DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Palus Politicus Trump revealed classified info to Russians in White House Meeting!

Yea, the President could order the AG to fire the prosecutor. The Saturday night massacre of Nixon finding someone to fire special prosecutor Cox shows the risk one takes doing that however.

Thanks.

One thing I didn't mention that I should have was cost of living, and you kinda sorta somewhat covered that.

But, you do appear to be paid fairly well. You get a "glorified" 401k? Well, that's more than many get. (me included - I get squat unless I put it in.) Not teachers here in Ohio, mind you. The retirement for teachers in Ohio is decreasing - which I find odd, because teachers tell us all the time it's self funded.

You put your 30 years in, then get the benefits? Or is that just Ohio?

Do your years teaching count if you move to a different state?

My parents also gave up a lot to help us 4 kids out. I'm thankful for that. My parents paid for their house once. Then twice. Then a third time. (second and third time were not for the whole value of the house, mind you)

I guess I'm altruistic. I donate my services to 4 different places. I also give money to our church (which has combined with another church) to provide free community meals, every Tuesday evening, 52 weeks a year.

I donate to the food pantry.

Yup, I'm altruistic. Although, on here, I get painted as a greedy, all for myself, republican.

j/c

I just wish to touch on a few points in this thread.

I agree with Jules that the Dems have to take some responsibility in electing Trump. The numbers on this can not be argued. Yet the Dems seem numb to the numbers. About one third of voters are GOP. About one third are Dems. Those people are going to vote along party lines for the most part. The people who actually decide elections are the one third who are independent voters.

For some reason it appears to me that the Dems went with Hillary, not because she would have been the most electable, best candidate they could find, but because they feel she was entitled as "the next in line". She was totally untrustworthy for independent voters to endorse.

So what happened? A lot of people voted for who they felt was the lesser of two evils. Hopefully the American people will start to realize, even if you vote for what you feel is the lesser of two evils, you still end up with evil.

Now let's look at term limits. For a very long time I was a vocal proponent of term limits. I still believe it's a good idea but I wonder if it will actually accomplish what people think it will?

Politicians by and large toe their party lines as they do now. A lot of their campaign money is gained by getting their parties endorsements. Those party endorsements sway a lot of their voters, be it GOP or Dems.

So while term limits sound good in theory, we would simply get clones of what we currently have. Party shills that toe the company line. Different faces with the same results. I don't see how that accomplishes anything.

I'll own up to my part in not voting at all, I didn't care who won because I was going to protest it anyway. The DNC stole Bernie's nomination and they are currently in court defending their actions.

If Trump won (which I didn't think he stood a chance at the time), I considered it a head thumping message to the dems. If Hillary won, she wasn't going to have any support from me.

Call that sour grapes, un-american, or whatever label you want to put on it; I could not back either candidate and the third party candidates were a joke.

I certainly won't attach a label to you because you didn't vote. It was quite a conundrum for me as well.

You see, I feel our votes are a valuable commodity that has been bestowed upon us. I don't feel it's something to give lightly. IMO whoever I vote for has to earn that right. I do not feel our forefathers gave us this right to spend frivolously. From my point of view, neither Clinton nor Trump met my threshold for a minimum standard to be president.

The only place we differ is that I feel a sense of duty to vote. I felt it my obligation to find and vote for a candidate I did consider worthy. I wrote in my Gov. here in Tennessee Bill Haslam.

That's the truth, and both parties have alienated those people who swing back and forth and do not vote party line. By catering to their fringe voters, they have now made it very difficult for the independents to vote for either one. A lot of people either went third party, wrote someone in, or didn't vote at all.





While this is also true, she should have beaten Trump. Her arrogance, her misunderstanding of the mood of the country and the Dem voters believing the had it in the bag, bragging about their victory for months before the election, lead to her failure.

A lot of Democrats do not seem to have any understanding of why she lost. It's the Russians! It's that kind of ignorance that will not allow them to seize the opportunity. Just like the Republicans have squandered every ounce of their good fortune of ending up in the majority. Instead, the Republicans have looked like bumbling fools. The people making excuses for any of them are blinded by party loyalty, not basing any conclusions on common sense, and certainly not thinking critically.

Most do. Our youngest voters didn't show up like they did for Obama, plain and simple. She still won the popular vote by 3 mill votes. A lot of republicans and Hillary Clinton still don't get that. If our youngest voters show up and vote in 2018 mid terms the republicans will most likely lose the house and the senate if things keep going this way.

Trump said firing 'nut job' Comey took pressure off Russia probe; White House official now 'person of interest': reports

https://www.yahoo.com/news/reports-trump...-195040125.html

Two more bombshell reports published Friday afternoon delivered a one-two punch to the Trump White House regarding the investigation into its potential ties to Russia, capping off a week where each day dealt a fresh blockbuster blow to the administration.

In one, the Washington Post reported that the FBI’s Russia probe has identified a current advisor to the president as a “person of interest,” while a second New York Times story reported the commander-in-chief told visiting Russian officials that the firing of FBI director James Comey had taken a weight off his shoulders.

“I just fired the head of the F.B.I. He was crazy, a real nut job,” said President Trump in a meeting with Russian officials last week, according to a New York Times report on a document summarizing the meeting. “I faced great pressure because of Russia. That’s taken off.”

Trump reportedly added that he wasn’t under investigation, which is potentially untrue as the president may not know the extent or specifics of the probe. The White House did not dispute the Times reporting on Trump’s quote.

The Washington Post story reported that the probe into potential ties between the Trump campaign and Russia had identified a senior White House adviser who is close to the president as a “significant person of interest.”

Two members of the Trump campaign and transition with reported ties to Russia – former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn and former campaign chair Paul Manafort – are not current White House officials, meaning the Post reporting has identified a new connection.

White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer commented on the Times report, reiterating the president’s recent characterization of Comey as a “grandstander.”

“By grandstanding and politicizing the investigation into Russia’s actions, James Comey created unnecessary pressure on our ability to engage and negotiate with Russia,” said Spicer in a statement to the Times regarding their story. “The investigation would have always continued, and obviously, the termination of Comey would not have ended it. Once again, the real story is that our national security has been undermined by the leaking of private and highly classified conversations.”

The conversation with Russia’s foreign minister Sergey V. Lavrov and Russian ambassador to the United States Sergey I. Kislyak took place on May 10, one day after Trump fired Comey. This was the same meeting where Trump revealed previously classified information. The White House initially said that Comey was fired following the recommendation of Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, but Trump undercut that account in an interview on May 11 where he said he as going to fire Comey regardless of what Rosenstein suggested because the FBI chief was a “showboat.”

So the WH didn't even deny it.

let me guess, this statement isn't obstruction of justice, either? firing somebody over an investigation into russia? now it took great pressure off of trump?

but there's no Russia story, right guys? smh.

If they have this and it is solid evidence not just hearsay; Trump just admitted to obstruction and he's in real trouble.

They are going to drag this out until they have thoroughly investigated the entire administration, but Trump's days are now numbered.

Lol this dude led the "lock her up" rally.

Guess what? LOCK HIM UP!!! LOCK HIM UP!!!

The Latest: AP Source says Flynn will invoke Fifth Amendment

https://www.yahoo.com/news/latest-ap-sou...--politics.html

The Latest: AP Source says Flynn will invoke Fifth Amendment

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Latest on ongoing investigations into Russia's alleged interference with the U.S. election (all times local):
9:30 a.m.

Former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn will invoke his Fifth Amendment protection against self-incrimination on Monday as he notifies the Senate Intelligence committee that he will not comply with a subpoena seeking documents.
That's according to a person with direct knowledge of the matter. The person spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss the private interactions between Flynn and the committee.
Flynn's decision comes less than two weeks after the committee issued a subpoena for Flynn's documents as part of the panel's investigation into Russia's meddling in the 2016 election.
Legal experts have said Flynn was unlikely to turn over the personal documents without immunity because he would be waiving some of his constitutional protections by doing so. Flynn has previously sought immunity from "unfair prosecution" to cooperate with the committee.
—AP reporter Chad Day

Then today, in Israel Trump blurts out that he never said "I never mentioned the word or name Israel" when giving the Russians highly classified information. Lol, you can't even make these things up to be this stupid.

No kidding! He just gave them the rest of the highly classified info. Not that they didn't figure it out already a couple weeks ago. Betting the Mossad agents in the field are skiddish right now.

j/c

Trump hiring Marc Kasowitz as personal lawyer for Russia probe

President Trump plans to retain Marc Kasowitz as his personal attorney to represent him in the federal investigation into his campaign’s alleged ties to Russia, according to media reports.

Fox Business and ABC News reported that Trump is expected to bring aboard the New York-based lawyer, who has represented Trump numerous times in the past.

The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Hiring Kasowitz would be a major step for Trump, who has been advised to seek outside legal counsel in the sprawling investigation into whether his associates colluded with Moscow to interfere in the 2016 election.

The stakes became higher for Trump last week when former FBI Director Robert Mueller was named as special counsel to oversee the probe.

The move was made after it was revealed the president allegedly pressured then-FBI Director James Comey to ease off his inquiry into former national security adviser Michael Flynn before firing him, which drew accusations that he could have obstructed justice.

Trump and his aides have repeatedly denied he acted improperly and the president has long insisted he is not under investigation.

Kasowitz is known as a hard-nosed trial attorney whose own website bills him as "one of the most prominent and feared lawyers in the United States."

He represented Trump last year when The New York Times printed accusations from women claiming Trump sexually assaulted them, demanding a retraction from the paper.

The lawyer has mostly represented business and corporate clients, and he appears to have little experience dealing with intelligence investigations.

It's unclear whether Trump will enlist other lawyers to work with Kasowitz.

Trump’s aides and legal experts recommended he bring in a private attorney to handle the Russia probe.

Past presidents have brought in their own lawyers when their personal actions have been the subject of investigations because the White House counsel represents the office of the president, not the man himself.

Anything that happened during the campaign could also fall outside the scope of the White House counsel’s office, and White House lawyers would likely be unable to maintain attorney-client privilege about matters related to the Russia probe.

“It’s important you keep these things separate and that he be represented in his personal capacity by lawyers who can sort through these issues in matters other than those related to his official duties,” said Jack Quinn, a longtime Washington lobbyist who served as former President Bill Clinton’s White House counsel.

http://thehill.com/homenews/administrati...or-russia-probe

Well Kasowitz can't buy/bribe anyone off or settle out of court this time.

Senate Intel heads get broad subpoena power in Russia probe


http://thehill.com/policy/national-secur...in-russia-probe

The leaders of the Senate Intelligence Committee now have broad authority to issue subpoenas in the Russia investigation without a full committee vote, Chairman Richard Burr (R-N.C.) said Thursday.

The panel voted unanimously to give Burr and Vice Chairman Mark Warner (D-Va.) the blanket authority for the duration of the investigation into election meddling and possible collusion with President Trump's campaign. The two leaders must be in agreement in order to issue an order.


The committee recently issued its second round of subpoenas in the investigation to business associates with former national security adviser Michael Flynn, whom Trump forced to resign in February.

The panel has also requested information from other former Trump associates — Carter Page, Paul Manafort and Roger — but has not issued subpoenas.

Manafort recently turned over hundreds of pages of documents to the committee voluntarily.

40 no longer responds to BS and made up media lies that you and the other liberals emotionally suck up.

This story is another lie and that has been proven.

Now, lets see here...

Hillary was gonna win in a landslide. (Lie)

The Media polls had her 7-10 points ahead. (Lie)

Trump was gonna be a Dictator. (Lie)

Trump is a Racist and supports the KKK. (Lie)

Trump colluded with the Russians to fix the election. (Lie)

The Media colluded with the Hillary campaign to slip her debate questions ahead of the debates. (TRUTH)

Trump gave out American secrets to our enemies. (Lie)

Trump is a traitor. (Lie)

FBI director Comey asked for more resources to investigate Russian/Trump collusion. (Lie)

FBI director Andrew McCabe threatened to quit. (Lie)

Why you Liberals continue to feed at the teat of your own lying Media is a mystery to everyone.

"Trump didn't shoot someone in 5th avenue. The bullet that hit the person just happened to come out of the same gun that Trump is holding, but the liberal media is the real enemy!!"

- 40

Anyways,

Trump to set up 'war room' to repel attacks over Russia probe: officials

https://www.yahoo.com/news/trump-set-war-room-repel-attacks-over-russia-195510349.html

If he's innocent, why can't he just cooperate fully with the investigation and stop firing those investigating him?

The hell you gotta set a war room for if you're innocent?

Kushner wanted secure line with Kremlin before inauguration: report

http://thehill.com/homenews/administrati...guration-report

Jared Kushner reportedly talked with a top Russian official in early December about establishing a private communications channel between President Trump's transition team and the Kremlin.

The president's son-in-law and senior adviser inquired about using Russian diplomatic facilities for the communications, apparently to shield the talks, U.S. officials briefed on intelligence reports told The Washington Post.


Russian ambassador to the U.S. Sergei Kislyak told his superiors that Kushner floated the idea during a meeting at Trump Tower on Dec. 1 or 2, according to the Post, which cited intercepts of Russian communications reviewed by U.S. officials.

Kislyak was reportedly taken aback by the proposal of allowing an American to use Russian communications equipment, which the Post noted could have carried security risks for both the Trump transition team and Moscow.

Michael Flynn, whom Trump had already tapped to serve as national security adviser at the time, reportedly attended the meeting.

Kushner is under scrutiny in the FBI's ongoing investigation into whether Trump campaign officials colluded with the Russians, The Washington Post and NBC News reported this week.

The FBI is interested in the details of Kushner's meeting with Kislyak, a meeting that the White House first disclosed in March.

Officials told the Post that knowledge of the discussion came because of communication surveillance on the Russians, not on the meeting or U.S. citizens.

The White House declined the Post’s request for comment as did Flynn’s lawyer, Robert Kelner. The Russian embassy did not respond the outlet’s requests for comment.

Add another "Push the Allegations when the Facts say otherwise" story by the Liberal lying Media...

US national security adviser 'not concerned' with Kushner, Russia back-channel allegations

President Trump’s National Security Adviser H.R. McMaster told reporters during a press conference at the G7 Summit in Sicily that he is “not concerned” with reports that Jared Kushner tried to set up diplomatic back-channels with Russia.

McMaster initially declined to speak on the Kushner reports but when asked if he would be concerned if someone in the administration tried to set up a backchannel with the Kremlin, he said “no,” Reuters reported.

"We have back-channel communications with any number of individual (countries). So generally speaking, about back-channel communications, what that allows you to do is communicate in a discreet manner," McMaster said, adding that “we're not concerned about it."
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/05/...llegations.html

What facts?

This is the same guy who said one thing in a press conference while trump said the opposite on Twitter.

At this point no mouthpiece coming from the WH is trustworthy.

Of course he's gonna say he isn't concerned. If he wants to keep his job, that's exactly what he's gonna say. It doesn't change the facts that the Feds are looking into kushner.

You can insult all the American war heroes you want but McMaster's reputation makes your post look, well, whatever.

Was it an insult or was it a truth?

And your comment makes no sense. You voted for a draft dodger who insulted a war hero in McCain.

So what does that make you? Yea...whatever.

Swish served! He's part of the brotherhood... Tell me again what branch you served in?

I'll listen to swabbie jokes from a vet, but not from a civilian. If you didn't wear the uniform, you don't get to run your mouth on anybody that did about serving or service records.

And Swish, Trump dodged because he is too self important and a coward. Period.