JUST the Stolen Documents/Mar-A-Lago/"Judge" Cannon Trial

[old salt]

Scary ? It's not like the complaint was buried. The ODNI referred it to DoJ, where It was investigated by DoJ criminal prosecutors.
If the WB is not satisfied with the ODNI's resolution, they can take it directly to one of the Congressional intel committees.

The WB's ID has still not been unmasked.
The Acting DNI will explain it tomorrow.

Tell that to the next WB. This is NOT going the way the law reads.

You can't get a little bit pregnant.

And again---go back and look. I was po'ed BEFORE we knew this was about Trump. And again----Trump hasn't done anything wrong. It's all on the DNI....that's where my complaint lies.

This isn't a TDS thing. This law needs to be airtight, no shenanigans.

The law needs teeth. Jail time for the DNI failing to follow the law, and losing his job, forfeiting pension would be a fine start.

You don't need a law to go to the FBI or Congress as a whistleblower.
This just adds an additional layer of protection for current members of the IC to share classified matl & gives the IC a chance to resolve the complaint first. ...but if you go direct to the WP, you might score a couple Nats or Caps tickets.

[Typical Lax Dad]

Scary ? It's not like the complaint was buried. The ODNI referred it to DoJ, where It was investigated by DoJ criminal prosecutors.
If the WB is not satisfied with the ODNI's resolution, they can take it directly to one of the Congressional intel committees.

The WB's ID has still not been unmasked.
The Acting DNI will explain it tomorrow.

Tell that to the next WB. This is NOT going the way the law reads.

You can't get a little bit pregnant.

And again---go back and look. I was po'ed BEFORE we knew this was about Trump. And again----Trump hasn't done anything wrong. It's all on the DNI....that's where my complaint lies.

This isn't a TDS thing. This law needs to be airtight, no shenanigans.

The law needs teeth. Jail time for the DNI failing to follow the law, and losing his job, forfeiting pension would be a fine start.

Yep.

[foreverlax]

Scary ? It's not like the complaint was buried. The ODNI referred it to DoJ, where It was investigated by DoJ criminal prosecutors.
If the WB is not satisfied with the ODNI's resolution, they can take it directly to one of the Congressional intel committees.

The WB's ID has still not been unmasked.
The Acting DNI will explain it tomorrow.

Tell that to the next WB. This is NOT going the way the law reads.

You can't get a little bit pregnant.

And again---go back and look. I was po'ed BEFORE we knew this was about Trump. And again----Trump hasn't done anything wrong. It's all on the DNI....that's where my complaint lies.

This isn't a TDS thing. This law needs to be airtight, no shenanigans.

The law needs teeth. Jail time for the DNI failing to follow the law, and losing his job, forfeiting pension would be a fine start.

I suspect we're going to hear from the DNI that he was told to hold it, either by the DOJ or White House directly. And that, too, will be an obstruction of justice. My guess is that this comes back to Barr. Again.

Brennan says the DNI is a straight shooter, though over his head...it's reported (though disputed) that he threatened to resign if he was told he couldn't speak candidly tomorrow...we'll see.

Seem nearly impossible that Barr wasn't aware of the call the moment after it happened. Assuming they circulate recaps/memos to the appropriate personnel..Barr was mentioned in that call - sure seems like he should recuse himself from this issue.

Fat chance of that.

[Trinity]

.@murraywaas on Giuliani: "The Ukrainian initiative appears to have begun in service of formulating a rationale by which the president could pardon Manafort, as part of an effort to undermine the special counsel’s investigation.". nybooks.com/daily/2019/09/… @nybooks


“In particular, the records show that Manafort’s camp provided Giuliani with information designed to smear two people: one was a Ukrainian journalist and political activist named Serhiy Leshchenko, whom Manafort believed, correctly, of helping to uncover Manafort’s..

And...the WH tried to hide the Ukraine call on a separate private system. Hillary says what?

Barr needs to recuse. He’s a witness.

[MDlaxfan76]

Scary ? It's not like the complaint was buried. The ODNI referred it to DoJ, where It was investigated by DoJ criminal prosecutors.
If the WB is not satisfied with the ODNI's resolution, they can take it directly to one of the Congressional intel committees.

The WB's ID has still not been unmasked.
The Acting DNI will explain it tomorrow.

Tell that to the next WB. This is NOT going the way the law reads.

You can't get a little bit pregnant.

And again---go back and look. I was po'ed BEFORE we knew this was about Trump. And again----Trump hasn't done anything wrong. It's all on the DNI....that's where my complaint lies.

This isn't a TDS thing. This law needs to be airtight, no shenanigans.

The law needs teeth. Jail time for the DNI failing to follow the law, and losing his job, forfeiting pension would be a fine start.

I suspect we're going to hear from the DNI that he was told to hold it, either by the DOJ or White House directly. And that, too, will be an obstruction of justice. My guess is that this comes back to Barr. Again.

Brennan says the DNI is a straight shooter, though over his head...it's reported (though disputed) that he threatened to resign if he was told he couldn't speak candidly tomorrow...we'll see.

Seem nearly impossible that Barr wasn't aware of the call the moment after it happened. Assuming they circulate recaps/memos to the appropriate personnel..Barr was mentioned in that call - sure seems like he should recuse himself from this issue.

Fat chance of that.

I agree with your conclusion, but the whistleblower apparently reports that one of the issues is that the call read out did not get put through proper channels, indeed there was an attempt to cover it up/hide it. My bet is that Barr was actually involved in the cover-up, not that he was just in the loop and is a witness. But that's merely a hunch.

[Trinity]

The complaint is available. Trump’s team is so screwed.

https://intelligence.house.gov/uploaded ... nclass.pdf

[foreverlax]

Scary ? It's not like the complaint was buried. The ODNI referred it to DoJ, where It was investigated by DoJ criminal prosecutors.
If the WB is not satisfied with the ODNI's resolution, they can take it directly to one of the Congressional intel committees.

The WB's ID has still not been unmasked.
The Acting DNI will explain it tomorrow.

Tell that to the next WB. This is NOT going the way the law reads.

You can't get a little bit pregnant.

And again---go back and look. I was po'ed BEFORE we knew this was about Trump. And again----Trump hasn't done anything wrong. It's all on the DNI....that's where my complaint lies.

This isn't a TDS thing. This law needs to be airtight, no shenanigans.

The law needs teeth. Jail time for the DNI failing to follow the law, and losing his job, forfeiting pension would be a fine start.

I suspect we're going to hear from the DNI that he was told to hold it, either by the DOJ or White House directly. And that, too, will be an obstruction of justice. My guess is that this comes back to Barr. Again.

Brennan says the DNI is a straight shooter, though over his head...it's reported (though disputed) that he threatened to resign if he was told he couldn't speak candidly tomorrow...we'll see.

Seem nearly impossible that Barr wasn't aware of the call the moment after it happened. Assuming they circulate recaps/memos to the appropriate personnel..Barr was mentioned in that call - sure seems like he should recuse himself from this issue.

Fat chance of that.

I agree with your conclusion, but the whistleblower apparently reports that one of the issues is that the call read out did not get put through proper channels, indeed there was an attempt to cover it up/hide it. My bet is that Barr was actually involved in the cover-up, not that he was just in the loop and is a witness. But that's merely a hunch.

Rudy's comment regarding his involvement now includes the State Department.

[a fan]

You don't need a law to go to the FBI or Congress as a whistleblower.
This just adds an additional layer of protection for current members of the IC to share classified matl & gives the IC a chance to resolve the complaint first. ...but if you go direct to the WP, you might score a couple Nats or Caps tickets.

Great. DNI Maguire just invoked Executive privilege when asked if he discussed the whistleblower complaint with Trump.

[a fan]

Now Maguire just said he handed the WB complaint off to the FBI?

What the heck?

Where is that in the WB act?

[a fan]

Acting DNI Joseph Maguire told lawmakers that his office consulted with the White House counsel after receiving the complaint because calls with foreign leaders usually fall under executive privilege, adding that such privilege was something he did not have the authority to waive.

So someone invokes the WB act on Trump. And the Director of National Intelligence decides he better bring this complaint to the White House lawyer.

Broken. Our country is broken.

Oh well. I like his policies.

[DocBarrister]

The complaint is available. Trump’s team is so screwed.

https://intelligence.house.gov/uploaded ... nclass.pdf

This is a sad day in American history.

And, NO, I am NOT smiling, because a president getting caught abusing his office, having his administration cover it up, the president facing impeachment, and his aides facing possible jail time ... all of that is an American tragedy that should be mourned, not gloated upon.

Again, a very, very sad day.

DocBarrister (saddened)

[a fan]

I'm left shaking my head. Maguire comes across as an honest, non partisan man.

He's just not all that bright.

In what world is the President not a member of our Intel community? He is this man's BOSS,FFS.

And if he really wants to protect the WB...why did he go outside the WB law, and contact the White House counsel as well as the FBI? The Intel Committee should have made that determination.

Sad day.

[Trinity]

A month into the case he doesn’t know if Rudy G has a security clearance?

[foreverlax]

I'm left shaking my head. Maguire comes across as an honest, non partisan man.

He's just not all that bright.

In what world is the President not a member of our Intel community? He is this man's BOSS,FFS. This has to be a "definition issue" as to how the law was written.

And if he really wants to protect the WB...why did he go outside the WB law, and contact the White House counsel as well as the FBI?That is an answer he hasn't been able to answer The Intel Committee should have made that determination.

Sad day.

Our pol need to do some heavy lifting - we used to think a POTUS was above all of these issues, since a POTUS would never do these types of things.

Time to make the rules for a POTUS laws.

[tech37]

I'm left shaking my head. Maguire comes across as an honest, non partisan man.

He's just not all that bright.

In what world is the President not a member of our Intel community? He is this man's BOSS,FFS.

Seriously a fan?... who's playing dumb now? Maguire was answering in a technical sense.

[RedFromMI]

I'm left shaking my head. Maguire comes across as an honest, non partisan man.

He's just not all that bright.

In what world is the President not a member of our Intel community? He is this man's BOSS,FFS.

Seriously a fan?... who's playing dumb now? Maguire was answering in a technical sense.

And he strikes me as someone who is unwilling to stick his neck out here and override the desires of either DOJ or the White House. I don't think it is fear in the sense that he is a coward about this, given that he is a former Seal, but rather a calculation that doing so in the current corrupt White House he would be effectively "crucified" for doing so.

[MDlaxfan76]

I'm left shaking my head. Maguire comes across as an honest, non partisan man.

He's just not all that bright.

In what world is the President not a member of our Intel community? He is this man's BOSS,FFS.

Seriously a fan?... who's playing dumb now? Maguire was answering in a technical sense.

And he strikes me as someone who is unwilling to stick his neck out here and override the desires of either DOJ or the White House. I don't think it is fear in the sense that he is a coward about this, given that he is a former Seal, but rather a calculation that doing so in the current corrupt White House he would be effectively "crucified" for doing so.

That may be accurate, but he doesn't strike me as a coward either...my sense is that he's an honorable guy, but one who is very concerned with rules (not a bad thing!) and he was very concerned with running afoul of conflicting rules, so he tried to work through it.

It appears that he understood just how sticky the wicket was, the hedge of thorns he needed to work his way through successfully.

He recognized the inherent issues of a WB blowing the whistle on the President, truly outside of any regular set of circumstances. "unprecedented" and thus running directly into possible executive privilege issues. At the same time, he understood darn well how egregious the conduct was and that it couldn't be ignored, much less the obligation, whether legal, moral or ethical to bring the complaint forward.

Ultimately that effort was successful. But not without an enormous amount of resistance by the WH and DOJ.

If I'd been managing the Dems I'd have quickly embraced his explanation for his own conundrum in such a way that made clear that while his actions may have been honorable and careful, the net result risked an ongoing cover-up of wrongdoing...an issue that perhaps Congress should explicitly fix for going forward, so that there would never be such a question again.

Schiff eventually got there, and steered the others there, but IMO, there was too much attention to whether the DNI had acted incorrectly (allowing the R's to charge that the Dems were calling into question his integrity). I thought that making clear that there's obvious huge conflicts when the deciders of whether to bring the issue to Congress are the subject of the complaint and the AG who is part and parcel of the wrongdoing creates an untenable problem. But that could have been done with more emphasis that such situation wasn't the DNI's fault, but rather it was the President and AG's fault.

Bottomline, however, I thought the DNI walked out with the respect of the Dems, if not their agreement as to his actions, and a bit to the horror of the R's, who for the most part (excluding toady Nunes and a couple of others) appeared to recognize, painfully, that the DNI found the situation to be an egregious abuse of power as well, albeit he wasn't going to say anything so direct. But his support for the integrity of the IG and his support for the WB were unshakable, so the Trumpists really didn't find anything the DNI said to be helpful for their claims of 'witch hunt'.

[old salt]

That's his Navy SEAL pedigree. He didn't leave his IG or WB exposed to crossfire.

[foreverlax]

That's his Navy SEAL pedigree. He didn't leave his IG or WB exposed to crossfire.

But he is The Deep State...

[seacoaster]

"Bottomline, however, I thought the DNI walked out with the respect of the Dems, if not their agreement as to his actions, and a bit to the horror of the R's, who for the most part (excluding toady Nunes and a couple of others) appeared to recognize, painfully, that the DNI found the situation to be an egregious abuse of power as well, albeit he wasn't going to say anything so direct. But his support for the integrity of the IG and his support for the WB were unshakable, so the Trumpists really didn't find anything the DNI said to be helpful for their claims of 'witch hunt'."

Agreed; nice summary MDlaxfan.