June 14, 2019
By Pete Williams
Washington — Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor (click here) on Friday denied a request from four Flint, Michigan officials who asked the U.S. Supreme Court to block lower court rulings that said they could be sued over lead contamination in the water supply.
Their motion was directed to Justice Sotomayor, who handles such appeals from that region. Without explanation, as is the usual practice, she denied their request.
The officials involved in the water crisis argued that they should be immune from a liability suit brought by a Flint woman, Shari Guertin, who said she and her minor daughter suffered injuries from drinking and bathing in water contaminated with lead. After a federal judge refused to throw the lawsuit out, the officials appealed.
A three-judge panel ruled against them in January, saying the officials "created the Flint Water environmental disaster and then intentionally attempted to cover up their grievous decision." The full Sixth Circuit declined last month to take the case, leaving the panel decision intact....
June 13, 2019
By the AP
Flint, Mich. (AP) — Michigan prosecutors (click here) dropped all criminal charges Thursday against eight people in the Flint water scandal and pledged to start the investigation from scratch. Officials said that since the election of a new attorney general, they have acquired a lot of new evidence that significantly expands of the scope of the investigation. They say the defendants, including Michigan's former health director, Nick Lyon, could be charged again....
A personal note: When the country first learned of the Flint Water Crisis I knew there would be a cover up of one kind or another. As the prosecutions rolled out it became obvious to me the efforts to achieve justice were being misdirected to those with the least power to have changed the course of the crisis.
That said, I also remember the first set of indictments brought the suicide of a man that worked in the water treatment plant. Realizing now these officials are being released from unlawful behavior with the potential for new indictments to be filed, I keep thinking that poor man who ended his life could have been proven to be the least liable for these tragedies and he might still be alive.
The Flint Water Crisis is not just about dirty water, it is about entire governance under Snyder that went badly wrong. People suffered and Governor Snyder did not care. He also did not care about those facing criminal charges so long as it did not touch him.
Friday, June 14, 2019
H.R. 1 - The House Democrats were ready on Day 1 to begin work.
Shown Here:
There is absolutely nothing in that bill to object to, so why doesn't it receive the endorsement of the US Senate. Mitch McConnell's strategy to make the Democrats useless is not going to work. The American people will see the effort the US House is putting forth and will realize the US Senate no nothing but a political organization unable to govern.
Introduced in House (01/03/2019)
This bill addresses voter access, election integrity, election security, political spending, and ethics for the three branches of government.
Specifically, the bill expands voter registration and voting access, makes Election Day a federal holiday, and limits removing voters from voter rolls.
The bill provides for states to establish independent, nonpartisan redistricting commissions.
The bill also sets forth provisions related to election security, including sharing intelligence information with state election officials, protecting the security of the voter rolls, supporting states in securing their election systems, developing a national strategy to protect the security and integrity of U.S. democratic institutions, establishing in the legislative branch the National Commission to Protect United States Democratic Institutions, and other provisions to improve the cybersecurity of election systems.
I think the Repugnant-licans don't want all these security issues and eliminating foreign money in elections. It is a lot to give up, all that Dark Money. They wouldn't have to give up the Kochs money. So, what is the problem in passing greater protections for the USA elections and electorate that ensures sovereign authority? I think the US Senate and every Senator needs to answer that question.
I think the Repugnant-licans don't want all these security issues and eliminating foreign money in elections. It is a lot to give up, all that Dark Money. They wouldn't have to give up the Kochs money. So, what is the problem in passing greater protections for the USA elections and electorate that ensures sovereign authority? I think the US Senate and every Senator needs to answer that question.
This bill addresses campaign spending, including by expanding the ban on foreign nationals contributing to or spending on elections; expanding disclosure rules pertaining to organizations spending money during elections, campaign advertisements, and online platforms; and revising disclaimer requirements for political advertising.
I don't understand why Repugnant-licans are so intent on old paradigms. Their old paradigms are very corrupt, even illegal and crumbling.
Why would a US Senator even give a nod to the NRA when they know for a fact there election donations came from Russia? Things are that desperate, huh? It is the Repugnant - lican Party that believes elections can't be won without enormous amounts of spending.
November 27, 2018
By Anna Massoglia
One of the nation’s most powerful political forces (click here) appears to be in the midst of a steep financial decline.
The National Rifle Association of America (NRA) experienced a $55 million decline in income last year, finding itself in the red for a second consecutive year, according to a new tax return reviewed by the Center for Responsive Politics and first obtained by the Daily Beast.
In 2017, the organization spent nearly $18 million more than it took in. While it’s better than the $46 million deficit the NRA reported in 2016, it is significantly worse than the group’s $27.8 million income in 2015.
The document confirms a precipitous drop in NRA membership dues reported by CRP in September. Member dues dropped by roughly $36 million between 2016 and 2017....
If there is a precipitous drop in NRA membership dues, the only conclusion that can be drawn is that is accompanied with a precipitous drop in NRA membership renewals. The gun owners of the USA believe deeply in background checks and it is my guess they are upset about all the deaths of innocent people as well, especially young people. Why would any US Senator continue to be affiliated with an organization that is lost it's grip?
I don't understand why Repugnant-licans are so intent on old paradigms. Their old paradigms are very corrupt, even illegal and crumbling.Why would a US Senator even give a nod to the NRA when they know for a fact there election donations came from Russia? Things are that desperate, huh? It is the Repugnant - lican Party that believes elections can't be won without enormous amounts of spending.
November 27, 2018
By Anna Massoglia
One of the nation’s most powerful political forces (click here) appears to be in the midst of a steep financial decline.
The National Rifle Association of America (NRA) experienced a $55 million decline in income last year, finding itself in the red for a second consecutive year, according to a new tax return reviewed by the Center for Responsive Politics and first obtained by the Daily Beast.
In 2017, the organization spent nearly $18 million more than it took in. While it’s better than the $46 million deficit the NRA reported in 2016, it is significantly worse than the group’s $27.8 million income in 2015.
The document confirms a precipitous drop in NRA membership dues reported by CRP in September. Member dues dropped by roughly $36 million between 2016 and 2017....
If there is a precipitous drop in NRA membership dues, the only conclusion that can be drawn is that is accompanied with a precipitous drop in NRA membership renewals. The gun owners of the USA believe deeply in background checks and it is my guess they are upset about all the deaths of innocent people as well, especially young people. Why would any US Senator continue to be affiliated with an organization that is lost it's grip?
This bill establishes an alternative campaign funding system for certain federal offices. The system involves federal matching of small contributions for qualified candidates.
This bill sets forth provisions related to ethics in all three branches of government. Specifically, the bill requires a code of ethics for federal judges and justices, prohibits Members of the House from serving on the board of a for-profit entity, expands enforcement of regulations governing foreign agents, and establishes additional conflict-of-interest and ethics provisions for federal employees and the White House.
The bill also requires candidates for President and Vice President to submit 10 years of tax returns.There is absolutely nothing in that bill to object to, so why doesn't it receive the endorsement of the US Senate. Mitch McConnell's strategy to make the Democrats useless is not going to work. The American people will see the effort the US House is putting forth and will realize the US Senate no nothing but a political organization unable to govern.
'McConnell's Graveyard': Nancy Pelosi Lists Bills Passed By House That S...(click here for US Senate calendar)
None of these bills are frivolous. The delay of gun legislation is causing deaths in the USA. Mitch McConnell is literally the Grim Reaper. It is not just a legislative Grim Reaper either. The negligence by the US Senate to address the problems of the USA is a political agenda and not one of the American people.
If the Republican Senate cannot be honest brokers of power then they don't belong there.
It is about half way through the year and there are 24,142 gun incidents and 6351 gun deaths. Of those deaths there are 273 deaths of children 11 years old and under and 1217 young people between the ages of 12 to 17.
And what has the US Senate done to end these tragedies? Not a darn thing.
If the Republican Senate cannot be honest brokers of power then they don't belong there.
And what has the US Senate done to end these tragedies? Not a darn thing.
The knee jerk reaction by Trump has to stop.
The crew is probably reporting what they saw to the owner of the tanker. The idea that Trump can determine what occurred with the tankers thousands of miles away while sitting in the Oval Office is ridiculous. The forensics aren't in.
The fact this was a flying object does not rule of terrorists either. We know terrorists have such munitions because they tried to take down an Israeli jet in Kenya years ago.
The picture to the left is the USS Cole in the same region of the world. It is remarkably the same TARGET area of the ship as that of the Kokuka Courageous. They have the same signature, but, the Cole was carried out by suicide bombers in a small boat.
But, the point is the method in an attempt to sink the boats with a huge explosion that would rock the region well into nearby coastal cities is basically the same, although the way to an explosion is different. There are just similarities that carry over years and years of time. That can't be ignored.
LET'S JUST SAY, the owner of the Kokuka Courageous is correct and there were no mines involved, THEN WHAT THE HECK IS THE US NAVY DOLING OUT AS PROOF? A doctored video?
June 14, 2019
By Linda Givetash and Arata Yamamoto
U.S. Central Command said the two vessels were hit Thursday by a limpet mine, which is attached to boats below the waterline using magnets. U.S. Central Command released video it claimed showed an Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps patrol boat removing an unexploded mine from one of the tankers, the Kokuka Courageous.
But on Friday morning, the owner of the 560-foot Courageous, said that sailors saw something flying toward the vessel just before the explosion and that the impact was well above the waterline....
My concern for both these countries, companies and their crew is sincere. There is nothing more to hope for, but, to determine the perpetrators of the crime and demand resolution to this episode of violence in the Gulf of Oman, but, the FACTS have to be true and they have to be clear to the indications as to whom is responsible.
The Americans need leave the investigation to the countries involved and the companies that want this solved. In the meantime, there is a Gulf of water that needs to be stabilized so commerce is not interrupted. If that interruption cannot be stopped, then there are other shipping routes.
I demand to know what the US Navy is calling proof of Iranian involvement.
Pompeo cannot speak about an oil pipeline bombing without also speaking to the retaliation by Saudi Arabia that caused the deaths of innocent people, including children. The Saudi response was completely disproportionate compared to the pipeline attack. The death of human beings is NOT justified because an oil pipeline was attacked.
Oil pipeline attacks are nothing new either. There have been plenty over the years (click here), in Iraq alone.
12 November 2017
An explosion (click here for film loop) ripped through an oil pipeline near the village of Buri in northern Bahrain.
Bahrain's interior minister, Sheikh Rashid bin Abdullah Al Khalifa, said in a statement that the blast was "the latest example of a terrorist act" and blamed Iran.
Iran has denied any involvement.
My concern for both these countries, companies and their crew is sincere. There is nothing more to hope for, but, to determine the perpetrators of the crime and demand resolution to this episode of violence in the Gulf of Oman, but, the FACTS have to be true and they have to be clear to the indications as to whom is responsible.
The Americans need leave the investigation to the countries involved and the companies that want this solved. In the meantime, there is a Gulf of water that needs to be stabilized so commerce is not interrupted. If that interruption cannot be stopped, then there are other shipping routes.
I demand to know what the US Navy is calling proof of Iranian involvement.
Pompeo cannot speak about an oil pipeline bombing without also speaking to the retaliation by Saudi Arabia that caused the deaths of innocent people, including children. The Saudi response was completely disproportionate compared to the pipeline attack. The death of human beings is NOT justified because an oil pipeline was attacked.
Oil pipeline attacks are nothing new either. There have been plenty over the years (click here), in Iraq alone.
12 November 2017
An explosion (click here for film loop) ripped through an oil pipeline near the village of Buri in northern Bahrain.
Bahrain's interior minister, Sheikh Rashid bin Abdullah Al Khalifa, said in a statement that the blast was "the latest example of a terrorist act" and blamed Iran.
Iran has denied any involvement.
To be completely honest, the problems with mines in the Strait of Hormuz appears to be an attempt to spark a war in the Middle East. That aspect cannot be ignored and needs to be studied by intelligence agencies globally.
There are absolutely no peace talks occurring anywhere and Trump's temperament is well known. I think the USA is being a fool for terrorists that would like to see an escalation in the region so they can return to prominence.
There are absolutely no peace talks occurring anywhere and Trump's temperament is well known. I think the USA is being a fool for terrorists that would like to see an escalation in the region so they can return to prominence.
Mines are a problem in many places in the world. Now it is a problem in a sensitive area of the world with economic impacts.
The USA is prepared to carry out these missions. This type of ordinance is not foreign to the concerns in these waters.
UNITED STATES
07.24.2017
Photo by Petty Officer 2nd Class Tyler Thompson
U.S. Navy
170724-N-QA919-0172
MEDITERRANEAN SEA (July 24, 2017) Senior Chief Explosive Ordnance Disposal (click here) Technician Robert Ramirez, left, and Explosive Ordnance Disposal Technician 3rd Class David Garcia, both assigned to Explosive Ordnance Disposal Mobile Unit (EODMU) 8, proceed to a simulated call in the Mediterranean Sea during exercise Noble Melinda 2017. The Israel Defense Force-hosted explosive ordnance disposal and mine countermeasures exercise is designed to increase the interoperability of participating nations, enhance maritime proficiencies, and promote maritime safety and security in the region. (U.S. Navy photo by Mass Communication Specialist 2nd Class Tyler Thompson/Released)
With a current measure by the US Navy in place to remove and disarm this type of munition, Trump has no basis to point to Iran. This form of terrorism, unfortunately, it not an uncommon concern. Of course, the Australian navy would be involved with such exercises.MEDITERRANEAN SEA (July 24, 2017) Senior Chief Explosive Ordnance Disposal (click here) Technician Robert Ramirez, left, and Explosive Ordnance Disposal Technician 3rd Class David Garcia, both assigned to Explosive Ordnance Disposal Mobile Unit (EODMU) 8, proceed to a simulated call in the Mediterranean Sea during exercise Noble Melinda 2017. The Israel Defense Force-hosted explosive ordnance disposal and mine countermeasures exercise is designed to increase the interoperability of participating nations, enhance maritime proficiencies, and promote maritime safety and security in the region. (U.S. Navy photo by Mass Communication Specialist 2nd Class Tyler Thompson/Released)
A bit of history.
It was the spring of 1939, (click here) and the threat of war was hanging over Europe when Stuart Macrae, the editor of Britain’s Armchair Science magazine, received a mysterious phone call.
A man named Millis Jefferis, who Macrae had never met before, wanted to know more about the powerful magnets featured in an issue of the magazine. The gruff-sounding Jefferis wouldn’t tell Macrae why he needed the information, but he was insistent....
Everything I look at says terrorists. This is on Etsy (click here) It is an empty shell for sale for $27.00. The proof of any sovereign state using such devices is highly questionable. 1/16 German Metal MAGNETIC LIMPET MINE re WWII Tank Panzer Tiger Diorama Model (click here)
The mines are from WWII. The country of Iran didn't exist during WWII. The picture below left (click here) is the usual method of installing the limpet mines. The terrorists that placed the magnet mines on the ship didn't care to carry out the explosions underwater.
Source of picture (click here)
There are far more questions than answers. The reality that can be acted on is the fact there were magnetic mines placed on the oil tankers. There need to be measures to insure safe passage of the ships. How that safe passage is achieved is most likely up to the USA and MONITORS to report trustworthy activities by the USA Ships. The monitors will have to be in the water. I doubt if any monitor will be allowed on board a USA ship.
There need to be cameras installed on the tankers to record nefarious activity. Those cameras can be a part of a monitor station on board to be viewed by a sailor.
Harbors around the world have sophisticated monitoring in their harbors. I am sure that level of surveillance can be brought to the ports along the Gulf of Oman.
To the right is a crosscut view of a limpet mine. It is a very crude device. It is also a very old device. There is nothing sophisticated about this.
It was probably used in the previous attack of four tankers. There is no evidence of that though. The word used is probably.
...It is an underwater charge (click here) incorporating a built in time delay exploder intended to be fixed to the hull of a ship magnetically or held in a place by a nylon belt. Highly effective against submarines, war / merchant ships riding at anchor or moored along the pier, or alongside a jetty as well as port installations, pipelines and offshore drilling / processing platforms. It can be easily carried on chariots, when required....
This article is from the Japan News. Japan and Norway need to be a large part of this initiative and certainly, need to be a part of the decision making at this point.
June 14, 2019
Dubai/Washington — The United States blamed Iran (click here) for attacks on two oil tankers in the Gulf of Oman on Thursday that drove up oil prices and raised concerns about a new U.S.-Iranian confrontation.
It was not immediately clear what befell the Norwegian-owned Front Altair or the Japanese-owned Kokuka Courageous, which both suffered explosions, forcing crews to abandon ship and leave the vessels adrift in waters between Gulf Arab states and Iran.
One source said the blast on the Front Altair, which caught fire and sent a huge plume of smoke into the air, may have been caused by a magnetic mine.
The firm that chartered the Kokuka Courageous tanker said that it was hit by a suspected torpedo but a person with knowledge of the matter said torpedoes were not used.
An unexploded device, believed to be a limpet mine, was spotted on the side of the Japanese tanker, a U.S. official told Reuters, speaking on condition of anonymity. If confirmed, the next steps might be to either deactivate or detonate the device....
There is nothing conclusive about that video, except, a potential Iranian ship is removing a mine from the ship. We all should be grateful the Iranians could safely remove a dangerous munition. The Japanese thought they might lose the ship entirely.
If this was a film loop whereby Iranian sailors were placing the magnetic mine on the ship it would be suspicious to a sovereign act, but, there is no such information in a film loop.
Trump wants a war. He doesn't care of it is legitimate or not. What needs to happen here are decisions between the countries using these waters for the need of mine sweepers and patrols to provide safe passage.
What concerns me is how terrorists obtained magnet mines and how was the attack deployed without anyone on the ship detecting the attack. The ships are not equipped with cameras that monitor the sides of the ship otherwise that video would be out there rather than an Iranian ship removing a magnetic mine.
Thursday, June 13, 2019
Unanimous Consent (click here) - A senator may request unanimous consent on the floor to set aside a specified rule of procedure so as to expedite proceedings. If no Senator objects, the Senate permits the action, but if any one senator objects, the request is rejected.
S. 1562: Foreign Influence Reporting in Elections Act (click here)
June 13, 2019
By Jordan Carney
S. 1562: Foreign Influence Reporting in Elections Act (click here)
H.R. 2853: Corporate Duty to Report Act of 2019 (click here)
The Duty to Report Act and Foreign Influence Reporting in Elections (FIRE) Act are bills which would require a campaign to report any attempt of contact by foreign nationals offering services or information.
The bills would require any such meeting be reported to both the Federal Elections Commission (FEC) and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI).
The Duty to Report was introduced in the House on May 20 as bill number H.R. 2853, by Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-CA15), also a longshot presidential candidate. It was introduced in the Senate that same day as bill number S. 1247 by Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-CT).
The FIRE Act introduced in the Senate on April 30 as bill number S. 1562 by Sen. Mark Warner (D-VA), top Democrat on the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence.
Marsha Blackburn states the FIRE Act is not bipartisan enough to pass the Senate. Well, where is the Republican bill to present with the FIRE Act to bring about a bipartisan conference that would allow passage of a much needed requirement? I don't see any attempt by Republicans to enforce and codify PROTECTIONS for the USA Constitution.
The Duty to Report Act and Foreign Influence Reporting in Elections (FIRE) Act are bills which would require a campaign to report any attempt of contact by foreign nationals offering services or information.
The bills would require any such meeting be reported to both the Federal Elections Commission (FEC) and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI).
The Duty to Report was introduced in the House on May 20 as bill number H.R. 2853, by Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-CA15), also a longshot presidential candidate. It was introduced in the Senate that same day as bill number S. 1247 by Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-CT).
The FIRE Act introduced in the Senate on April 30 as bill number S. 1562 by Sen. Mark Warner (D-VA), top Democrat on the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence.
Marsha Blackburn states the FIRE Act is not bipartisan enough to pass the Senate. Well, where is the Republican bill to present with the FIRE Act to bring about a bipartisan conference that would allow passage of a much needed requirement? I don't see any attempt by Republicans to enforce and codify PROTECTIONS for the USA Constitution.
June 13, 2019
By Jordan Carney
Senate Republicans blocked legislation (click here) on Thursday that would force campaigns to notify the Federal Election Commission and the FBI about attempts by foreign nationals to influence an election.
Sen. Mark Warner (D-Va.), the vice chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, tried to pass the Foreign Influence Reporting in Elections (FIRE) Act (click here) by unanimous consent.
"This legislation is pretty simple, even for this body, it would require any presidential campaign that receives offers of assistance from an agent of a foreign government, has an obligation to report that offer of assistance to law enforcement, specifically the FBI," Warner said from the Senate floor....
The Special Counsel Report - Volume 1 - page 11, page 19 on the PDF
I. THE SPECIAL COUNSEL'S INVESTIGATION (click here)
On May 17, 2017, Deputy Attorney General Rod J. Rosenstein-then serving as Acting Attorney General for the Russia investigation following the recusal of former Attorney General Jeff Sessions on March 2, 2016-appointed the Special Counsel "to investigate Russian interference with the 2016 presidential election and related matters." Office of the Deputy Att'y Gen., Order No. 3915-2017, Appointment of Special Counsel to Investigate Russian Interference with the 2016 Presidential Election and Related Matters, May 17, 2017) ("Appointment Order"). Relying on "the authority vested" in the Acting Attorney General, "including 28 U.S.C. §§ 509, 510, and 515," (this is the law allowing the investigation that has been cited before) the Acting Attorney General ordered the appointment of a Special Counsel "in order to discharge [the Acting Attorney General's] responsibility to provide supervision and management of the Department of Justice, and to ensure a full and thorough investigation of the Russian government's efforts to interfere in the 2016 presidential election." Appointment Order (introduction). "The Special Counsel," the Order stated, "is authorized to conduct the investigation confirmed by then-FBI Director James B. Corney in testimony before the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence on March 20, 2017," including:
This paragraph simply states the obvious. The Special Counsel was established to investigate Russian cyber warfare of the 2016 sovereign elections when the Assistant Attorney General had to also carry out other duties.
(i) any links and/or coordination between the Russian government and individuals associated with the campaign of President Donald Trump; and
(ii) any matters that arose or may arise directly from the investigation; and
(iii) any other matters within the scope of 28 C.F.R. § 600.4(a).
In this case, Attorney General Sessions recused himself and he was correct in doing so. That is why the jurisdiction then fell to Assistant AG Rosenstein.
The Special Counsel conducted all those jurisdictions, including Obstruction of Justice. That aspect of the law is probably is the most important aspect of any investigation, regardless of the topic of the investigation. As an illustration, what if the laws punishing obstruction did not exist? What would happen with murder? What would happen to stealing? What would happen with child abduction?
The idea a USA citizen could get away with any type of obstruction that limits an investigation is outrageous. When people obstruct justice it has to be met with charges of lawlessness. It is the basis of our laws. If the USA does not respect an investigation into facts regarding lawlessness, why bother with the Rule of Law? Where would that put the USA on the spectrum of the definition of democracy?
Obstruction of Justice must be met with criminal charges. It is obvious.
Appointment Order ,r (b). Section 600.4 affords the Special Counsel "the authority to investigate and prosecute federal crimes committed in the course of, and with intent to interfere with, the Special Counsel's investigation, such as perjury, obstruction of justice, destruction of evidence, and intimidation of witnesses." 28 C.F.R. § 600.4(a). The authority to investigate "any matters that arose . .. directly from the investigation," Appointment Order ,r (b)(ii), covers similar crimes that may have occurred during the course of the FBI's confirmed investigation before the Special Counsel's appointment. "If the Special Counsel believes it is necessary and appropriate," the Order further provided, "the Special Counsel is authorized to prosecute federal crimes arising from the investigation of these matters." Id. ,r ( c ). Finally, the Acting Attorney General made applicable "Sections 600.4 through 600.10 of Title 28 of the Code of Federal Regulations." Id. ,r (d).
The Special Counsel has a great deal of authority. The DOJ cannot interfere with the Special Counsel. If the DOJ attempts to interfere in the investigation and it's proceedings, the USA Congress is provided the information regarding the facts. That is what makes the lack of cooperation by Barr so ridiculous. The USA Congress is the backstop to the corruption of the investigation. Of course, it is obvious within the law itself that the USA Congress has the right to information from the investigation. Any statement otherwise is manipulation of the law.
The code cited is that of the same previous citation.
The Acting Attorney General further clarified the scope of the Special Counsel's investigatory authority in two subsequent memoranda. A memorandum dated August 2, 2017, explained that the Appointment Order had been "worded categorically in order to permit its public release without confirming specific investigations involving specific individuals." It then confirmed that the Special Counsel had been authorized since his appointment to investigate allegations that three Trump campaign officials-Carter Page, Paul Manafort, and George Papadopoulos- "committed a crime or crimes by colluding with Russian government officials with respect to the Russian government's efforts to interfere with the 2016 presidential election." The memorandum also confirmed the Special Counsel's authority to investigate certain other matters, including two additional sets of allegations involving Manafort (crimes arising from payments he received from the Ukrainian government and crimes arising from his receipt of loans from a bank whose CEO was then seeking a position in the Trump Administration); allegations that Papadopoulos committed a crime or crimes by acting as an unregistered agent of the Israeli government; and four sets of allegations involving Michael Flynn, the former National Security Advisor to President Trump.
This is the paragraph that Nunes points as to evidence of the Steele Dossier. Really? It is thinly veiled there? Hm. In the first highlighted sentence in this paragraph, it appears to me that is about releasing the information to the public.
"worded categorically in order to permit its public release without confirming specific investigations involving specific individuals."
It makes me wonder why all the hubbub about Congress' insistence on release of the documents. I don't think of the Steele Dossier is evident in the memo of August 27, 2017 at that point. It makes me realize what a criminal Barr actually is though.
three Trump campaign officials-Carter Page, Paul Manafort, and George Papadopoulos-
As a matter of fact, the names in this paragraph states nothing about Steele or a dossier.
I also see the name of Ukraine here, in that crimes by Manafort were committed there. He received monies from Ukraine. It wasn't the monies or the payment that is questioned, so much as THE CRIMES THAT AROSE from the monies paid. So, Ukraine did nothing wrong in paying Manafort for whatever reason they felt it was due, but, it was after Manafort had the monies that the crimes occurred.
Where is this mysterious reference on Page 11 to the Steele Dossier? It doesn't exist. I think Nunes found the wording in the Special Counsel report that could be manipulated for a descent against this investigation playing to the paranoid Republican of THE DEEP STATE. Nowhere here that I see is there a mention that the investigation is based on the Steele Dossier, hence in bias to Hillary Clinton. Nunes needs to be investigated for altering the meaning of a report from the Special Counsel.
"When you look at what happened today, (click here) remember we talked a lot about the scope memo. What were the directions given to the special counsel? Well, we now know hidden on page 11, very thinly, still veiled, but we now know they used the Steele dossier, the Clinton dirt, the Clinton-paid-for dirt as part of the memo for the special counsel that directed the special counsel what to do," Nunes told host Sean Hannity.
THERE IS NO DEEP STATE. There is "Deep Fake" which comes from other sources than law enforcement, but, no DEEP STATE. The Deep State is a manipulation of fear by some Americans. Nunes is lying to people.
In mentioning these memos the Special Counsel is attempting to remain above reproach. The Special Counsel is openly stating besides the law affording the Special Counsel its authority, there were other memos providing additional authority. This is a way to state there were other interactions between the Assistant Attorney General and the Special Counsel. In disclosing these memos the Special Counsel is not stumbling over anything to attempt to hide it, quite the contrary. The entire disclosure of these interactions raises the report above suspicion. The Special Counsel wanted full disclosure to ensure the brevity of the report. He didn't want surprises to those that are to trust this report. Surprises might cast concern whether or not there was a concern to be leveraged.
Robert Mueller knows his country. He knows how suspicion can take hold and escalate concern. I can easily say, Robert Mueller, is a very wise man that puts his country before any potential to undermine it. That is a very unique characteristic and why he was perfect for this investigation. He would never compromise the country. Never.
On October 20, 2017, the Acting Attorney General confirmed in a memorandum the Special Counsel's investigative authority as to several individuals and entities. First, "as part of a full and thorough investigation of the Russian government's efforts to interfere in the 2016 presidential election," the Special Counsel was authorized to investigate "the pertinent activities of Michael Cohen, Richard Gates, , Roger Stone, and I"
That is a fascinating statement. "...and I." That means if an investigation should lead to corruption of the Assistant Attorney General and any potential corruption to the investigation, it was the authority of the Special Counsel to act to end that corruption. In other words, if Rosenstein fell into conflict with the best outcomes of the investigation, he would be subject to the authority of the Special Counsel as well. I am sure that then fell to Barr, if he tried to interfere with the investigation as well.
That brings me to a point whereby Robert Mueller wrote to Barr to release at least the Introduction and Executive Summary of each volume. There were memos that demanded public disclosure. Robert Mueller already composed parts of the report to release to the public. Barr had no authority to stand in the way. Barr's lack of authority to withhold the report from the public is what prompted him to release the entire report even though Mueller did not specify that in his 2 page letter to Barr. Interesting. Barr knew he was in violation.
Add to that his Contempt of Congress and Barr's intent in his office becomes curious.
"Confirmation of the authorization to investigate such individuals," the memorandum stressed, "does not suggest that the Special Counsel has made a determination that any of them has committed a crime."
The memo to the Special Counsel was not to instruct him to file charges if there was no basis for those charges. So, Rosenstein in his instructions to the Special Counsel wanted to draw attention to people he knew to be of concern to the investigation.
In other words, "Hey, Bob, be sure you take a look at these folks but you may find there is nothing wrong and that is okay."
Second, with respect to Michael Cohen, the memorandum recognized the Special Counsel's authority to investigate " leads relate[d] to Cohen' s establishment and use of Essential Consultants LLC to, inter alia (inter alia - among other things), receive funds from Russian-backed entities."
That has to be a great feeling. "among other things," Bob there may be the fact Cohen took some Russian money, too. It isn't as though there isn't a lot to be done, but, then "inter alia" there is more to do. I guess at that point, that becomes an assignment to one of his staff specializing in bank fraud, etc.
Third, the memorandum memorialized the Special Counsel's authority to investigate individuals and entities who were possibly engaged in "jointly undertaken activity" with existing subjects of the investigation, including Paul Manafort.
Manafort was definitely a person of interest. I don't blame them. His activities with Ukraine and Russia had to bring a lot of concern. Almost an ownership of the exploits by Russia to dismantle Ukraine's military and government and replace it with a basically dictator and oligarch militias. How could the USA let a USA citizen carry out such acts against democracy for the purpose of wealth?
Finally, the memorandum described an FBI investigation opened before the Special Counsel's appointment into "allegations that [then-Attorney General Jeff Sessions] made false statements to the United States Senate[,]" and confirmed the Special Counsel's authority to investigate that matter.
The above paragraph speaks for itself. The paragraph below begins the formulation of the investigation by the Special Counsel. The Special Counsel above stated the authority granted, but, the following paragraph is a description of the thinking that formulated the application of the authority. It was Robert Mueller's thinking. He took control of the investigation and this is how he rolled it out to his investigators.
It is important to realize the level of competency that exists with Robert Mueller. No one was telling him how to conduct the investigation, just that he had to conduct it. A Former Director of the FBI would know how to roll out an investigation of this magnitude. The authority was in excellent hands.
The Special Counsel structured the investigation in view of his power and authority "to exercise all investigative and prosecutorial functions of any United States Attorney." 28 C.F.R: § 600.6.
The Special Counsel knew the law. This was child's play for him.
Interesting. The Special Counsel found the information already accumulated in an investigation by the FBI valuable. He didn't throw away 10 months of competent work by the FBI under Comey. I sure he read every word.
The Special Counsel's Office exercised its judgment regarding what to investigate and did not, for instance, investigate every public report of a contact between the Trump Campaign and Russian-affiliated individuals and entities.
The Special Counsel was not going to waste valuable time and money chasing every potential lead. What does that mean? It means the investigation carries brevity. The Special Counsel knew what was litigable and what was important for the sovereign state of the USA and that is where his focus would lie. He WASN'T INTERESTED IN A WITCH HUNT!
The Office has concluded its investigation into links and coordination between the Russian government and individuals associated with the Trump Campaign. Certain proceedings associated with the Office's work remain ongoing. After consultation with the Office of the Deputy Attorney General, the Office has transferred responsibility for those remaining issues to other components of the Department of Justice and FBI. Appendix D lists those transfers.
The word "individuals" is important to note.
Two district courts confirmed the breadth of the Special Counsel's authority to investigate Russia election interference and links and/or coordination with the Trump Campaign.
See UnitedStates v. Manafort, 312 F. Supp. 3d 60, 79-83 (D.D.C. 2018) (click here); United States v. Manafort, 321 F. Supp. 3d 640, 650-655 (E.D. Va. 2018). In the course of conducting that investigation, the Office periodically identified evidence of potential criminal activity that was outside the scope of the Special Counsel's authority established by the Acting Attorney General. After consultation with the Office of the Deputy Attorney General, the Office referred that evidence to appropriate law enforcement authorities, principally other components of the Department of Justice and to the FBI. Appendix D summarizes those referrals.
The Special Counsel did not ignore information to law enforcement simply because it did not fall within his authority. He reported any of that information to the Assistant Attorney General and reports were provided to other agencies to carry out the investigations that fell outside the Special Counsel authority.
This section is followed by three stars, so I will end here for now. I am sure the reading of this document will result in reading Appendix D.
Thank you for your interest.
On May 17, 2017, Deputy Attorney General Rod J. Rosenstein-then serving as Acting Attorney General for the Russia investigation following the recusal of former Attorney General Jeff Sessions on March 2, 2016-appointed the Special Counsel "to investigate Russian interference with the 2016 presidential election and related matters." Office of the Deputy Att'y Gen., Order No. 3915-2017, Appointment of Special Counsel to Investigate Russian Interference with the 2016 Presidential Election and Related Matters, May 17, 2017) ("Appointment Order"). Relying on "the authority vested" in the Acting Attorney General, "including 28 U.S.C. §§ 509, 510, and 515," (this is the law allowing the investigation that has been cited before) the Acting Attorney General ordered the appointment of a Special Counsel "in order to discharge [the Acting Attorney General's] responsibility to provide supervision and management of the Department of Justice, and to ensure a full and thorough investigation of the Russian government's efforts to interfere in the 2016 presidential election." Appointment Order (introduction). "The Special Counsel," the Order stated, "is authorized to conduct the investigation confirmed by then-FBI Director James B. Corney in testimony before the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence on March 20, 2017," including:
This paragraph simply states the obvious. The Special Counsel was established to investigate Russian cyber warfare of the 2016 sovereign elections when the Assistant Attorney General had to also carry out other duties.
(i) any links and/or coordination between the Russian government and individuals associated with the campaign of President Donald Trump; and
(ii) any matters that arose or may arise directly from the investigation; and
(iii) any other matters within the scope of 28 C.F.R. § 600.4(a).
(a)Original jurisdiction. The jurisdiction of a Special Counsel shall be established by the Attorney General. The Special Counsel will be provided with a specific factual statement of the matter to be investigated. The jurisdiction of a Special Counsel shall also include the authority to investigate and prosecute federal crimes committed in the course of, and with intent to interfere with, the Special Counsel's investigation, such as perjury, obstruction of justice, destruction of evidence, and intimidation of witnesses; and to conduct appeals arising out of the matter being investigated and/or prosecuted.
In this case, Attorney General Sessions recused himself and he was correct in doing so. That is why the jurisdiction then fell to Assistant AG Rosenstein.
The Special Counsel conducted all those jurisdictions, including Obstruction of Justice. That aspect of the law is probably is the most important aspect of any investigation, regardless of the topic of the investigation. As an illustration, what if the laws punishing obstruction did not exist? What would happen with murder? What would happen to stealing? What would happen with child abduction?
The idea a USA citizen could get away with any type of obstruction that limits an investigation is outrageous. When people obstruct justice it has to be met with charges of lawlessness. It is the basis of our laws. If the USA does not respect an investigation into facts regarding lawlessness, why bother with the Rule of Law? Where would that put the USA on the spectrum of the definition of democracy?
Obstruction of Justice must be met with criminal charges. It is obvious.
Appointment Order ,r (b). Section 600.4 affords the Special Counsel "the authority to investigate and prosecute federal crimes committed in the course of, and with intent to interfere with, the Special Counsel's investigation, such as perjury, obstruction of justice, destruction of evidence, and intimidation of witnesses." 28 C.F.R. § 600.4(a). The authority to investigate "any matters that arose . .. directly from the investigation," Appointment Order ,r (b)(ii), covers similar crimes that may have occurred during the course of the FBI's confirmed investigation before the Special Counsel's appointment. "If the Special Counsel believes it is necessary and appropriate," the Order further provided, "the Special Counsel is authorized to prosecute federal crimes arising from the investigation of these matters." Id. ,r ( c ). Finally, the Acting Attorney General made applicable "Sections 600.4 through 600.10 of Title 28 of the Code of Federal Regulations." Id. ,r (d).
The Special Counsel has a great deal of authority. The DOJ cannot interfere with the Special Counsel. If the DOJ attempts to interfere in the investigation and it's proceedings, the USA Congress is provided the information regarding the facts. That is what makes the lack of cooperation by Barr so ridiculous. The USA Congress is the backstop to the corruption of the investigation. Of course, it is obvious within the law itself that the USA Congress has the right to information from the investigation. Any statement otherwise is manipulation of the law.
The code cited is that of the same previous citation.
The Acting Attorney General further clarified the scope of the Special Counsel's investigatory authority in two subsequent memoranda. A memorandum dated August 2, 2017, explained that the Appointment Order had been "worded categorically in order to permit its public release without confirming specific investigations involving specific individuals." It then confirmed that the Special Counsel had been authorized since his appointment to investigate allegations that three Trump campaign officials-Carter Page, Paul Manafort, and George Papadopoulos- "committed a crime or crimes by colluding with Russian government officials with respect to the Russian government's efforts to interfere with the 2016 presidential election." The memorandum also confirmed the Special Counsel's authority to investigate certain other matters, including two additional sets of allegations involving Manafort (crimes arising from payments he received from the Ukrainian government and crimes arising from his receipt of loans from a bank whose CEO was then seeking a position in the Trump Administration); allegations that Papadopoulos committed a crime or crimes by acting as an unregistered agent of the Israeli government; and four sets of allegations involving Michael Flynn, the former National Security Advisor to President Trump.
This is the paragraph that Nunes points as to evidence of the Steele Dossier. Really? It is thinly veiled there? Hm. In the first highlighted sentence in this paragraph, it appears to me that is about releasing the information to the public.
"worded categorically in order to permit its public release without confirming specific investigations involving specific individuals."
It makes me wonder why all the hubbub about Congress' insistence on release of the documents. I don't think of the Steele Dossier is evident in the memo of August 27, 2017 at that point. It makes me realize what a criminal Barr actually is though.
three Trump campaign officials-Carter Page, Paul Manafort, and George Papadopoulos-
As a matter of fact, the names in this paragraph states nothing about Steele or a dossier.
I also see the name of Ukraine here, in that crimes by Manafort were committed there. He received monies from Ukraine. It wasn't the monies or the payment that is questioned, so much as THE CRIMES THAT AROSE from the monies paid. So, Ukraine did nothing wrong in paying Manafort for whatever reason they felt it was due, but, it was after Manafort had the monies that the crimes occurred.
Where is this mysterious reference on Page 11 to the Steele Dossier? It doesn't exist. I think Nunes found the wording in the Special Counsel report that could be manipulated for a descent against this investigation playing to the paranoid Republican of THE DEEP STATE. Nowhere here that I see is there a mention that the investigation is based on the Steele Dossier, hence in bias to Hillary Clinton. Nunes needs to be investigated for altering the meaning of a report from the Special Counsel.
"When you look at what happened today, (click here) remember we talked a lot about the scope memo. What were the directions given to the special counsel? Well, we now know hidden on page 11, very thinly, still veiled, but we now know they used the Steele dossier, the Clinton dirt, the Clinton-paid-for dirt as part of the memo for the special counsel that directed the special counsel what to do," Nunes told host Sean Hannity.
THERE IS NO DEEP STATE. There is "Deep Fake" which comes from other sources than law enforcement, but, no DEEP STATE. The Deep State is a manipulation of fear by some Americans. Nunes is lying to people.
In mentioning these memos the Special Counsel is attempting to remain above reproach. The Special Counsel is openly stating besides the law affording the Special Counsel its authority, there were other memos providing additional authority. This is a way to state there were other interactions between the Assistant Attorney General and the Special Counsel. In disclosing these memos the Special Counsel is not stumbling over anything to attempt to hide it, quite the contrary. The entire disclosure of these interactions raises the report above suspicion. The Special Counsel wanted full disclosure to ensure the brevity of the report. He didn't want surprises to those that are to trust this report. Surprises might cast concern whether or not there was a concern to be leveraged.
Robert Mueller knows his country. He knows how suspicion can take hold and escalate concern. I can easily say, Robert Mueller, is a very wise man that puts his country before any potential to undermine it. That is a very unique characteristic and why he was perfect for this investigation. He would never compromise the country. Never.
On October 20, 2017, the Acting Attorney General confirmed in a memorandum the Special Counsel's investigative authority as to several individuals and entities. First, "as part of a full and thorough investigation of the Russian government's efforts to interfere in the 2016 presidential election," the Special Counsel was authorized to investigate "the pertinent activities of Michael Cohen, Richard Gates, , Roger Stone, and I"
That is a fascinating statement. "...and I." That means if an investigation should lead to corruption of the Assistant Attorney General and any potential corruption to the investigation, it was the authority of the Special Counsel to act to end that corruption. In other words, if Rosenstein fell into conflict with the best outcomes of the investigation, he would be subject to the authority of the Special Counsel as well. I am sure that then fell to Barr, if he tried to interfere with the investigation as well.
That brings me to a point whereby Robert Mueller wrote to Barr to release at least the Introduction and Executive Summary of each volume. There were memos that demanded public disclosure. Robert Mueller already composed parts of the report to release to the public. Barr had no authority to stand in the way. Barr's lack of authority to withhold the report from the public is what prompted him to release the entire report even though Mueller did not specify that in his 2 page letter to Barr. Interesting. Barr knew he was in violation.
Add to that his Contempt of Congress and Barr's intent in his office becomes curious.
"Confirmation of the authorization to investigate such individuals," the memorandum stressed, "does not suggest that the Special Counsel has made a determination that any of them has committed a crime."
The memo to the Special Counsel was not to instruct him to file charges if there was no basis for those charges. So, Rosenstein in his instructions to the Special Counsel wanted to draw attention to people he knew to be of concern to the investigation.
In other words, "Hey, Bob, be sure you take a look at these folks but you may find there is nothing wrong and that is okay."
Second, with respect to Michael Cohen, the memorandum recognized the Special Counsel's authority to investigate " leads relate[d] to Cohen' s establishment and use of Essential Consultants LLC to, inter alia (inter alia - among other things), receive funds from Russian-backed entities."
That has to be a great feeling. "among other things," Bob there may be the fact Cohen took some Russian money, too. It isn't as though there isn't a lot to be done, but, then "inter alia" there is more to do. I guess at that point, that becomes an assignment to one of his staff specializing in bank fraud, etc.
Third, the memorandum memorialized the Special Counsel's authority to investigate individuals and entities who were possibly engaged in "jointly undertaken activity" with existing subjects of the investigation, including Paul Manafort.
Manafort was definitely a person of interest. I don't blame them. His activities with Ukraine and Russia had to bring a lot of concern. Almost an ownership of the exploits by Russia to dismantle Ukraine's military and government and replace it with a basically dictator and oligarch militias. How could the USA let a USA citizen carry out such acts against democracy for the purpose of wealth?
Finally, the memorandum described an FBI investigation opened before the Special Counsel's appointment into "allegations that [then-Attorney General Jeff Sessions] made false statements to the United States Senate[,]" and confirmed the Special Counsel's authority to investigate that matter.
The above paragraph speaks for itself. The paragraph below begins the formulation of the investigation by the Special Counsel. The Special Counsel above stated the authority granted, but, the following paragraph is a description of the thinking that formulated the application of the authority. It was Robert Mueller's thinking. He took control of the investigation and this is how he rolled it out to his investigators.
It is important to realize the level of competency that exists with Robert Mueller. No one was telling him how to conduct the investigation, just that he had to conduct it. A Former Director of the FBI would know how to roll out an investigation of this magnitude. The authority was in excellent hands.
The Special Counsel structured the investigation in view of his power and authority "to exercise all investigative and prosecutorial functions of any United States Attorney." 28 C.F.R: § 600.6.
The Special Counsel knew the law. This was child's play for him.
§ 600.6 Powers and authority.
Subject to the limitations in the following paragraphs, the Special Counsel shall exercise, within the scope of his or her jurisdiction, the full power and independent authority to exercise all investigative and prosecutorial functions of any United States Attorney. Except as provided in this part, the Special Counsel shall determine whether and to what extent to inform or consult with the Attorney General or others within the Department about the conduct of his or her duties and responsibilities.
He modeled the investigation in the way a US Attorney would carry out an investigation. The Special Counsel was not a US Attorney, nor had the capacity of a US Attorney, but, the way a US Attorney would access classified and unclassified information would be the same in methodology. It certainly would be a methodology of which he was very familiar.
Said differently, the Special Counsel did not embark on untested methods of information access or investigation. He used tried and true methods of investigation that would carry brevity in a court of law.
He did a really good job. He thought about everything.
Like a U.S. Attorney's Office, the Special Counsel's Office considered a range of
classified and unclassified information available to the FBI in the course of the Office's Russia
investigation, and the Office structured that work around evidence for possible use in prosecutions
of federal crimes (assuming that one or more crimes were identified that warranted prosecution).
There was substantial evidence immediately available to the Special Counsel at the inception of
the investigation in May 2017 because the FBI had, by that time, already investigated Russian
election interference for nearly 10 months.He modeled the investigation in the way a US Attorney would carry out an investigation. The Special Counsel was not a US Attorney, nor had the capacity of a US Attorney, but, the way a US Attorney would access classified and unclassified information would be the same in methodology. It certainly would be a methodology of which he was very familiar.
Said differently, the Special Counsel did not embark on untested methods of information access or investigation. He used tried and true methods of investigation that would carry brevity in a court of law.
He did a really good job. He thought about everything.
Interesting. The Special Counsel found the information already accumulated in an investigation by the FBI valuable. He didn't throw away 10 months of competent work by the FBI under Comey. I sure he read every word.
The Special Counsel's Office exercised its judgment regarding what to investigate and did not, for instance, investigate every public report of a contact between the Trump Campaign and Russian-affiliated individuals and entities.
The Special Counsel was not going to waste valuable time and money chasing every potential lead. What does that mean? It means the investigation carries brevity. The Special Counsel knew what was litigable and what was important for the sovereign state of the USA and that is where his focus would lie. He WASN'T INTERESTED IN A WITCH HUNT!
The Office has concluded its investigation into links and coordination between the Russian government and individuals associated with the Trump Campaign. Certain proceedings associated with the Office's work remain ongoing. After consultation with the Office of the Deputy Attorney General, the Office has transferred responsibility for those remaining issues to other components of the Department of Justice and FBI. Appendix D lists those transfers.
The word "individuals" is important to note.
Two district courts confirmed the breadth of the Special Counsel's authority to investigate Russia election interference and links and/or coordination with the Trump Campaign.
See UnitedStates v. Manafort, 312 F. Supp. 3d 60, 79-83 (D.D.C. 2018) (click here); United States v. Manafort, 321 F. Supp. 3d 640, 650-655 (E.D. Va. 2018). In the course of conducting that investigation, the Office periodically identified evidence of potential criminal activity that was outside the scope of the Special Counsel's authority established by the Acting Attorney General. After consultation with the Office of the Deputy Attorney General, the Office referred that evidence to appropriate law enforcement authorities, principally other components of the Department of Justice and to the FBI. Appendix D summarizes those referrals.
The Special Counsel did not ignore information to law enforcement simply because it did not fall within his authority. He reported any of that information to the Assistant Attorney General and reports were provided to other agencies to carry out the investigations that fell outside the Special Counsel authority.
Thank you for your interest.
May 31, 2018 was the last Pentagon press briefing.
April 10, 2019
Gerard Butler’s (click here) last action movie was about Navy SEALs rescuing a kidnapped Russian president to prevent World War III. But the least realistic part may have been when the burly Scottish actor stood before a lectern in the Pentagon’s press briefing room to chat about it in October.
Once a staple of military news coverage, the Pentagon press briefing has become a rare occurrence in the Trump Administration.
In fact, it’s been more than 220 days since former Defense Secretary James Mattis delivered his final televised briefing on Aug. 28, and more than 310 days since former Pentagon chief spokesperson Dana White delivered hers on May 31. Acting Secretary of Defense Patrick Shanahan has never delivered a televised briefing in his role....
There have been many issues as of late regarding military personnel receiving pardons in the face of war crimes.
May 23, 2019
By Ephrat Livin
All is not fair in war. (click here) There are laws that military members must follow and courts that enforce these rules. Nonetheless, ahead of Memorial Day on May 27, US president Donald Trump is reportedly considering pardons for American servicemen accused or convicted of war crimes, including civilian murders.
Many veterans, acutely aware of the fact that Trump is not one of them, are incensed by the reports. “He is a serial draft evader who wants to play general,” Gary Solis, a former military judge and prosecutor, Marine, and Vietnam war veteran, tells Quartz. “This just exhibits the president’s ignorance.”...
Granted Trump is an ignorant man in many ways, however, I believe there is a method to the madness. Why not send a clear signal to that the USA forgives those that commit war crimes?
In another war crimes case, the judge dismissed the prosecutor.
June 4, 2019
San Diego -- A military judge (click here) took the rare step Monday of removing a prosecutor accused of misconduct from the war crimes case of a decorated Navy SEAL.
Capt. Aaron Rugh ordered the lead prosecutor removed from the case of Special Operations Chief Edward Gallagher after defense lawyers accused the prosecution of spying on their emails, according to the ruling.
The defense asked Rugh to dismiss the case or remove prosecutors because of the surreptitious effort to track defense emails without court approval in an effort to find the source of news leaks.
Rugh said it was not in his power to determine if Cmdr. Christopher Czaplak violated ethical or professional rules, but the potential for a probe into those actions required that he be removed from the prosecution.
Czaplak received word of the ruling during a deposition while questioning an Iraqi general who is a witness in the case, defense lawyer Tim Parlatore said.
Czaplak left in the middle of the testimony being recorded on video in San Diego for use at the trial. He did not return to the courtroom....
Has there been a communique from Trump to the USA military regarding war crimes and the treatment of those that commit them?
It is important to realize, leaving the Iran Agreement was a CAMPAIGN promise. Trump's actions are all based in hate. Just that simple.
The tensions that exist today is a direct result of Trump's willingness to escalate ANY situation; ie: the USA Southern Border.
There is no REAL REASON for any of Trump's actions regarding Iran.
Putin, the Russian president with two nuclear capacity jets in Venezuela, is stating any relationship with the USA is deteriorating BY THE HOUR. (click here) That means Trump no longer serves Putin's purpose as a populous figure in Russia.
Trump fell right into the trap.
He shared high valued classified information the day after James Comey was fired. He held a private meeting with Putin in Helsinki that went on for hours. He has made Russia a priority in many public statements. He is the fool Putin longed for and put him in the presidency to benefit Russia.
The tensions that exist today is a direct result of Trump's willingness to escalate ANY situation; ie: the USA Southern Border.
There is no REAL REASON for any of Trump's actions regarding Iran.
Putin, the Russian president with two nuclear capacity jets in Venezuela, is stating any relationship with the USA is deteriorating BY THE HOUR. (click here) That means Trump no longer serves Putin's purpose as a populous figure in Russia.
Trump fell right into the trap.
He shared high valued classified information the day after James Comey was fired. He held a private meeting with Putin in Helsinki that went on for hours. He has made Russia a priority in many public statements. He is the fool Putin longed for and put him in the presidency to benefit Russia.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)