Sharyl Atkisson (who was herself surveilled by the Obama administration) explains.
Seems like Fractured Fairy Tales were funnier when I was a kid.
6 thoughts on “The FBI’s Fractured Fairy Tale”
Comments are closed.
Sharyl Atkisson (who was herself surveilled by the Obama administration) explains.
Seems like Fractured Fairy Tales were funnier when I was a kid.
Comments are closed.
Great comment on why would Russia collude with Trump, when everyone including Russia thought Trump would lose. Odd the FBI was worried about such a crime with the least likely target.
Odd the FBI was worried about such a crime with the least likely target.
Ahhh but was he the only target? The spying on the Trump campaign began either before or just after he announced his candidacy and the TDS had not yet set in. Because he won, the focus is on him now, but was the spying about stopping Trump or about rigging the election for Hillary?
The spying didn’t take place because of anything intrinsic to Trump because the goal wasn’t stopping Trump but helping Hillary and the Democrats. I think we will find that the Obama administration didn’t just weaponize the intelligence community against the Trump campaign but all the Republicans, or at least the top 5.
It is kind of amazing that all the Democracy Dies in Darkness jounolists and lefties rioting in the streets couldn’t spare a square for Attkinsson when the Obama administration used the intelligence community to attack her.
Instead we get a lot of claims that she deserved what ever happened to her professionally just like Dinesh deserved it and the Tea Party deserved it.
Apparently when congress decides to exercise their constitutional powers of oversight, the FBI can subpoena emails, phone records, and documents from not only congresspeople but their staff. http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/06/12/rosenstein-threatened-to-subpoena-gop-led-committee-in-chilling-clash-over-records-emails-show.html
Where was this dedication when Obama didn’t turn in the emails from his secret email accounts?
Actually, Rosenstein makes the point as if he was a private citizen. The problem he has is that a decision to hold him in contempt of Congress is already a public record, and while he can try to demand individual members retain other communications, his suggestion that he has to prove the allegation false with that information is dumb.
First, the defendant doesn’t have to prove anything, so he lacks a basic understanding of our freedoms. Second, I repeat that the decision to hold a person in contempt is discussed in the open. Members could caucus in private, but the vote is an open record and the grounds for contempt would be discussed in debate. Finally, try telling a judge you’ll subpoena their private emails and calls for holding you in contempt of court.
Congress should not put up with this. The easy solution – and one that is entirely justified, IMHO – would be to disestablish the FBI.