Former NSA Director Michael Rogers Cooperating with Durham Investigation into Trump-Russia Probe

You mean like in Libya and Syria? /facepalm

Or heck in Cuba?

 

Cuba, we should have told the Russians move it or lose it.

 

Yes i'm sure in hindsight nuclear war would have been preffered eh? Insanity.

 

Technically correct as they don’t actually “tap wires” anymore. That is how they can deny “wiretapping” and be telling the truth. Carter page, whom was the target of the surveillance was a CIA informant, and when the fbi asked the CIA they confirmed that fact. The fbi altered the e-mail to show the CIA denied that carter page was working with the CIA and took that to the FISC.
Carter page, the one person affiliated with the trump campaign, with the most Russian connections, didn’t see a single indictment or charge. Funny that...

 

I dunno atomic war in the early 60's
Vs the past 60 years of little proxy wars all over the world. Can you honestly say one is worse than the other?

 

I would say our foreign policy over the last couple decades has done nothing but create cluster ****s to recover from a previous cluster **** meanwhile a select few always gain.. Strange that dont you think?

Why do we get away with anything in the name of "National Security" but other countries can not?

 

That's kinda my point.. if we had just had it out with the Russians, we would have had our oh shiit moment and we'd be on the way to making things better for a while.

We have mortal wounds with bandaids hidden under the hospital blanket.

 

Open war with nuclear power? Neo-Cons are nuts.

 

I'm not a neocon.. I'm just guessing about how things might be different now.
After all Hiroshima and Nagasaki are both flourishing inspite of getting nuked.


Doing everything to avoid war is never a good option. And it's been our primary Strategy for the last 50 years.

 

Japan was not a nuclear power..

Japan attacked us.

How is being in a constant state of war trying to avoid it?

 

All of those brushfire are the result of avoiding war with the USSR and or Chinese communism.

 

There's this thing called the 4th Amendment...

https://aclj.org/government-corrupt...power-blames-others-for-her-unmasking-scandal
https://thehill.com/opinion/white-h...ha-power-spewed-anti-trump-bias-in-government

This is just the tip of the iceberg. We can go into McCabe's, Clapper's, Comey's, and Brennan's lies under oath. Or perhaps Comey, McCabe, Steele, and other's known illegal leaking to the "Free Press". Or the FBI Lawyer that changed Carter Page's status as a CIA Source to not being one on a FISA Application.

If you are still asking what "evidence" there is of crimes by the DoJ, then you are just a petty Leftist Partisan that refuses to see it in black and white in Government Reports.

 

I would say the end of all human life on Earth would have been worse, yes. And that IS what a full-on nuclear exchange would have caused. Read this;

https://www.publishersweekly.com/978-0-394-58307-5

and stop embarrassing yourself.

 

Yawn... don't worry I'm not embarrassed.

 

You should be, but then I forget, you're conservative. Have you ever read the book?

 

Crickets

 

And you're a commie always accusing people baselessly and abusing them anyway you can..
I'm sure I'll be one of the first ones against your wall when you are king.

As i just proved, i have actually read a book, many of them in fact. A few i even regret reading.

 

Sagan was just another lefty who often exaggerated, as he admitted in his dire warnings on the fallout from the 1991 Kuwaiti oil fires. Scientists are no less likely to let their biases affect their work than any other profession.

 

Perjury(statements of falsehood either or by omission under oath), that is now virtually guaranteed by the IG report. And as Carter Page noted, said omission of evidence is also evidence of *drumroll* Obstruction of Justice. But in the case of the falsification of evidence, we also have a clear cut case of Forgery!

The amount of criminal offenses(all felonies) are staggering and stacking. And there's direct and available public evidence for each and every offense. People are going to go to jail. We just don't know who Durham/Barr will charge, but Comey's little gimmick of "It wasn't on my watch" is hardly going to fly.

 

My xmas wish.

 

Durham certainly won't uncover any less than the IG report has, which has verified what Nunes has been claiming for a long time. The horse is now out of the barn. If what you say above turns out to be true, that amounts to the Deep State attempting to prevent Trump from being elected and to later hinder his administration, in the Plan B Insurance Policy Peter Strozek mentioned. It would be the greatest political scandal in US history. If there are indictments by next summer, the resulting trials and sentencing will go on for a long time.

 

Likely into his second term, the 'optics' won't look so good on the Democratic side(they'll argue he's overseeing political persecution. Hell, liar Schiff already argued that before a single indictment.) but a speedy trial has never been factually that speedy.

 

I would say using spies to verify or validate intel would be great. Then we would have known there were no WMDs in Iraq and Saddam would probably still be there.

 

It is amazing how little company Mike Rogers had and what vile scum was occupying these high offices. Scum in league with the Fake News Media at the highest level pushing a pack of lies that continues to this day. I'm looking forward to Durham's report!~

#JOURNALISM: RealClearInvestigations: The NY Times Used to Correct Its Whoppers. But Not These Two. Here’s Why.

A fuller accounting by the Times is especially necessary because the media’s pushing of Trump-Russia conspiracy theories was central to an unprecedented and possibly criminal effort to subvert or remove a president under false pretenses. Unless the Times and other sources come clean about who was feeding them misleading and partisan information, we may never understand this momentous chapter of history.

Protecting confidential sources is, of course, one of the bedrocks of journalism. The free flow of information depends on people being able to share hard truths without jeopardizing their careers or lives.

But not when sources lie or mislead. When that happens, the confidentiality deal is off and “your responsibility would be to set the record straight,” Lynn Walsh, ethics chair of the Society of Professional Journalists, confirmed to me recently in a general conversation about SPJ’s standards for anonymous sourcing.

When sources engage in gross deception on a matter of such import, even committing national security crimes in the process, the news media involved should honor their higher duty – to their readers or viewers – to expose the malfeasance and correct the record.

There’s a less exalted incentive for the Times to revisit its reporting: damage control before the Justice Department releases the findings of prosecutor John H. Durham’s criminal probe of Trump-Russia’s origins.

The auguries, however, are not good.​

Think of them as Democrat Party — or perhaps Chinese — operatives with bylines and you won’t go far wrong.