[KaiserJeep]

I heartily agree, Populism is a good thing and provides something that the two party system does not: real choice.

But I have never been a registered D or R, and am distinctly anti-partisan.

Trump as a Populist can make real changes. The establishment candidate from either the D's or the R's can not. That Trump chose too assume the mantle of one of the two parties, rather than form a third party as did both Teddy R and Perot, reflects pragmatism - there was a talent vacuum in both parties, which will still be true in 2020, he has no real competition. But whoever runs as a Populist must oppose the incumbent establishment, which was at the time a Democrat named Obama, who had generated massive dissatisfaction - a perfect setting for a Populist to run as a member of the opposition party.

[Revi]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('KaiserJeep', 'I') heartily agree, Populism is a good thing and provides something that the two party system does not: real choice.

But I have never been a registered D or R, and am distinctly anti-partisan.

Trump as a Populist can make real changes. The establishment candidate from either the D's or the R's can not. That Trump chose too assume the mantle of one of the two parties, rather than form a third party as did both Teddy R and Perot, reflects pragmatism - there was a talent vacuum in both parties, which will still be true in 2020, he has no real competition. But whoever runs as a Populist must oppose the incumbent establishment, which was at the time a Democrat named Obama, who had generated massive dissatisfaction - a perfect setting for a Populist to run as a member of the opposition party.

[Revi]

We have been through this many times before. We need someone who can campaign. I am obviously not a fan of our present leader, but he does know how to campaign.

[Plantagenet]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Revi', ' ')We need someone who can campaign. I am obviously not a fan of our present leader, but he does know how to campaign.

[Newfie]

Joe lost my support when he came out for Obama’s “all the above” energy approach.

AOC was tight to call BS on him.

[Plantagenet]

Russian sources of the Steele "Pissgate" dossier now revealed

steele-dossier-sources

Steele identified at least some of the Russian sources he got the Pissgate dossier from.

Soo-prise Soo-prise, the fake info in the dossier came directly from high level people linked to the Kremlin and to Russian intelligence agencies

Dossier author Christopher Steele identified a former Russian spy chief and a top adviser to Russian President Vladimir Putin as being involved in handling potentially compromising information about President Donald Trump, State Department notes show.

In her notes, State Department official Kathleen Kavalec also referred to the two Russians — former Russian foreign intelligence chief Vyacheslav Trubnikov and Putin aide Vladislav Surkov — as “sources.”....the notes are significant because they are the first government documents that show Steele discussing potential sources for the information in his dossier, which the former MI6 officer provided to the FBI.

Trubnikov also has links to Stefan Halper, an FBI informant who collected information from Trump campaign aides George Papadopoulos and Carter Page. Halper arranged for Trubnikov to visit intelligence seminars at the University of Cambridge in 2012 and 2015. He also tapped Trubnikov to contribute to a Pentagon study published in 2015.

So now we know Steele got the dossier material from very high level Russian intelligence agents and the Kremlin, and now we also know that anything that can be checked in the dossier has proven to be false. Its time to face facts---- the dossier is a clearly Russian disinformation scheme since we know it came from the highest levels of the Kremlin and Russian intelligence agencies and we know it is filled with disinformation.

Of course Mueller was too busy being duped by the Russians to actually look into the Russian sources of the Steele dossier, but thank goodness Mueller has made himself irrelevant and now AG Barr is now on the case and the facts are starting to come out.

Cheers!

[Newfie]

Source?

(Kind of ironic that I ask actually)

[Newfie]

Thoughts on Trump FISA record declassification?

And here is an interesting piece on relations between major players. Don’t know if it true, but interesting. Sounds a lot like some big organizations I worked in.

https://www.realclearinvestigations.com ... e_out.html

[Cog]

The CIA and FBI have repeatedly played the game of losing information, texts, emails, or simply saying they involve intelligence matter and can't be released. The reality is the information is embarrassing to them since it shows their involvement in this attempted coup. The Strozk and Page emails were purposely hidden from Congress until the OIG found them in their files. The FBI apparently lost their copies(Yeah right). AG Barr will have to do a lot of digging to get this damaging information. The Deep State protects itself at all costs and that has been going on for decades. He is going to have threaten people with subpoenas and jail time to get to the truth about it.

At the heart of the matter is a question. Was the investigation into the Trump campaign the result of a legitimate concern over foreign meddling in our election or was it a tool used by the former administration to destroy the incoming one? Guess it depends on who you trust as to what you believe.

My take on it is if this was a legit investigation, then someone should have been charged with colluding or conspiring with the Russians. Mueller did not find that nor did he charge anyone with it. So why was the investigation even began if there was no definitive evidence that such collusion existed?

[Plantagenet]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Cog', '
')
At the heart of the matter is a question. Was the investigation into the Trump campaign the result of a legitimate concern over foreign meddling in our election or was it a tool used by the former administration to destroy the incoming one? Guess it depends on who you trust as to what you believe.

My take on it is if this was a legit investigation, then someone should have been charged with colluding or conspiring with the Russians. Mueller did not find that nor did he charge anyone with it. So why was the investigation even began if there was no definitive evidence that such collusion existed?

[jedrider]

Trump’s War on the Constitution - Is it at a Breaking Poing?
https://truthout.org/articles/trumps-war-on-the-constitution-has-reached-a-breaking-point/

It may be at a breaking point, but this has been playing out for the last 20/40 years of Republican administrations and Clinton was no angel either.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'T')his moment is genuinely historic, an “inflection point” as described by Rep. Ted Lieu (D-California). “Either the Trump camp’s claims about executive power stand,” writes Esquire blogger Charles P. Pierce, “or the Constitution does.” What began with Richard Nixon and accelerated through Dick Cheney has come to full noxious bloom under Donald Trump. It is time for Speaker Pelosi and House Democrats to salvage this thought experiment we call a country, and to salvage the institution they serve while they still can. Impeachment is the way.

[Plantagenet]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('jedrider', 'I')mpeachment....impeachment.....

[jedrider]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Plantagenet', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('jedrider', 'I')mpeachment....impeachment.....

[Cog]

What unconstitutional behavior might that be? That sounds very vague to start impeachment proceedings. Where are the high crimes and misdemeanors that the Constitution refers to and to which Mueller found insufficient evidence to charge Trump with anything. Somehow I don't believe "Orange Man Bad" is something the American people are going to accept as a sufficient charge and specification. If the Democrats want Trump out so badly, we have an election next year to decide that.

It is not the role of the legislative branch to decide if the president's policies and executive orders are unconstitutional. That is the role of judiciary. The Congress has the power of the purse strings and that is sufficient to either fund the president's policies or to deny that funding.

[dissident]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Cog', 'W')hat unconstitutional behavior might that be? That sounds very vague to start impeachment proceedings. Where are the high crimes and misdemeanors that the Constitution refers to and to which Mueller found insufficient evidence to charge Trump with anything. Somehow I don't believe "Orange Man Bad" is something the American people are going to accept as a sufficient charge and specification. If the Democrats want Trump out so badly, we have an election next year to decide that.

It is not the role of the legislative branch to decide if the president's policies and executive orders are unconstitutional. That is the role of judiciary. The Congress has the power of the purse strings and that is sufficient to either fund the president's policies or to deny that funding.

[Newfie]

Sitting in a motel room, watched about 20 minutes of CNN in full Trump Derangement Syndrome seizure. Granted Trump attracts this shit and seems to encourage it. But no excuse. I suppose the acid commentators are just as bad.

The “news” has gotten totally abysmal.

[Revi]

I am much more focused on the environmental abominations that his administration is perpetrating every day. He's also got to be the sleaziest person that has ever occupied the office. His businesses have been propped up by the russians for many years now. When they want a favor, he's their man.

[Newfie]

Try reading a good bio of LBJ if you want to know sleazy. Or Nixon if you want to know narcissism.

But back to constraining the Presidents powers, it strikes me that every President since Carter (and maybe him) has expanded these powers to where they are far beyond what was intended by the Constitution. Obama’s attack on Libia and the drone strikes (assignation on a foreign countries soil) come to mind as excesses.

Cog, you have an opinion on that?

In any case I would be more impressed if Congress were to push in that front. Because they don’t I consider this all just s real time “Game of Thrones”. And we the people willing support which ever lord we are accustomed to.

[Tanada]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Newfie', 'T')ry reading a good bio of LBJ if you want to know sleazy. Or Nixon if you want to know narcissism.

But back to constraining the Presidents powers, it strikes me that every President since Carter (and maybe him) has expanded these powers to where they are far beyond what was intended by the Constitution. Obama’s attack on Libia and the drone strikes (assignation on a foreign countries soil) come to mind as excesses.

Cog, you have an opinion on that?

In any case I would be more impressed if Congress were to push in that front. Because they don’t I consider this all just s real time “Game of Thrones”. And we the people willing support which ever lord we are accustomed to.

[Newfie]

Correct, and thanks for pointing that out.

I don’t think that modifies my point that Congress is being very selective in what they are being outraged over.