[News] Post a Political News Story

Ongoing discussion of the political news of the day. This thread is for 'smaller' stories that don't call for their own thread. If a story blows up, please start a new thread for it.

I notice that the Trump trash isn't making a big deal about the fact that their messiah's 2017 update to the FISA act upgrading mishandling secret materials from a misdemeanor to a felony is what is biting him in the ass.

Now that "DOJ requests court unseal Trump search warrant" we will see how his cult twists themselves into knots to show this is actually wrong.

croaker wrote:
maverickz wrote:
Robear wrote:

Really? Define benevolent.

Really? I'm surprised you're not familiar with the level of popularity Hitler and the Nazi party had in Germany during those years. He promised Germans a recovery from World War I in economic, social, psychological, and global prestige terms. He promised a wholecloth improvement of every day Germans' lives. And, he was giving the Germans someone to blame for all their ills.

Not to be too nitpicky here, but that's being a successful politician, not being benevolent (unless that's your definition of benevolence).

I was very specific about using the words "thought" and "Germans".

Paleocon wrote:
Seth wrote:
Seth wrote:

Are there any reports of the reactionaries doing anything more than nonviolent protests outside Mara lago and writing very sad tweets?

So far the response has been pretty muted, imo, considering we just desecrated the throne of their god.

Fox News reporting that, yep, pretty much just sad tweets. you might assume Fox News would be playing down any violent rhetoric, but they’re one of the few reporting on “increased death threats.” Unpopular opinion but I’ve never really considered online death threats as newsworthy, as they are ubiquitous.

Fox News wrote:

Authorities monitoring social media posts are spotting a significant increase in death threats aimed towards agents, Wray and Garland. These threats are reported to continue at a steady pace online.

The FBI/DOJ security procedures are not made public, and both Garland and Wray travel with armed security. Still, Fox News is told there are discussions to potentially increase their security.

Not even enough to increase their security detail yet eh? Fair enough.

Trump trash at FBI building in Cincy

Killed by law enforcement and oh by the way was at the Capitol on 1/6. This wasn't his first rodeo, but it sure was his last.

maverickz wrote:
Robear wrote:
Maverickz wrote:

You know who thought they had a benevolent dictator ruling them? Germans recovering from World War I.

Really? Define benevolent.

Really? I'm surprised you're not familiar with the level of popularity Hitler and the Nazi party had in Germany during those years. He promised Germans a recovery from World War I in economic, social, psychological, and global prestige terms. He promised a wholecloth improvement of every day Germans' lives. And, he was giving the Germans someone to blame for all their ills.

He's not a dictator if he was DEMOCRATICALLY ELECTED! Sheesh.

Rat Boy wrote:
Paleocon wrote:
Seth wrote:
Seth wrote:

Are there any reports of the reactionaries doing anything more than nonviolent protests outside Mara lago and writing very sad tweets?

So far the response has been pretty muted, imo, considering we just desecrated the throne of their god.

Fox News reporting that, yep, pretty much just sad tweets. you might assume Fox News would be playing down any violent rhetoric, but they’re one of the few reporting on “increased death threats.” Unpopular opinion but I’ve never really considered online death threats as newsworthy, as they are ubiquitous.

Fox News wrote:

Authorities monitoring social media posts are spotting a significant increase in death threats aimed towards agents, Wray and Garland. These threats are reported to continue at a steady pace online.

The FBI/DOJ security procedures are not made public, and both Garland and Wray travel with armed security. Still, Fox News is told there are discussions to potentially increase their security.

Not even enough to increase their security detail yet eh? Fair enough.

Trump trash at FBI building in Cincy

Killed by law enforcement and oh by the way was at the Capitol on 1/6. This wasn't his first rodeo, but it sure was his last.

Weird. I assumed he was white.

maverickz wrote:

Robear wrote:

Maverickz wrote:

You know who thought they had a benevolent dictator ruling them? Germans recovering from World War I.

Really? Define benevolent.

Really? I'm surprised you're not familiar with the level of popularity Hitler and the Nazi party had in Germany during those years. He promised Germans a recovery from World War I in economic, social, psychological, and global prestige terms. He promised a wholecloth improvement of every day Germans' lives. And, he was giving the Germans someone to blame for all their ills.

Wow. Irony really is dead... And no, you have not given your definition of benevolent any more than anyone else did above.

Rat Boy wrote:

Killed by law enforcement and oh by the way was at the Capitol on 1/6. This wasn't his first rodeo, but it sure was his last.

Of course he had an account on Truth Social:

IMAGE(https://i.imgur.com/jl5gBOp.png)

And his last post:

IMAGE(https://i.imgur.com/bBnONpU.png)

There's some captures of him on Twitter responding to MTG that the 2020 election was stolen and that "The next step is the one we used in 1775."

Mixolyde wrote:
Rat Boy wrote:

Killed by law enforcement and oh by the way was at the Capitol on 1/6. This wasn't his first rodeo, but it sure was his last.

Weird. I assumed he was white.

I mean, he tried to breach an FBI building and after a car chase exchanged fire with police officers. White or not, law enforcement takes a very dim view of people actually firing at them. If he'd only been firing at other people, it might have been a very different ending.

Yeah he walked into an FBI office with an AR-15 and shot a nail gun in the building. He then fled to a car and high speed chase got out in a field and had a hours long standoff with officers. That is the preferential white guy treatment.

Stele wrote:

Yeah he walked into an FBI office with an AR-15 and shot a nail gun in the building. He then fled to a car and high speed chase got out in a field and had a hours long standoff with officers. That is the preferential white guy treatment.

So he thought a nail gun would work on the bullet proof glass?
IMAGE(https://i.imgur.com/bBnONpU.png)

OG_slinger wrote:

But then Trump's and the entire right wing's argument so far--that the FBI and DOJ are hiding something--goes out the window. There can't be a gigantic conspiracy if the DOJ is willing to drop trow and show everything.

The DOJ was never going to release anything, and if they were it was all lies, and if it’s true it’s not that bad.

this was a practice reply

Robear wrote:

maverickz wrote:

Robear wrote:

Maverickz wrote:

You know who thought they had a benevolent dictator ruling them? Germans recovering from World War I.

Really? Define benevolent.

Really? I'm surprised you're not familiar with the level of popularity Hitler and the Nazi party had in Germany during those years. He promised Germans a recovery from World War I in economic, social, psychological, and global prestige terms. He promised a wholecloth improvement of every day Germans' lives. And, he was giving the Germans someone to blame for all their ills.

Wow. Irony really is dead... And no, you have not given your definition of benevolent any more than anyone else did above.

I have no idea what you're trying to say.

The entire point is that the definition of "benevolent" is extremely subjective. Which is why I kept repeating my question of who gets to define benevolent. What may be benevolent for one group of people may be malevolent for another.

Mixolyde wrote:

He's not a dictator if he was DEMOCRATICALLY ELECTED! Sheesh.

IMAGE(https://jaynedenker.files.wordpress.com/2014/06/woah.jpg)

maverickz wrote:

The entire point is that the definition of "benevolent" is extremely subjective .

Lol that was everyone’s point.

Seth wrote:
maverickz wrote:

The entire point is that the definition of "benevolent" is extremely subjective .

Lol that was everyone’s point.

We're You're all smart!

We're all very smrt!

Ahh but who’s definition of smrt?

IMAGE( https://static.wikia.nocookie.net/simpsons/images/2/2c/Homer_Goes_to_College_41.JPG)

Edit: this was less witty after your edits.

JC wrote:
Stele wrote:

Yeah he walked into an FBI office with an AR-15 and shot a nail gun in the building. He then fled to a car and high speed chase got out in a field and had a hours long standoff with officers. That is the preferential white guy treatment.

So he thought a nail gun would work on the bullet proof glass?
IMAGE(https://i.imgur.com/bBnONpU.png)

Yeah well Trump voters aren't the sharpest knives in the drawer

The classified documents at Mar-a-Lago were about nukes. Sorry, it's WaPo and I burned through my free articles.

Rat Boy wrote:

The classified documents at Mar-a-Lago were about nukes. Sorry, it's WaPo and I burned through my free articles.

Of course they were. I so hope they have him on tape trying to sell the material to someone.

Nuke secrets would probably pay off a lot of his Russian debt.

Rat Boy wrote:

The classified documents at Mar-a-Lago were about nukes. Sorry, it's WaPo and I burned through my free articles.

Nukes *and* signals intelligence.

FBI searched Trump’s home to look for nuclear documents and other items, sources say

WaPo wrote:

Classified documents relating to nuclear weapons were among the items FBI agents sought in a search of former president Donald Trump’s Florida residence on Monday, according to people familiar with the investigation.

Experts in classified information said the unusual search underscores deep concern among government officials about the types of information they thought could be located at Trump’s Mar-a-Lago Club and potentially in danger of falling into the wrong hands.

The people who described some of the material that agents were seeking spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss an ongoing investigation. They did not offer additional details about what type of information the agents were seeking, including whether it involved weapons belonging to the United States or some other nation. Nor did they say if such documents were recovered as part of the search. A Trump spokesman did not immediately respond to a request for comment. The Justice Department and FBI declined to comment.

Attorney General Merrick Garland said he could not discuss the investigation on Thursday. But in an unusual public statement at the Justice Department, he announced he had personally authorized the decision to seek court permission for a search warrant.

Garland spoke moments after Justice Department lawyers filed a motion seeking to unseal the search warrant in the case, noting that Trump had publicly revealed the search shortly after it happened.

“The public’s clear and powerful interest in understanding what occurred under these circumstances weighs heavily in favor of unsealing,” the motion says. “That said, the former President should have an opportunity to respond to this Motion and lodge objections, including with regards to any ‘legitimate privacy interests’ or the potential for other ‘injury’ if these materials are made public.”

Material about nuclear weapons is especially sensitive and usually restricted to a small number of government officials, experts said. Publicizing details about U.S. weapons could provide an intelligence road map to adversaries seeking to build ways of countering those systems. And other countries might view exposing their nuclear secrets as a threat, experts said.

One former Justice Department official, who in the past oversaw investigations of leaks of classified information, said the type of top-secret information described by the people familiar with the probe would probably cause authorities to try to move as quickly as possible to recover sensitive documents that could cause grave harm to U.S. security.

“If that is true, it would suggest that material residing unlawfully at Mar-a-Lago may have been classified at the highest classification level,” said David Laufman, the former chief of the Justice Department’s counterintelligence section, which investigates leaks of classified information. “If the FBI and the Department of Justice believed there were top secret materials still at Mar-a-Lago, that would lend itself to greater ‘hair-on-fire’ motivation to recover that material as quickly as possible.”

...

The investigation into the improper handling of documents began months ago, when the National Archives and Records Administration sought the return of material taken to Mar-a-Lago from the White House. Fifteen boxes of documents and items, some of them marked classified, were returned early this year. The archives subsequently asked the Justice Department to investigate.

Former senior intelligence officials said in interviews that during the Trump administration, highly classified intelligence about sensitive topics, including about intelligence-gathering on Iran, was routinely mishandled. One former official said the most highly classified information often ended up in the hands of personnel who didn’t appear to have a need to possesses it or weren’t authorized to read it.

That former official also said signals intelligence — intercepted electronic communications like emails and phone calls of foreign leaders — was among the type of information that often ended up with unauthorized personnel. Such intercepts are among the most closely guarded secrets because of what they can reveal about how the United States has penetrated foreign governments.

A person familiar with the inventory of 15 boxes taken from Mar-a-Lago in January indicated that signals intelligence material was included in them. The precise nature of the information was unclear.

The former officials and the other individual spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive intelligence matters.

This spring, Trump’s team received a grand jury subpoena in connection with the documents investigations, two people familiar with the investigation, who also spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss details, confirmed to The Washington Post on Thursday. Investigators visited Mar-a-Lago in the weeks following the issuance of the subpoena, and Trump’s team handed over some materials. The subpoena was first reported by Just the News, a conservative media outlet run by John Solomon, one of Trump’s recently designated representatives to the National Archives.

People familiar with the probe have said it is focused on whether the former president or his aides withheld classified or other government material that should have been returned to government custody earlier. The people, who also spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss the investigation, said that as authorities engaged in months of discussions on the subject, some officials came to suspect the Trump team was not being truthful.

As a quick review, trump tried to sell nuclear secrets to Saudi Arabia back in 2019 through his pal Michael Flynn and got caught, but was still “considering the deal.”

Obv this won’t happen to the Donald, but it might be time for the right to refresh themselves on the Rosenbergs.

Seth wrote:

As a quick review, trump tried to sell nuclear secrets to Saudi Arabia back in 2019 through his pal Michael Flynn and got caught, but was still “considering the deal.”

Obv this won’t happen to the Donald, but it might be time for the right to refresh themselves on the Rosenbergs.

Also don't forget that Kushner got $2 billion from the Saudi royal family's sovereign wealth fund to start his private equity company and Trump just hosted the Saudi-backed LIV Golf tournament at his Bedminster property. When asked about the families of 9/11 protesting the tournament because of the Saudis Trump responded by saying “Well, nobody’s gotten to the bottom of 9/11, unfortunately, and they should have.”

Maverickz wrote:

The entire point is that the definition of "benevolent" is extremely subjective. Which is why I kept repeating my question of who gets to define benevolent. What may be benevolent for one group of people may be malevolent for another.

That's a whole lot for someone to figure out from a two word question with no explanation... To me, for example, it sounded like you were doing the Post-Modernist Republican definition hair-splitting thing. It would have been far more clear if you'd simply added your last sentence to the question...

[quote="hbi2k"]

Seth wrote:

I don't think it's a particularly interesting or enlightening mental exercise to imagine being stabbed by the Friendly Knife

I don't go into the cancer thread all like, "what if it was the good cancer?"

Somewhat tangentially... You've just described the Democratic party.

OG_slinger wrote:
Seth wrote:

As a quick review, trump tried to sell nuclear secrets to Saudi Arabia back in 2019 through his pal Michael Flynn and got caught, but was still “considering the deal.”

Obv this won’t happen to the Donald, but it might be time for the right to refresh themselves on the Rosenbergs.

Also don't forget that Kushner got $2 billion from the Saudi royal family's sovereign wealth fund to start his private equity company and Trump just hosted the Saudi-backed LIV Golf tournament at his Bedminster property. When asked about the families of 9/11 protesting the tournament because of the Saudis Trump responded by saying “Well, nobody’s gotten to the bottom of 9/11, unfortunately, and they should have.”

And signals intelligence would sure come in handy to the Russians right about now.

What if it was the good treason?

DSGamer wrote:

This raises something I really struggle with regarding this forum.

I've felt, at times, that merely criticizing Democrats for not doing enough to improve the lives of Americans and protect the rights of marginalized people gets me screamed out of these forums. Forum members insinuate that merely criticizing Democrats risks causing voters to give up and not show up to the polls, therefore any criticism is VERY VERY DANGEROUS. Because of this I've taken breaks lately from even discussing anything here.

However, the same forum also apparently believes that it's okay to do thought experiments about whether or not we should just scrap democracy altogether. LOL.

Make it make sense, please. Is valid criticism of Democratic Party tactics in a web forum dangerous to the very republic? Or can we have thought experiments about how democracy is pointless?

Just a small aside. I stopped posting at a forum that I had frequented for TWENTY YEARS because of the venom aimed at me when I even broached the topic of revolution from the outside as the only way things would change. By people who themselves eventually did the same.

This wound up being the breaking point to where I blackpilled the whole political system and the human race. It is truly freeing.

Secret Service watchdog suppressed memo on January 6 texts erasure

The Guardian wrote:

Top career officials at the Department of Homeland Security’s (DHS) office of the inspector general (OIG) tried to alert Congress in April that Secret Service texts from the time of the January 6 Capitol attack had been erased, but their efforts were nixed by its leadership, documents show.

The new revelations appear to show that the chief watchdog for the Secret Service and DHS took deliberate steps to stop the retrieval of texts it knew were missing.

The officials inside the inspector general’s office – the chief watchdog for the Secret Service – prepared a memo that detailed how the Secret Service was resisting the oversight body’s review into January 6, and delayed informing it about the lost texts.

But after the memo was emailed to the DHS inspector general Joseph Cuffari’s chief of staff, its contents were never seen again, and the disclosure about the erased text messages was never included in Cuffari’s semi-annual report to Congress about oversight work.

The revelation shows that the Secret Service only admitted texts from January 6 were lost months after they were requested by the inspector general’s office, and that Cuffari might have violated federal law in not reporting the matter in the report to Congress.

As noted in the memo, obtained by the Project on Government Oversight and reviewed by the Guardian, the Inspector General Act of 1978 required Cuffari to report “significantly delayed access to information, including the justification of the establishment for such action”.

The circumstances around the erasure of the Secret Service texts have become central to the congressional investigation by the House January 6 select committee, as it examines how agents and leaders planned to move Donald Trump and Mike Pence as violence unfolded at the Capitol.

The Secret Service is a division of DHS, and the chairman of the select committee, Bennie Thompson, in recent weeks has escalated the loss of the texts with the secretary of the Department of Homeland Security, Alejandro Mayorkas, according to sources familiar with the matter.

Thompson has spoken with Mayorkas at least twice, the sources said, and the secretary has deputized an attorney in the DHS counsel’s office to oversee the transfer of materials from the agency to Congress, as investigators examine whether the texts can be reconstructed.

The memo – approved by the DHS office of counsel, the office of investigations, as well as the office of inspections – is particularly significant because it amounted to a compendium of efforts by the Secret Service to seemingly stymie the review.

“Secret Service has resisted OIG’s oversight activities and continued to significantly delay OIG’s access to records, impeding the progress of OIG’s January 6, 2021 review,” the memo said.

Secret Service interviewees, the memo said, regularly indicated that they would not provide documents to the DHS inspector general’s office unless they first went through an internal review, a move potentially in violation of the Inspector General Act.

The memo also noted that on multiple occasions, when the Secret Service produced documents months after they were requested, they contained redactions. The Secret Service did not indicate who approved or applied the redactions or why they were made, the memo said.

Finally, career officials inside the DHS inspector general’s office wrote, the Secret Service claimed they could not access crucial texts from January 6 because of an April 2021 phone system migration that wiped all data from the devices of agents.

The memo was sent to an office overseen by Cuffari’s chief of staff, Kristen Fredericks, on 1 April, according to materials reviewed by the Guardian, so that it could be included in the DHS inspector general’s report to Congress – only for it to be excluded.

Drazzil wrote:
DSGamer wrote:

This raises something I really struggle with regarding this forum.

I've felt, at times, that merely criticizing Democrats for not doing enough to improve the lives of Americans and protect the rights of marginalized people gets me screamed out of these forums. Forum members insinuate that merely criticizing Democrats risks causing voters to give up and not show up to the polls, therefore any criticism is VERY VERY DANGEROUS. Because of this I've taken breaks lately from even discussing anything here.

However, the same forum also apparently believes that it's okay to do thought experiments about whether or not we should just scrap democracy altogether. LOL.

Make it make sense, please. Is valid criticism of Democratic Party tactics in a web forum dangerous to the very republic? Or can we have thought experiments about how democracy is pointless?

Just a small aside. I stopped posting at a forum that I had frequented for TWENTY YEARS because of the venom aimed at me when I even broached the topic of revolution from the outside as the only way things would change. By people who themselves eventually did the same.

This wound up being the breaking point to where I blackpilled the whole political system and the human race. It is truly freeing.

That seems excessive. You might have just been on a bad forum. No reason to give up on democratic politics being the correct solution to governance, because of bad faith forum posters.