Skip to main content
No. of Recommendations: 18
https://www.judicialwatch.org/press-room/press-releases/fede...

United States District Judge Royce C. Lamberth ruled that discovery can begin in Hillary Clinton’s email scandal. Obama administration senior State Department officials, lawyers, and Clinton aides will now be deposed under oath. Senior officials — including Susan Rice, Ben Rhodes, Jacob Sullivan, and FBI official E.W. Priestap — will now have to answer Judicial Watch’s written questions under oath.

Judicial Watch’s discovery will seek answers to:

Whether Clinton intentionally attempted to evade the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) by using a non-government email system;
whether the State Department’s efforts to settle this case beginning in late 2014 amounted to bad faith; and
whether the State Department adequately searched for records responsive to Judicial Watch’s FOIA request.


https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-01-16/federal-judge-orde...
Incredibly, Justice Department attorneys admit in a filing opposing Judicial Watch’s limited discovery that “Counsel for State contacted the counsel of some third parties that Plaintiff originally included in its draft discovery proposal to obtain their client’s position on being deposed.” This collusion occurred despite criticism from the Court that the DOJ engaged in “chicanery” to cover up misconduct and that career employees in the State and Justice Departments may have “colluded to scuttle public scrutiny of Clinton, skirt FOIA, and hoodwink this Court.”
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 4
Look a squirrel!!!!!!!

Yet another sad attempt to try and distract the sheple from the fact that the current administration is up to their necks in corruption, scandal, and ineptness.

The real question is, how stupid does a person have to be to keep falling for it?
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 16
Look a squirrel!!!!!!!

Yet another sad attempt to try and distract the sheple


Funny that’s the reaction I have to the NYTimes headline screamed: “F.B.I. Opened Inquiry Into Whether Trump Was Secretly Working on Behalf of Russia.”

Evidence?

NYT readers had to get down to paragraph 9 to read: “No evidence has emerged publicly that Mr. Trump was secretly in contact with or took direction from Russian government officials.” Four paragraphs later, the Times’ writers noted that, “A vigorous debate has taken shape among former law enforcement officials … over whether FBI investigators overreacted.”


https://original.antiwar.com/mcgovern/2019/01/16/russia-gate...
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 5
“No evidence has emerged publicly that Mr. Trump was secretly in contact with or took direction from Russian government officials.”




And yet Trump's personal lawyer just admitted there was collusion.


https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2019/01/16/rudy...
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 7
And yet Trump's personal lawyer just admitted there was collusion.

Actually he just clarified that Trump did not collude. That he had no way of knowing what everyone in the campaign did. That will revealed in the Mueller report perhaps.

Amerika gets it’s panties in a twist with possible foreign influence. But is quite fine with US definite election intervention throughout the world.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/02/17/sunday-review/russia-isnt...
Similar efforts were undertaken in elections in wartime Iraq and Afghanistan, not always with success. After Hamid Karzai was re-elected president of Afghanistan in 2009, he complained to Robert Gates, then the secretary of defense, about the United States’ blatant attempt to defeat him, which Mr. Gates calls in his memoir “our clumsy and failed putsch.”

At least once the hand of the United States reached boldly into a Russian election. American fears that Boris Yeltsin would be defeated for re-election as president in 1996 by an old-fashioned Communist led to an overt and covert effort to help him, urged on by President Bill Clinton. It included an American push for a $10 billion International Monetary Fund loan to Russia four months before the voting and a team of American political consultants (though some Russians scoffed when they took credit for the Yeltsin win).

But what does democracy mean? Can it include secretly undermining an authoritarian ruler or helping challengers who embrace democratic values? How about financing civic organizations?

I guess it means whatever the Deep State establishment elites want it to mean.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
"Funny that’s the reaction I have to the NYTimes headline screamed: “F.B.I. Opened Inquiry Into Whether Trump Was Secretly Working on Behalf of Russia.”

I thought that was a big nothingburger. That is the difference between the two of us.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 7
”Funny that’s the reaction I have to the NYTimes headline screamed: “F.B.I. Opened Inquiry Into Whether Trump Was Secretly Working on Behalf of Russia.”

I thought that was a big nothingburger. That is the difference between the two of us.


No the difference is that I believe the Mueller report will turn out to much more of a nothing burger than this probe.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 2
No the difference is that I believe the Mueller report will turn out to much more of a nothing burger than this probe.


Cohen's testimony next month about Trump's instructions to commit illegal acts should be enlightening. Between now and then, Trump will be claiming he never met the guy.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
United States District Judge Royce C. Lamberth ruled that discovery can begin in Hillary Clinton’s email scandal. Obama administration senior State Department officials, lawyers, and Clinton aides will now be deposed under oath. Senior officials — including Susan Rice, Ben Rhodes, Jacob Sullivan, and FBI official E.W. Priestap — will now have to answer Judicial Watch’s written questions under oath.

Judicial Watch’s discovery will seek answers to:

Whether Clinton intentionally attempted to evade the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) by using a non-government email system;
whether the State Department’s efforts to settle this case beginning in late 2014 amounted to bad faith; and
whether the State Department adequately searched for records responsive to Judicial Watch’s FOIA request.



Tom Fitton is my hero!!

Kathleen
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 5
Amerika gets it’s panties in a twist with possible foreign influence.


And yet the left has no problem with illegal immigrants influencing elections.

Kathleen
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
73%

The over/under on the percent of questions they answer with 'I don't recall'. Some will take a serious run at James Comey, the current record holder.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
the left has no problem with illegal immigrants influencing elections.




Illegals don't vote.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 3
The over/under on the percent of questions they answer with 'I don't recall'. Some will take a serious run at James Comey, the current record holder.

Biggest 36 scandals of Comey’s career:https://lists.grabien.com/list-fbi-scandals-under-comey
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 5
<<the left has no problem with illegal immigrants influencing elections.




Illegals don't vote.>>


So you think the DACA children don't influence politics and elections in the United States? It's just an accident that a good many states now provide programs to fund education and other services available ONLY to illegal immigrants?

That's a MUCH biggere deal than anything the Roooosians may have done.


Seattle Pioneer
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 6
<<the left has no problem with illegal immigrants influencing elections.




Illegals don't vote.>>


So you think the DACA children don't influence politics and elections in the United States? It's just an accident that a good many states now provide programs to fund education and other services available ONLY to illegal immigrants?

That's a MUCH biggere deal than anything the Roooosians may have done.


Not only that, illegal aliens DO vote. Illegally, of course, but we have a system carefully designed to make illegal voting very difficult to detect and impossible to rectify after the fact.

In spite of which, we do OCCASIONALLY catch someone. For example: https://www.ice.gov/news/releases/illegal-alien-arrested-cha...

And I should mention that LEGAL immigrants, who aren't naturalized citizens, ALSO don't vote... legally. But that doesn't necessarily stop them. The lowest credible estimate is that in the 2008 Presidential election there were at least 38,000 non-citizens voting in the US. https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/jun/19/noncitizen-...

Now, am I serious about the system making it hard to detect illegal voting?

Consider: in California, if you get a driver license or ID card - for which they do NOT require proof of legal US residence - you are automatically registered to vote unless you explicitly deny that you are a citizen. If you make no claim at all on the subject - and therefore can't be accused of falsely claiming to be a citizen - you're registered to vote. And if you DO claim to not be a US citizen, they send a follow-up query so you have a second chance to not explicitly deny citizenship; again, if you don't deny citizenship (but do return the query card) then you are registered to vote. https://themarketswork.com/2017/06/20/illegal-voting-some-un...
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 3
<<Consider: in California, if you get a driver license or ID card - for which they do NOT require proof of legal US residence - you are automatically registered to vote unless you explicitly deny that you are a citizen. If you make no claim at all on the subject - and therefore can't be accused of falsely claiming to be a citizen - you're registered to vote. And if you DO claim to not be a US citizen, they send a follow-up query so you have a second chance to not explicitly deny citizenship; again, if you don't deny citizenship (but do return the query card) then you are registered to vote. https://themarketswork.com/2017/06/20/illegal-voting-some-un...



We should count ourselves lucky that California doesn't register everyone in the world as a voter, under the liberals "citizen of the world" theory. After all, isn't it racist white supremacist thinking that restricts voting to those who happen to live in a particular geographic area?

Perhaps the California's legislature will plug this gap soon.


Seattle Pioneer
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
You had to go back to 2011 to find one single example? I rest my case.
Print the post Back To Top