meaning of the term "deep state" is as flawed as your understanding of the terms, Nazi, fascist, and alt-right.


Those I referenced as "Deep State" is no more inaccurate that what was posted in this erroneous topic

 

Tic toc closer to trump, tic to closer to trump .............


Would you care to define your meaning and contrast it with what you see as the topic meaning?


This topic is mis-titled, it should be titled 'Fallacy' .


"The only thing man learns from history is man learns nothing from history"
Report Inappropriate Content