triplehorn

Zuck claims he first became aware of Cambridge Analytica in March 2018 ?!!! what a whopping bald-faced lie. You know he knows he lied as he comes back to it unprompted attempting a plausible hedge after AOC let him hang himself with that initial lie. Vile.

There will be more formal reporting coming out shortly, but here's a thread on the Second Circuit hearing oral arguments re Trump's tax returns being turned over to Manhattan DA (not SDNY, not NYAG) cont.

GOP: "nothing matters"

Re impeaching Barr, he's got some splainin' to do.

Greg Sargent in WaPo re Bill Taylor's testimony yesterday and Bill Barr: "...The testimony from Taylor, the acting U.S. ambassador to Ukraine, also contains a key revelation about Attorney General William P. Barr — one that provides an occasion to revisit his role in this scandal, and hints at how Barr will likely continue perverting the U.S. government machinery to help Trump get away with it. Taylor’s key mention of Barr comes in a very damning passage. Taylor recounted that he’d learned that Gordon Sondland, the U.S. ambassador to the European Union, had informed Ukraine that the frozen military aid would be conditioned on launching the “investigations” Trump wanted. Taylor then testified that on a call, Sondland stated that Trump told him he wanted Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelensky to “publicly” pledge investigations -- which would undercut the fact of Russian sabotage of the 2016 election and help smear potential 2020 opponent Joe Biden. Taylor claimed Sondland told him the money was dependent on this. Taylor then adds: We also discussed the possibility that the Ukrainian Prosecutor General, rather than President Zelenskyy, would make a statement about investigations, potentially in coordination with Attorney General Barr’s probe into the investigation of interference in the 2016 elections. Two senior U.S. officials seriously discussed a plan in which the attorney general of the United States would publicly coordinate with a foreign government to help Trump absolve Russia of culpability for an attack on our political system, by helping to repudiate our intelligence services’ conclusion about that culpability. cont."

According to Clint Watts, Tulsi is neither an asset nor an agent, she's an "agent of influence". Clint defines the different FBI terminologies and explains what's going on with Gabbard in a segment tonight. starts at 34min in:

I’d like to see the House do a two-fer. Pence is not clean in this Ukraine matter. He can also get indicted sitting office unlike potus if I’m not mistaken. Would like to see a special one unsealed for the VP

Unless I’m mistaken, if Trump resigns it’s Pence. If Pence were to resign first, any replacement would have to be confirmed by majorities in both House and Senate. So no Ivanka. Keep in mind Pence is up to his gargler in all this.

Page 11 and 12 and to the end have the meat. 🚨Page 11 gasp inducer--> Taylor on Sondland: "He said President Trump wanted President Zelensky "in a public box" by making a public statement about ordering such investigations." Extortion. Blackmail. Trump only cares that a PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENT is made by Z into Bidens and 2016 election interference, and to specifically state he "will leave no stone unturned." It's the public announcement that was so desired to use to manipulate the American public, not the outcome of any investigation occurring out of the public eye until conclusion. Trump is orchestrating 'black propaganda', a serious crime, by extorting Z to make a public announcement without disclosing Trump has anything to do with initiating it. Taylor goes into significant detail on several occasions to explain how he came to know hoe "investigations" meant Burisma, Bidens, and 2016 Ukraine election intereference. This treasonous corrupt fuckery by Trump is everything I already understood, just with proof. Get the fuck out you fucking piece of shit.

Tulsi as running mate is the kind of feeling his gut desperation move that the tv celebrity would make. Nothing more. But thanks Hillary !

The vibe I get is that Tulsi as a third party candidate would likely pull away some Trump voters...unless Trump tapped her to replace lame ass Pence in which case she’d pull some Dem voters to Dotus. Seems like Hilldawg threw a shoe in any fantasy about that happening. Instead of someone like Tulsi lending a veil of credibility to Trump in the face of mobbed up Russophilia, now Tulsi accepting would all but rekindle and confirm the controversy about her. fwiw, Nikki Haley is not dumb enough, corrupt enough, (or culti enough) to touch that invitation.

My understanding is that impeachment is a political process, while criminal law is much less so. Your criticisms miss the important subject of the judges - a corrupt GOP Senate. Shell casings, powder residue, and stained hands are being systematically neutralized, scrubbed, and swept away. In a case of impeachment, a smoking gun has more impact on the conduct of the 'judges' than it does the certainty about a criminal's guilt. And scoffing at "endless and breathless conspiracying" ignores the basic reality that wholesale shifts in public opinion are incremental and can take a long time, and involve many apparent dead-ends even if it's only a result of obstruction. That eventual public shift is an important pre-set to have before even being able to accept the significance of a smoking gun. So really, for impeachment in this case, you need both - a major shift in public sentiment and a smoking gun to then put the judges on notice. Without the shift in public sentiment, judges don't worry so much about misinterpreting the evidence. It's also a lot easier to jape about "breathless conspiracying" given a backdrop of mass lying and obstruction of justice.

c'mon now, let's get those Trump tax returns and bank financials

all 3 VVV

I don't know what to make of Tad Devine. Here he is grouped (in the urea colored shirt) with Paul Manafort and GRU-linked Konstantin Kilimnik. Devine was known to have been in touch with Kilimnik as recently as 2014. I guess that places Devine a lot closer in time to Bernie than it does Kerry in '04, but perhaps more notably it places him with Bernie after his Ukraine work with Manafort and a guy linked to Russian military intelligence. So yeah, not FARA violations. you're good to go, Bernie.

It’s why I referenced ‘swamp’. No one heard of or knew about FARA violations until Mueller rolled through. Bernie’s coterie was no different.

Tony Podesta says hi

Hey, Bernie Would Know ! John Haltiwanger Feb 26, 2019 Several of Sen. Bernie Sander's top advisers abruptly broke ties with the Vermont senator's 2020 campaign on Tuesday, including one adviser with ties to former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort. [...] The departure comes after increased public scrutiny into Devine's past work with Manafort as a consultant in Ukraine, NBC reported. Manafort and Devine worked together to help the pro-Russia Ukrainian leader Viktor Yanukovych in 2010. Yanukovych was eventually ousted during the Ukrainian revolution in 2014 and now lives in exile in Russia. Devine, who was chief strategist for Sanders in 2016, last year revealed he's cooperated with special counsel Robert Mueller's investigation into Russian election interference. "The Special Counsel has asked Tad Devine to appear and testify about media consulting work on past political campaigns in Ukraine," DML said in a statement in July 2018. "We have been assured by the Special Counsel’s Office that we have no legal exposure, did not act unlawfully, and that Tad is testifying as a fact witness." cont. hi Bernie, nice little swamp you had there.

^^^ YES. This is so vitally important right now. It's long overdue, and now has metastasized into having real time urgent national security implications. Transnational criminality involving global banking and corporations, large and small, and mass money laundering, is the story of our time. It's the lifeblood that both sustains the global markets tied to human misery, and the river that undercuts societies and systems of government that progress from the foundation of the rule of law. darkness versus light.

and not answer the question twice. This isn't hard.

You're being dishonest and provocative, dude. Why ?

No need to read past the first sentence. I'm no political scientist, but a casual understanding informs that you've got it backwards and wrong. Horseshoe theory speaks more to psychological bearings than policy. The further left or right you go, you tend to find more ideological purists, less tolerance, and greater vulnerability to accepting an ends justifies the means over a process that is more moderate, diverse, and gradual to change. The former is more prone to acceding to totalitarianism, and systemic breakdown and chaos for change, i.e. fascism. Combine into someone being an agent of systemic chaos with being a con artist skilled at inciting and duping people and the result is that a wider net is cast, i.e. Trump.

Right? No one here is a Clinton apologist. And in contrast to pre-2016, FARA violations are now taken as very serious matter, in actuality, as a result of the unprecedented attack by Russia on and foreign interference in our 2016 election. We ARE in different times today, not entirely dissimilar from post-9/11, and for Gabbard to play dumb rope-a-dope with this shit is a telltale flashing red beacon. She needs to leave.

Here's a game. A Scooby snack for anyone who can give three examples of Gabbard being critical of Putin/Russia to promote her policy views. Three examples to counter these where she praises Putin/Russia as a means to attack our own. weird huh.