Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins
Forum Rules and Guidelines

Moose & Squirrel v Boris & Natasha: what's the deal with the rooskies and trumpland?

Jumbo

By Jumbo
in The Tailgate

 Share

Recommended Posts

visionary

visionary

Posted
Posted (edited)

https://www.politico.com/story/2018/05/22/republican-fundraiser-hacked-emails-ap-603404

Quote

The impasse sets up a potential legal standoff over press protections at a time when political battles are increasingly being waged via leaks of hacked data. A copy of the subpoena obtained by POLITICO demands the AP turn over all its information about its sources, including their names, along with information about how the AP obtained the hacked emails.

 

While several outlets — including the Wall Street Journal and the Hollywood Reporter — have published articles based on Broidy’s stolen emails, the businessman is singling out the AP for a subpoena because of the lengths the outlet has gone to conceal the identity of its sources, according to a person familiar with Broidy’s thinking.

 

While other outlets have provided Broidy with the original PDF documents they received containing Broidy’s emails, the AP appears to have only provided Broidy with scans of printouts of the emails, according to the person. Original PDF documents contain metadata that can be helpful for forensic analysis when attempting to trace the source of a hack, while scans of printouts lack such metadata.

 

The subpoena comes as part of a March lawsuit Broidy brought in a California federal court against the government of Qatar, Republican operative Nick Muzin and Muzin’s firm Stonington Strategies, which has registered as an agent of Qatar. The lawsuit accuses Qatar of hacking Broidy’s emails and alleges that Muzin aided in their dissemination. The AP is not a party to the lawsuit.

Quote

Still, federal law prevents the enforcement of subpoenas of news organizations unless the information is crucial to a case and those seeking the information have exhausted all other means of obtaining it, according to Douglas Mirell, a media lawyer at Greenberg Glusker in Los Angeles.

 

For that reason, Broidy faces an uphill battle in convincing a court to implement his subpoena, Mirell said.

 

“The AP has a strong case for precluding the disclosure of this information,” he told POLITICO.

 

Laura Handman, a media lawyer at Davis, Wright, Tremaine, added that under certain circumstances, state shield laws can even apply in federal court proceedings.

 

Edited by visionary
Link to comment
Share on other sites
NoCalMike

NoCalMike

Posted
Posted (edited)

This entire "investigation of the investigation" is another distraction that the media is running with. It is now getting as much air time as the legitimate investigation.  

 

The entire "spy" narrative has been carefully crafted to make it seem like someone was just placed there out of the blue to collect info, when any halfwit can come to the obvious conclusion that the Trump campaign was doing some shady things, information was shared with the FBI, and they felt it was worth looking into.  

 

There is no story.

Edited by NoCalMike
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Momma There Goes That Man

Momma There Goes That Man

Posted
Posted

If anything, this person was approached by the FBI in order to protect Trump. It was a counterintelligence investigation. They believed there was a potential Russian agent or that someone in the campaign had been compromised. This informant was there to confirm that, not to blast trump but to alert the FBI of the validity of this danger so it could

be addressed. 

 

But trump doesnt understand how anything works and knows his supporters are too stupid to understand as well so he can just frame this narrative however he wants.  

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
No Excuses

No Excuses

Posted
Posted

Alex Jones is our President.

 

 

We are ****ed because this loon will stop at nothing to protect himself. And about 30% of the voters will blindly follow along with his vicious assaults on institutions that check his power and corruption. 

 

I said a few pages ago that this is creeping fascism. I think we are now officially underway in determining if our democracy prevails or not. 

  • Like 3
  • Sad 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
No Excuses

No Excuses

Posted
Posted (edited)

He’s following the Erdogan playbook. Erdogan was under corruption investigation in Turkey in 2013. He proclaimed a “deep state conspiracy”, fired the investigators, launched investigations into his political rivals and purged prosecutors. 

 

If anyone ever wondered how authoritarians gain power and become dictators, this is how they do it. They destroy non-political institutions of law enforcement and justice, and they do it by convincing a segment of the country that mysterious “deep state” forces are out to get them. 

 

Is there anyone left in the GOP base who doesn’t want to surrender this countries institutions to protect a supremely awful person like Donald Trump? This really can’t be worth it. 

Edited by No Excuses
  • Like 8
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Larry

Larry

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, No Excuses said:

We are ****ed because this loon will stop at nothing to protect himself. And about 30% of the voters will blindly follow along with his vicious assaults on institutions that check his power and corruption. 

 

I've got to say, I'm about to go postal if I hear the phrase "no collusion" one more time.  

 

I mean, to start with, it's like the sixth denial they're trying to use, after the first five lies got shown to be lies.  

 

It started with the Russian spy agency hacking the DNC to try to find dirt.  

 

Trump's response was to claim that it wasn't Russia.  

 

The IC then went public, flat out stating that it was unanimous that yes, it was Russia.  

 

Trump then tried to convince people that "well, Putin says it wasn't Russia, too".  

 

IC:  It was Russia.  And seriously, you're trying to point at "Putin denies something" as some kind of proof?  

 

Trump:  Well, there was no contact between my campaign and Russia.  

 

IC:  Seriously?  We've got recordings of your campaign staff on the phone with the Russian ambassador. 

Your son was trying to set up meetings in the Russian embassy, so he could use Russian crypto gear to communicate with Russia without us monitoring it. 

The three top people in your campaign cleared time in their schedules, a week before the GOP convention, so that they could meet with a Russian lawyer.  

 

Trump:  Well, the meeting was to discuss something else.  

 

IC:  We have your own internal emails, in which your son stated that the Russian lawyer was there as a representative of the Russian government.  

He stated that the purpose of the meeting was to solicit the Russian government's help with your campaign.  

(And the other two top heads of your campaign cleared their schedule, to make time for the meeting.)  

And the makeup of the meeting makes it clear that the purpose was to negotiate, not just to receive info.  

If it was just a case of Russia offering something, without anything in return, then the top three people in your campaign don't need to be there.  

 

And, obviously, a quid pro quo was agreed to.  

One week after that meeting, your campaign successfully modified the GOP platform, to remove any punishment of Russia for invading and conquering a Baltic country.  

And two weeks after that, Russia delivered the first of their nothing burgers that they obtained from the DNC, via their illegal activities.  

 

Trump:  No collusion.  

 

IC:  Actually, that is collusion.  

 

Trump:  No collusion. 

(Meaning "well, you don't have actual recordings of the words spoken at that meeting. 

And Trump wasn't there personally.  Just the three top people in his campaign.")  

 

IC:  Well, you finally found something that we aren't able (or willing) to publicly prove is untrue.  

  • Like 5
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Larry

Larry

Posted
Posted
Just now, AsburySkinsFan said:

Meanwhile the Republucan Congress sits on their collective asses actibg like this is all ok.

 

They're not sitting on their asses.  They're actively turning the crank on the lie machine.  

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Momma There Goes That Man

Momma There Goes That Man

Posted
Posted

Study: Sean Hannity spent the last year laying the groundwork for an authoritarian response to the Russia probe

I reviewed all 487 of Sean Hannity’s segments about the first year of Robert Mueller's investigation. Here’s what I found.

https://www.mediamatters.org/blog/2018/05/23/study-sean-hannity-spent-last-year-laying-groundwork-authoritarian-response-russia-probe/220281

 

Quote

To watch Hannity’s broadcast over the last year is to plunge into a strikingly paranoid vision of America today.

“A soft coup is underway right here in the United States of America,” Hannity said last June, “in an attempt to overturn November's election results and forcibly remove a duly elected president from office, sinister forces quickly aligning in what is becoming now, in my mind, a clear and present danger.”

 

Specifically, Hannity claims that the leadership of the FBI, aided by Democrats and the media, conspired during the 2016 election to exonerate Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton of the crimes they knew she had committed. At the same time, Hannity alleges that this cabal fabricated the narrative that Trump had colluded with Russia in order to prevent him from becoming president -- and that once Trump won the election despite these efforts to manipulate voters, his enemies continued to try to drive him from office. This narrative bears little relationship to reality: In the months leading up to the election, the FBI kept its investigation into whether the Trump campaign collaborated with the Kremlin’s effort to support his candidacy a secret while repeatedly calling attention to the Clinton probe, likely costing the Democrat the presidency.

 

Nonetheless, the sinister cabal of Democrats, journalists, and the “deep state” are the villains of this story. And in Hannity’s telling, the host and his rotating cast of guests are the only thing standing between Trump and his annihilation.

 

Hannity presents his show as the only venue willing to tell the truth about the story, casting reporting about Trump, Russia, and the 2016 election not as the result of serious journalism, but as part of a plot against the president.

 

The Fox host is adamant that any suggestion of collusion between Trump associates and Russian officials is the stuff of “black-helicopter, tinfoil-hat conspiracy.” Instead, Hannity claims that the “real collusion” happened between Russia and the Democrats, in the form of various broadly discredited pseudoscandals.

 

Hannity’s attempts to exonerate Trump are disturbing enough. But it’s his attempts to turn his audience against a set of new enemies that are truly dangerous.

 

In Hannity’s telling, Mueller, a Republican who served as a Marine officer during the Vietnam War and was first appointed to run the FBI by George W. Bush, is running a duplicitous “witch hunt.” His team is composed of vicious Democratic partisans, and his personal relationship with former FBI Director James Comey is both suspect and actually illegal.

 

This counternarrative of Hannity’s, repeated ad nauseum over the months, is designed to lead his audience inexorably to a simple conclusion: “Mueller's probe is tainted. Hillary is a criminal.” And Trump is justified in taking drastic action, including shutting down the investigation into his activities and then prosecuting and jailing his opponents, to protect himself.

 

Hannity’s story is in step with the president’s own crude preferences and biases. Trump prefers an authoritarian model for law enforcement, in which the job of the Justice Department is to protect him and punish his enemies. Hannity’s show is providing Trump with both constant encouragement to act on those impulses, and is a powerful propaganda tool urging his base to support him if he does. Hannity benefits in turn from his private access to the president and Trump’s public displays of support for his program.

 

This joint strategy is working. Hannity’s ratings have never been higher. And while polls show broad support for Mueller’s probe, among Fox viewers and Republican voters, the Fox host and his colleagues, in collaboration with the president, have successfully poisoned the well.

 

The result is a very dangerous moment, in which the president could act on Hannity’s entreaties for authoritarian action -- and escape unscathed thanks to the supine congressional Republicans and the unyielding supportthe host and his allies have inculcated for the last year in Fox’s legions of viewers.

 

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...