Had enough yet

[dtwarren]

Currently, the only discernible acts of illegality, with publicly presented supporting evidence, arises out of the world of "illegal leaking."

When you use the term "illegal leaking" do you have a specific statute in mind or are you just going by the Trump camp's mantra that it was information that was leaked and therefore it is illegal?

[mark blazejewski]

When you use the term "illegal leaking" do you have a specific statute in mind or are you just going by the Trump camp's mantra that it was information that was leaked and therefore it is illegal?

OMG, apparently another lawyer whose seemingly waning practice provides him time to chase political enemies on Speak Up.

One wonders if you understand the use of the Scare Quote.

I did say, counsel "...the ONLY DISCERNIBLE acts of illegality, with publicly presented SUPPORTING evidence, arise out of the WORLD of "illegal leaks."

You may want to put down your used, dogged-eared copy of the US Code, grab a dictionary, or your friend Google, and check-out the definition of ONLY, DISCERNIBLE, SUPPORTING AND WORLD.

But to answer your question, yep, 18 U.S.C. 641.

[HipKat]

Obama and the Democrats screwed-up the nation's health insurance. The Democrats paid the price.

And the Republicans spent 7 years trying to repeal it and came up with several ways to screw it up worse. BTW, how great was health insurance before Obamacare again?

[mark blazejewski]

And the Republicans spent 7 years trying to repeal it and came up with several ways to screw it up worse. BTW, how great was health insurance before Obamacare again?

My insurance was fine. Sorry your's wasn't.

[mark blazejewski]

Obama and the Democrats screwed-up the nation's health insurance. The Democrats paid the price.

The Republicans won three elections pledging to fix it. With blame assigned to the Democrats, and with confidence having been placed in the Republican promise of an alternative, the Republicans MUST deliver.

Both sides can come out smelling like roses, if they get to work and stop flinging the s***.

But I'm not holding my breath, and that is why I think both sides suck.

The "Swamp" has been stirred-up some. Trump has called-out his own party on health insurance. Kudos.

Donald J. Trump ✔ @realDonaldTrump
If Republicans don't Repeal and Replace the disastrous ObamaCare, the repercussions will be far greater than any of them understand!
8:01 PM - 23 Jul 2017
15,579 15,579 Retweets 60,788 60,788 likes

[mark blazejewski]

mark blazejewskiQUOTE]To quickly and succinctly answer your question, yes I agree with coup theory.

As when Michael Corleone discharged Tom Hagen, Trump is gearing up to meet this coup head-on, and is in search of a "wartime consigliere."
President Trump knows what has to be done, and foresees that things may get rough.

The President is deploying his forces to destroy the coup. That includes distancing himself from Sesssions, so that, in the future, Sessions may more freely deal a retaliatory strike against Hillary Clinton, and surrounding himself with articulate loyalists to present his public case. (July 22, 2017).

THE PLOT THICKENS TODAY, July 24, 2017:

Donald J. Trump ✔ @realDonaldTrump
So why aren't the Committees and investigators, and of course our beleaguered A.G., looking into Crooked Hillarys crimes & Russia relations?
8:49 AM - 24 Jul 2017
9,699 9,699 Retweets 33,560 33,560 likes


HMMM???

The Manafort-Republican establishment connection suggests this coup does not operationally function under the exclusive control of the Democrat Party. Rather, it appears to be the collective efforts of some Republican establishment figures, and of other pro-New World Order, Globalist entities and elites.

Donald J. Trump ✔ @realDonaldTrump
As the phony Russian Witch Hunt continues, two groups are laughing at this excuse for a lost election taking hold, Democrats and Russians!
4:09 PM - 23 Jul 2017
17,617 17,617 Retweets 73,190 73,190 likes

HMMM???



Donald J. Trump ✔ @realDonaldTrump
It's very sad that Republicans, even some that were carried over the line on my back, do very little to protect their President.
4:14 PM - 23 Jul 2017
30,612 30,612 Retweets 113,635 113,635 likes


HMMM???

Yes, I believe there is an ongoing coup, and Trump is trying to deal with it.

[HipKat]

I was self employed. No way I could afford it for me and my 2 kids

[mark blazejewski]

IMHO,

As I suggested last week, I believe that Trump's attack on Sessions were aimed at putting public distance between the Attorney General and himself, in order to give the Justice Department more flexibility to pursue an HRC probe.

It is my opinion that if Trump wanted Sessions out, he would simply ask for his resignation, and Sessions would comply, and without a public circus.

I believe the public "argument" is only window dressing for an orchestrated plan to seemingly "pressure," in the interests of justice and fairness, Sessions into naming a special prosecutor, or special counsel, to investigate HRC.

The public argument would also serve to put Democrats on the spot, and force them to justify why HRC should not be investigated. Furthermore, it would pressure Trump's own Republicans to advocate such an investigation.

The supporting timeline:

(1) July 19: Trump says that he if he had prior knowledge that Sessions would have recused himself on the broad, clouded, and factually unsupported "Russia-collusion" issue, he would have never named him as A.G.

(2) July 20: While it is customary for Cabinet members to resign when they have lost the confidence of the President, Sessions dismissed resignation as an option.

(3) July 21: Spicer resigns for reasons arising out of the Scaramucci appointment.

Scarramucci is a hardline defender of, and advocate for Trump. Something akin to a "wartime consigliere." Scarramucci's appointment signaled Trump going over to the offensive against Democrats, establishment Republicans, and other Global entities and elitists.

(4) July 23: Trump "Tweets" that his own party is not standing behind him, and that the Democrats are laughing at the Republicans for their disloyalty:


Donald J. Trump ✔ @realDonaldTrump
As the phony Russian Witch Hunt continues, two groups are laughing at this excuse for a lost election taking hold, Democrats and Russians!
4:09 PM - 23 Jul 2017


Donald J. Trump ✔ @realDonaldTrump
It's very sad that Republicans, even some that were carried over the line on my back, do very little to protect their President.
4:14 PM - 23 Jul 2017

(5) July 24: Trump "Tweets" Sessions is "beleaguered" while calling for Congress, investigators and Sessions to look into HRC.

Donald J. Trump ✔ @realDonaldTrump
So why aren't the Committees and investigators, and of course our beleaguered A.G., looking into Crooked Hillarys crimes & Russia relations?
8:49 AM - 24 Jul 2017

The use of the word "beleaguered" is interesting. While it may mean "under pressure," it can also me "hemmed in." Therefore, Trump could be suggesting that Sessions' recusal will prevent him from pursuing HRC, but that HRC still needs to be investigated.

(6) July 25: Trump suggests that the HRC probe is compromised as is weighed in her favor:


Donald J. Trump‏Verified account @realDonaldTrump 1h1 hour ago
More
Problem is that the acting head of the FBI & the person in charge of the Hillary investigation, Andrew McCabe, got $700,000 from H for wife!



(7) July 25: Trump further "Tweets" that HRC is not being investigated in a strong and serious way, and Sessions needs to correct this:


Donald J. Trump‏Verified account @realDonaldTrump 2h2 hours ago
More
Attorney General Jeff Sessions has taken a VERY weak position on Hillary Clinton crimes (where are E-mails & DNC server) & Intel leakers!
8,863 replies5,361 retweets17,224 likes
Reply 8.9K Retweet 5.4K
Like 17K


Donald J. Trump‏Verified account @realDonaldTrump 2h2 hours ago
More
Ukrainian efforts to sabotage Trump campaign - "quietly working to boost Clinton." So where is the investigation A.G. @seanhannity



There is a great deal of talk about Sessions resigning. Personally, I do not think this is about a Sessions termination or resignation.

Consistent with my post on Saturday, this "Tweet-s*** storm" is setting the stage for a vigorous HRC investigation, what I referred to as "a retaliatory strike," and is intended to give the "beleaguered", or "hemmed in" Sessions a justifiable reason to launch such a strike, by naming a special counsel, who is not a predisposed HRC supporter.

To me, it sure looks like Trump and Scarammucci have gone over to the attack.



Just my thoughts.

[mark blazejewski]

IMHO,

As I suggested last week, I believe that Trump's attack on Sessions were aimed at putting public distance between the Attorney General and himself, in order to give the Justice Department more flexibility to pursue an HRC probe.

It is my opinion that if Trump wanted Sessions out, he would simply ask for his resignation, and Sessions would comply, and without a public circus.

I believe the public "argument" is only window dressing for an orchestrated plan to seemingly "pressure," in the interests of justice and fairness, Sessions into naming a special prosecutor, or special counsel, to investigate HRC.

The public argument would also serve to put Democrats on the spot, and force them to justify why HRC should not be investigated. Furthermore, it would pressure Trump's own Republicans to advocate such an investigation.

The supporting timeline:

(1) July 19: Trump says that he if he had prior knowledge that Sessions would have recused himself on the broad, clouded, and factually unsupported "Russia-collusion" issue, he would have never named him as A.G.

(2) July 20: While it is customary for Cabinet members to resign when they have lost the confidence of the President, Sessions dismissed resignation as an option.

(3) July 21: Spicer resigns for reasons arising out of the Scaramucci appointment.

Scarramucci is a hardline defender of, and advocate for Trump. Something akin to a "wartime consigliere." Scarramucci's appointment signaled Trump going over to the offensive against Democrats, establishment Republicans, and other Global entities and elitists.

(4) July 23: Trump "Tweets" that his own party is not standing behind him, and that the Democrats are laughing at the Republicans for their disloyalty:


Donald J. Trump ✔ @realDonaldTrump
As the phony Russian Witch Hunt continues, two groups are laughing at this excuse for a lost election taking hold, Democrats and Russians!
4:09 PM - 23 Jul 2017


Donald J. Trump ✔ @realDonaldTrump
It's very sad that Republicans, even some that were carried over the line on my back, do very little to protect their President.
4:14 PM - 23 Jul 2017

(5) July 24: Trump "Tweets" Sessions is "beleaguered" while calling for Congress, investigators and Sessions to look into HRC.

Donald J. Trump ✔ @realDonaldTrump
So why aren't the Committees and investigators, and of course our beleaguered A.G., looking into Crooked Hillarys crimes & Russia relations?
8:49 AM - 24 Jul 2017

The use of the word "beleaguered" is interesting. While it may mean "under pressure," it can also me "hemmed in." Therefore, Trump could be suggesting that Sessions' recusal will prevent him from pursuing HRC, but that HRC still needs to be investigated.

(6) July 25: Trump suggests that the HRC probe is compromised as is weighed in her favor:


Donald J. Trump‏Verified account @realDonaldTrump 1h1 hour ago
More
Problem is that the acting head of the FBI & the person in charge of the Hillary investigation, Andrew McCabe, got $700,000 from H for wife!



(7) July 25: Trump further "Tweets" that HRC is not being investigated in a strong and serious way, and Sessions needs to correct this:


Donald J. Trump‏Verified account @realDonaldTrump 2h2 hours ago
More
Attorney General Jeff Sessions has taken a VERY weak position on Hillary Clinton crimes (where are E-mails & DNC server) & Intel leakers!
8,863 replies5,361 retweets17,224 likes
Reply 8.9K Retweet 5.4K
Like 17K


Donald J. Trump‏Verified account @realDonaldTrump 2h2 hours ago
More
Ukrainian efforts to sabotage Trump campaign - "quietly working to boost Clinton." So where is the investigation A.G. @seanhannity



There is a great deal of talk about Sessions resigning. Personally, I do not think this is about a Sessions termination or resignation.

Consistent with my post on Saturday, this "Tweet-s*** storm" is setting the stage for a vigorous HRC investigation, what I referred to as "a retaliatory strike," and is intended to give the "beleaguered", or "hemmed in" Sessions a justifiable reason to launch such a strike, by naming a special counsel, who is not a predisposed HRC supporter.

To me, it sure looks like Trump and Scarammucci have gone over to the attack.



Just my thoughts.

Let me add one thing: IF TRUMP DOES NOT HAVE SOMETHING LIKE THIS IN MIND, AND IS ACTING BY A "NEVER UNSPOKEN THOUGHT" IMPULSE(S), THEN I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE HELL HE IS DOING.

To pick a fight with your own AG publicly, without a a predetermined purpose, makes no sense. If that is the case, perhaps the "Deep State" is "GAS LIGHTING" him?

[Lee Chowaniec]

Hey, Mark B.
Great post as usual (#368)

To put it bluntly, the left and his own party members think they can **** on Trump forever without risk of retaliation and exposure. They may succeed in getting rid of him in the future as the odds are stacked heavily against him, but before that happens there will be a lot of the sins from politicos from both major parties exposed and their careers in jeopardy.

Has he not repeatedly stated that he is there to drain the swamp, and it doesn’t seem to matter from which party the alligators are from. If they think he is going silently into the night, they are dumber and more corrupt than I thought – if that’s possible.

And finally after eight months Uncle Chucky believes the Dems message was ill conceived.

[HipKat]

Jeeezuz, you people on the right and you're ridiculous catch phrases (fueled by the so called Fake Media you loathe so much - another catch phrase). Do you even know what "Drain the swamp" means?? Trust me, no swamp has been drained, except the alligators Trump stocked it with, so far.

Investigate HRC?? Seriously?? How do you possibly put 2 and 2 together to come up with that gem?? Even The Don hasn't mentioned her in while. HRC is gone, out of the picture, no longer relevant.

The only thing Trump wants is the Russia "thing" gone and if he gets rid of Sessions, it'll be to find a replacement that will either dump Muller or at least handcuff him.

[mark blazejewski]

[QUOTE=HipKat;1735942]
I[QUOTE]nvestigate HRC?? Seriously?? [/QUOTE

Trump should have never said he wanted to let her off the hook. SHE IS A CROOK! SHE IS A LIAR, AND SHE IS A M......, it is one word, you fill in the blacks.

[mark blazejewski]

HRC is gone, out of the picture, no longer relevant.

She is not politically relevant. Not everything is politics HipKat. Her political irrelevance has nothing to do with her accountability for possible law breaking. Did you ever hear of the law, is law breaking only your concern when it deals with Trump?

The only thing Trump wants is the Russia "thing" gone and if he gets rid of Sessions, it'll be to find a replacement that will either dump Muller or at least handcuff him.

The Russia thing at this point is a contrived nothing burger. But, if the left is dedicated to the rule of law, regarding the Russian suspicions, they must be equally dedicated to pursuing all of the leaks, HRC, DNC crap. Isn't that true?


I am merely harmonizing (1) Trump's public criticisms of Sessions, (2) Trump's apparent reluctance to fire Sessions, (3) Sessions' apparent decision not to resign, and (4) The content of the Tweets.

I may be wrong, just as I said: "IMHO." Sorry for thinking.



[/QUOTE]

[mark blazejewski]

Hey, Mark B.
Great post as usual (#368)

To put it bluntly, the left and his own party members think they can **** on Trump forever without risk of retaliation and exposure. They may succeed in getting rid of him in the future as the odds are stacked heavily against him, but before that happens there will be a lot of the sins from politicos from both major parties exposed and their careers in jeopardy.

Has he not repeatedly stated that he is there to drain the swamp, and it doesn’t seem to matter from which party the alligators are from. If they think he is going silently into the night, they are dumber and more corrupt than I thought – if that’s possible.

And finally after eight months Uncle Chucky believes the Dems message was ill conceived.

Yes to all of the above Mr. C.

[mark blazejewski]

mark blazejewski IMHO,

The public argument would also serve to put Democrats on the spot, and force them to justify why HRC should not be investigated. Furthermore, it would pressure Trump's own Republicans to advocate such an investigation.

From "The Washington Examiner," July 26, 2017:



House conservatives gunning for probe of James Comey and Hillary Clinton
by Josh Siegel | Jul 25, 2017, 8:13 PM


A group of House conservatives has filed an amendment asking the Justice Department for information related to former FBI Director James Comey's handling of the Hillary Clinton email case.

The amendment, first reported by the Washington Post, demands information on "leaks by James B. Comey," on "the propriety and consequence of immunity deals given to possible Hillary Clinton co-conspirators" and Comey's decision to "usurp the authority of then-Attorney General Loretta Lynch in his unusual announcement that criminal charges would not be brought against" Clinton.

Rep. Andy Biggs, R-Ariz., a co-sponsor of the amendment, told the Washington Examiner he aims to "push back" against "accusations" that are distracting from the agenda of President Trump and Republicans in Congress.

"The bottom line is we are tired of passively letting people make accusations to overcrowd our agenda and they ought to respond to claims we know exist about their misconduct," Biggs said in an interview, referring to Clinton and other Democrats targeted in the amendment, including Susan Rice, former President Barack Obama's national security adviser.

The amendment requires the Justice Department to appoint a special counsel to explore the Justice Department and FBI's handling of the Clinton email investigation.

"For the past several years, Democrats have obstructed justice and blocked every Congressional investigation imaginable," said Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, another sponsor of the amendment, in a statement to the Washington Examiner. "Both parties have criticized James Comey over the past year for his performance as FBI director. Even Sen. Feinstein [Dianne] says there should be an investigation into Loretta Lynch and James Comey's handling of the Clinton investigation. Let's have a special counsel for that and see how serious congressional Democrats are about getting to the truth."

The amendment, also sponsored by Reps. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., and Mike Johnson, R-La., will be attached to a bill from Rep. Pramila Jayapal, D-Wash., that requests the Justice Department provide documents related to Comey's firing.

In recent days, Trump has complained on Twitter that Attorney General Jeff Sessions has not moved to investigate Clinton on other issues unrelated to her use of a private email server while she was secretary of state. However, when he was president-elect, Trump said that he would not pursue a new investigation of Clinton.

"I don't want to hurt the Clintons, I really don't," Trump told reporters in November. "She went through a lot and suffered greatly in many different ways, and I am not looking to hurt them at all. The campaign was vicious."

The conservative-authored amendment asks the Justice Department to explain why the FBI did not further investigate Clinton for "selling access to the U.S. State Department through Clinton Foundation donations."

Biggs insisted he and his colleagues did not file their amendment to do the bidding of Trump.

"This is a matter of seeking justice," Biggs said. "It's what this is always about. If you don't seek justice, people lose faith and confidence in their representatives."




Leaders Create Leaders S2 EP10: Millennial Gamechangers - ft. Peter Voogd
Watch Full Screen
In addition to Clinton and Comey, the amendment targets Rice, who some conservatives argue inappropriately sought the identities of people close to Trump -- in a process known as "unmasking" -- whose communications were captured after the election in surveillance of foreigners by U.S. spy agencies.

The conservative co-sponsors ask the Justice Department to say whether Comey had advance knowledge of Rice's unmasking request.

Other information sought includes communication between Comey and special counsel Robert Mueller before the Senate Intelligence Committee hearing last month in which the former FBI director described his interactions with Trump, and evidence of "any or all" leaks by Comey to New York Times reporter Michael Schmidt dating to 1993.

Schmidt broke the story detailing memos that Comey wrote about his conversations with Trump