Looks like an attempt at impeachment has already started. We’ll see where this goes.
http://www.okayplayer.com/news/preliminary-impeachment-papers-filed-against-donald-trump.html
1 Like
Article is seriously misleading.
Seems like the author of the article did not read the pdf despite linking to it. It’s not a direct request for impeachment. Just an inquiry. That being said, is that really the first step in a presidential impeachment ?
The 9th Circuit maintains the suspension of Trump’s immigration order/Muslim ban.
Bring on the Supreme Court…
2 Likes
To be fair, the 9th Circuit does cover a disproportionately large percentage of the US population in comparison to the other Circuits, so I’m not immediately opposed to splitting it up. However, that kind of redistricting should involve a complete restructure of all the Circuits and not just the 9th. Maybe adding an additional two instead of just one Circuit would be appropriate (and also increase the number of federal judges). Source on the numbers.
Gerrymandering of districts, fun.
“Now you fucked up!”
National security adviser Michael Flynn privately discussed U.S. sanctions against Russia with that country’s ambassador to the United States during the month before President Trump took office, contrary to public assertions by Trump officials, current and former U.S. officials said.
[…]
Flynn on Wednesday denied that he had discussed sanctions with Kislyak. Asked in an interview whether he had ever done so, he twice said, “No.”
On Thursday, Flynn, through his spokesman, backed away from the denial. The spokesman said Flynn “indicated that while he had no recollection of discussing sanctions, he couldn’t be certain that the topic never came up.”
Apparently the 9th circuit court ruling against Trump is savage. Trump’s response is “see you in court”, apparently unaware that they already were in court to begin with.
Wasn’t the ruling limited to the stay and not on the executive order itself?
1 Like
1 Like
None of the corroborated information deals with Trump (yet), but the fact that some of it is true could be the first break in what could be yuuuuuge!
1 Like
Could be huge…
Right now it sounds like they confirmed A called B on Tuesday and… That’s it. Nothing about the content just that the contact was verified. Which, is hardly newsworthy.
If I alleged that Rym and Scott were planning to egg Cremlian’s car based on a phone call they made on Sunday and later produced a phone log showing the call took place would that confirm the allegations? The allegation is not the call but the content of the call. So far this story is still a whole lot of nothing.
I’d say the fact that the call was made at all is mighty odd, given that Flynn hadn’t assumed office yet…
1 Like
I’ve not read the full story yet, so I may be putting my foot in my mouth, but it’s a start. This is 35 pages of this guy said this to that guy on this date and this lady peed on this bed on that date.
Imagine the converse. Imagine if we’d just found out NO call had taken place between individuals on the dates listed in the doc. That kinda makes me have less faith the rest of the doc is true. By the same token, confirming it did, while proving nothing, strengthens my faith that the rest of the doc is true.
The CNN article states they have only confirmed contact between foreign nationals (Russians talking to Russians) and not Americans talking to foreigners. At this stage wouldn’t it benefit Russia to leak out confirming information to weaken the US president? Couldn’t they just be creating this confirmation information whole cloth?
Consider this: before BuzzFeed published the dossier who had access to its information? Now that the dossier is public everyone has access and it is easier to fabricate evidence supporting it.
Not going to get my hopes up until I see a smoking gun. Not gonna get trolled.
[quote=“hmtksteve, post:417, topic:125”]
Consider this: before BuzzFeed published the dossier who had access to its information? Now that the dossier is public everyone has access and it is easier to fabricate evidence supporting it.
[/quote]Oh, I can answer this one - pretty much any Republican or Democrat on the hill that wanted it, since it was being circulated around both parties, and almost every major media outlet running, and while most major intelligence agencies didn’t have the exact file to hand, they had similar files. Plus, it was rumored to be in the wild, but I’m not sure if that’s true.
In short, it wasn’t a secret that Russia was keeping Kompromat on Trump. Anyone paying attention knew of it’s existence for months before Buzzfeed just posted the contents.
That’s not the point I am trying to make.
When police investigate a crime they will often release some information while keeping other bits private. When they them canvas for tips and witnesses they can compare the incoming information to all of the information they have. If a tip includes previously unreleased information that tip is more worthy of following up as it is potentially more credible. If the entirety of the investigation were made public those investigating would have a more difficult time telling potential tips from bogus ones.
The same is true here. Since the entire dossier is out it is easier for foreign intelligence services to create credible disinformation leaks.
[quote=“hmtksteve, post:419, topic:125”]
The same is true here. Since the entire dossier is out it is easier for foreign intelligence services to create credible disinformation leaks.
[/quote]But that doesn’t make sense. If they wanted to make credible disinformation leaks, every half-way competent intelligence service already has it, or has access to it. And really, the one one country that has been positioning itself as a country that would do it is Russia, and they allegedly already have the information on trump discussed in the dossier. And trust me, it doesn’t really help make leaked disinformation(or information, for that matter) more credible, because the same people they’d leak that information to already had the dossier.
There’s also more you have to consider - do you think the American public did not deserve to know something that was both non-classified, and being heavily discussed about the (at the time) president elect by people at the top levels of the government and media? To quote Richard Tofel of ProPublica: “If you oppose the BuzzFeed decision to publish, you need to explain why citizens should not be allowed to see the dossier.” CNN had already published about the existence of and key points of the Dossier, it was a matter of public debate - Do you really think that the debaters shouldn’t be allowed to know what they’re debating about?
For some further reading:
CJR defends Buzzfeed’s decision to publish the dossier. Covers points I haven’t covered here.
On the nature of Russian Kompromat, from Merril professor Sarah Oates.
2 Likes
Flynn is resigning as National Security Advisor.
3 Likes
Aaaand now the Trump administration admits that Trump knew about Flynn for “weeks…”
“President Trump was aware that his national security adviser Michael Flynn had misled White House officials and Vice President Pence for “weeks” before he was forced to resign on Monday night.”
The more we learn about this, the worse it gets for them.