Nobody talking about Trump self quarantining?

[smokedog01]

Originally Posted by Tiny

The last 24 hours would indicate you were right and I was wrong.

He is now in the hospital. Oddly none of his doctors are giving him hydroxychloroquine and zinc and I doubt that he is objecting. They are hitting him with an experimental drug cocktail. That is a compassionate use application. This is getting worse by the minute for him. I hope he pulls though. Don't get me wrong I hope he loses the election in a godamned landslide but I don't wish death on anyone. Other than maybe Oeb.

[Chung Tran]

I hope Trump recovers, and will be healthy when Biden is sworn in at the Capitol, on January 20. I'm not as charitable regarding Barr, Guiliani, and Jordan, should Rona beat them down.

[smokedog01]

Originally Posted by Chung Tran

I hope Trump recovers, and will be healthy when Biden is sworn in at the Capitol, on January 20. I'm not as charitable regarding Barr, Guiliani, and Jordan, should Rona beat them down.

Barr's legacy is going to be the hardest to live down. Trump is just a dumb grifter. Barr knew better and for some reason went all in.

[lustylad]

Originally Posted by smokedog01

Barr's legacy is going to be the hardest to live up to by any future Attorney General.

FTFY.


Barr vs. the Beltway

Swamp creatures heap abuse on him for exposing abuse at the Justice Department.

By Kimberley A. Strassel
May 14, 2020 7:24 pm ET

In the Bible, we are told that the truth will set us free. In the Beltway, we find that the truth-tellers get hammered.

Take William Barr. The attorney general in recent weeks has made good on his pledge to be transparent about the Justice Department’s actions in the 2016 election and to right wrongs. The department’s decision to withdraw its false-statements case against former national security adviser Mike Flynn was its first public acknowledgment that past leaders sullied their mission.

That’s not an opinion, but the reality as shown by new documents released in the Flynn case. Agents of the Federal Bureau of Investigation debated if the goal of the interview with Mr. Flynn was to “get him to lie, so we can prosecute him or get him fired.” Then-Director James Comey refused to brief the Trump administration about the bureau’s Flynn concerns. The interviewing agents encouraged Mr. Flynn to forgo legal counsel and denied him the standard warning that lying was a crime. Prosecutors withheld exculpatory evidence from Mr. Flynn’s defense attorneys. No self-respecting lawyer could defend any of this.

Thanks to acting Director of National Intelligence Richard Grenell, we also got a document this week showing the Obama political team was in on the Flynn sandbagging. The list of Obama partisans who “unmasked” Mr. Flynn—snooping on his phone conversations—include Vice President Joe Biden, White House chief of staff Denis McDonough and Treasury Secretary Jacob Lew. The dates suggest the administration was listening in on Mr. Flynn from the start.

Yet instead of applauding Mr. Barr for divulging these facts, the Beltway has responded with ire. Mr. Barr’s transparency threatens to reveal further that the Russia-collusion narrative was pure fantasy, to puncture the self-righteousness of the likes of Mr. Comey and his scribes, to question the appropriateness of special counsel Robert Mueller’s probe, and to expose how hatred of Donald Trump drove people of power to break rules and destroy norms. Thus the vicious campaign to undermine Mr. Barr’s credibility, an operation that has now been joined not only by Democrats and the press, but also by Justice Department alumni and even the federal judge presiding over Mr. Flynn’s case.

The press spent all week flogging an open letter from 1,900 former Justice Department employees calling on Mr. Barr to resign for having “assaulted the rule of law” by withdrawing the charges against Mr. Flynn. Never mind that this crew is an insignificant fraction of the tens of thousands of former department employees who didn’t sign a letter. Many stories also conveniently neglected to mention that the letter was organized by Protect Democracy, a nonprofit formed in 2017 by former counsels for President Obama.

The proof of the skullduggery behind these attacks and press stories is in the name they don’t mention: U.S. Attorney Jeff Jensen. He’s the man Mr. Barr tapped in January to review the Flynn case, and who made the recommendation to withdraw the charges. Career prosecutors worked on the withdrawal brief. No one has dared suggest Mr. Jensen is anything but a fine lawyer—because they can’t. He spent 10 years at the FBI and 10 as a career prosecutor. His involvement refutes the critics’ assertion that this was a “politicized” decision by Mr. Barr on behalf of Mr. Trump. So they’ve excised him—and the career prosecutors—from the story.

Then there’s Judge Emmet Sullivan’s decision to join the smear campaign against Mr. Barr. Rather than grant the prosecution’s request to withdraw the Flynn case, Judge Sullivan appointed a retired judge, John Gleeson, to oppose the effort and to investigate whether Mr. Flynn engaged in perjury—an offense with which he wasn’t charged—by changing his plea. Mr. Gleason is singularly unsuited for this task. A former prosecutor, he once worked alongside Mueller “pit bull” Andrew Weissmann, who as a member of Mr. Mueller’s team helped railroad Mr. Flynn. And Mr. Gleeson has admitted his palpable bias in a Washington Post op-ed this week that urged Judge Sullivan to deny the prosecution motion and leave Mr. Flynn’s conviction in place.

All this highlights the nakedly political nature of Judge Sullivan’s actions. From a purely legal perspective, this is an insignificant case; “lying to the feds” charges are a dime a dozen, and even Mr. Mueller’s prosecutors initially recommended little or no prison time for Mr. Flynn. The judge’s moves are simply over the top. More important, they are legally and ethically dubious. As no less than Judge Gleeson once wrote in an opinion: “The government has near-absolute power . . . to extinguish a case that it has brought.” Judge Sullivan is providing ample evidence of hostility toward a defendant—of a malevolent intent to punish—that would be strong grounds for appeal.

The only reason to do it is to provide Mr. Barr’s critics a talking point to counter the ugly truths the attorney general is revealing.

The bright light in this morass of rough justice and partisan slander is Mr. Barr himself. He knew what was coming and appears unfazed and unwilling to be rolled into meekness. The country is lucky to have a top law-enforcement officer who cares more about justice and his department’s reputation than about the former officials who abused its power. The more they howl, the more obvious their guilt.

Write to kim@wsj.com.

[oeb11]

Originally Posted by smokedog01

He is now in the hospital. Oddly none of his doctors are giving him hydroxychloroquine and zinc and I doubt that he is objecting. They are hitting him with an experimental drug cocktail. That is a compassionate use application. This is getting worse by the minute for him. I hope he pulls though. Don't get me wrong I hope he loses the election in a godamned landslide but I don't wish death on anyone. Other than maybe Oeb.

Thank you for the usual nonsense - puppy brigade - it is clear DPST sowflakes (not mis-spelled) do not tolerate criticism of their political narrative - and wish DEATH on any who oppose them
Fine - join harris in constructing her concentration camps - The puppy brigade can patrol between 'teh' fences sniffing out potential escapees as a way of making a living under racist, marxist Harris.

and - give up on pretending to be a medical expert - you DPST's have no clue as to the medical literature - or how to reference your usual foolish assumptions given you by comrade Xi!

[oeb11]

Originally Posted by lustylad

FTFY.


Barr vs. the Beltway

Swamp creatures heap abuse on him for exposing abuse at the Justice Department.

By Kimberley A. Strassel
May 14, 2020 7:24 pm ET

In the Bible, we are told that the truth will set us free. In the Beltway, we find that the truth-tellers get hammered.

Take William Barr. The attorney general in recent weeks has made good on his pledge to be transparent about the Justice Department’s actions in the 2016 election and to right wrongs. The department’s decision to withdraw its false-statements case against former national security adviser Mike Flynn was its first public acknowledgment that past leaders sullied their mission.

That’s not an opinion, but the reality as shown by new documents released in the Flynn case. Agents of the Federal Bureau of Investigation debated if the goal of the interview with Mr. Flynn was to “get him to lie, so we can prosecute him or get him fired.” Then-Director James Comey refused to brief the Trump administration about the bureau’s Flynn concerns. The interviewing agents encouraged Mr. Flynn to forgo legal counsel and denied him the standard warning that lying was a crime. Prosecutors withheld exculpatory evidence from Mr. Flynn’s defense attorneys. No self-respecting lawyer could defend any of this.

Thanks to acting Director of National Intelligence Richard Grenell, we also got a document this week showing the Obama political team was in on the Flynn sandbagging. The list of Obama partisans who “unmasked” Mr. Flynn—snooping on his phone conversations—include Vice President Joe Biden, White House chief of staff Denis McDonough and Treasury Secretary Jacob Lew. The dates suggest the administration was listening in on Mr. Flynn from the start.

Yet instead of applauding Mr. Barr for divulging these facts, the Beltway has responded with ire. Mr. Barr’s transparency threatens to reveal further that the Russia-collusion narrative was pure fantasy, to puncture the self-righteousness of the likes of Mr. Comey and his scribes, to question the appropriateness of special counsel Robert Mueller’s probe, and to expose how hatred of Donald Trump drove people of power to break rules and destroy norms. Thus the vicious campaign to undermine Mr. Barr’s credibility, an operation that has now been joined not only by Democrats and the press, but also by Justice Department alumni and even the federal judge presiding over Mr. Flynn’s case.

The press spent all week flogging an open letter from 1,900 former Justice Department employees calling on Mr. Barr to resign for having “assaulted the rule of law” by withdrawing the charges against Mr. Flynn. Never mind that this crew is an insignificant fraction of the tens of thousands of former department employees who didn’t sign a letter. Many stories also conveniently neglected to mention that the letter was organized by Protect Democracy, a nonprofit formed in 2017 by former counsels for President Obama.

The proof of the skullduggery behind these attacks and press stories is in the name they don’t mention: U.S. Attorney Jeff Jensen. He’s the man Mr. Barr tapped in January to review the Flynn case, and who made the recommendation to withdraw the charges. Career prosecutors worked on the withdrawal brief. No one has dared suggest Mr. Jensen is anything but a fine lawyer—because they can’t. He spent 10 years at the FBI and 10 as a career prosecutor. His involvement refutes the critics’ assertion that this was a “politicized” decision by Mr. Barr on behalf of Mr. Trump. So they’ve excised him—and the career prosecutors—from the story.

Then there’s Judge Emmet Sullivan’s decision to join the smear campaign against Mr. Barr. Rather than grant the prosecution’s request to withdraw the Flynn case, Judge Sullivan appointed a retired judge, John Gleeson, to oppose the effort and to investigate whether Mr. Flynn engaged in perjury—an offense with which he wasn’t charged—by changing his plea. Mr. Gleason is singularly unsuited for this task. A former prosecutor, he once worked alongside Mueller “pit bull” Andrew Weissmann, who as a member of Mr. Mueller’s team helped railroad Mr. Flynn. And Mr. Gleeson has admitted his palpable bias in a Washington Post op-ed this week that urged Judge Sullivan to deny the prosecution motion and leave Mr. Flynn’s conviction in place.

All this highlights the nakedly political nature of Judge Sullivan’s actions. From a purely legal perspective, this is an insignificant case; “lying to the feds” charges are a dime a dozen, and even Mr. Mueller’s prosecutors initially recommended little or no prison time for Mr. Flynn. The judge’s moves are simply over the top. More important, they are legally and ethically dubious. As no less than Judge Gleeson once wrote in an opinion: “The government has near-absolute power . . . to extinguish a case that it has brought.” Judge Sullivan is providing ample evidence of hostility toward a defendant—of a malevolent intent to punish—that would be strong grounds for appeal.

The only reason to do it is to provide Mr. Barr’s critics a talking point to counter the ugly truths the attorney general is revealing.

The bright light in this morass of rough justice and partisan slander is Mr. Barr himself. He knew what was coming and appears unfazed and unwilling to be rolled into meekness. The country is lucky to have a top law-enforcement officer who cares more about justice and his department’s reputation than about the former officials who abused its power. The more they howl, the more obvious their guilt.

Write to kim@wsj.com.

Thank U - LL
The more the craven DPST swamp creatures scream and howl - the more likely it is they are caught in malfeasance and criminal acts.



Snowflake DPST's and their marxist, racist nomenklatura are royally pissed at Barr fro cleaning out their political corruption in the DOJ - they are perverting the American neutral justice system into a Stalinist action arm to enforce their political dictums.

XComey, page, Strzock, all belong in jail - as all the DOJ laawyers who submitted the fake FISA warrant information to persecute Flynn


9500- please don't compromise yourself by getting knickers in a snit - your hatred of Flynn because of his opposition to the DPST Deep State is well known.

[matchingmole]

[matchingmole]

Originally Posted by smokedog01

Barr's legacy is going to be the hardest to live down. Trump is just a dumb grifter. Barr knew better and for some reason went all in.

[Tiny]

Originally Posted by lustylad

FTFY.


Barr vs. the Beltway

Swamp creatures heap abuse on him for exposing abuse at the Justice Department.

By Kimberley A. Strassel
May 14, 2020 7:24 pm ET

In the Bible, we are told that the truth will set us free. In the Beltway, we find that the truth-tellers get hammered.

Take William Barr. The attorney general in recent weeks has made good on his pledge to be transparent about the Justice Department’s actions in the 2016 election and to right wrongs. The department’s decision to withdraw its false-statements case against former national security adviser Mike Flynn was its first public acknowledgment that past leaders sullied their mission.

That’s not an opinion, but the reality as shown by new documents released in the Flynn case. Agents of the Federal Bureau of Investigation debated if the goal of the interview with Mr. Flynn was to “get him to lie, so we can prosecute him or get him fired.” Then-Director James Comey refused to brief the Trump administration about the bureau’s Flynn concerns. The interviewing agents encouraged Mr. Flynn to forgo legal counsel and denied him the standard warning that lying was a crime. Prosecutors withheld exculpatory evidence from Mr. Flynn’s defense attorneys. No self-respecting lawyer could defend any of this.

Thanks to acting Director of National Intelligence Richard Grenell, we also got a document this week showing the Obama political team was in on the Flynn sandbagging. The list of Obama partisans who “unmasked” Mr. Flynn—snooping on his phone conversations—include Vice President Joe Biden, White House chief of staff Denis McDonough and Treasury Secretary Jacob Lew. The dates suggest the administration was listening in on Mr. Flynn from the start.

Yet instead of applauding Mr. Barr for divulging these facts, the Beltway has responded with ire. Mr. Barr’s transparency threatens to reveal further that the Russia-collusion narrative was pure fantasy, to puncture the self-righteousness of the likes of Mr. Comey and his scribes, to question the appropriateness of special counsel Robert Mueller’s probe, and to expose how hatred of Donald Trump drove people of power to break rules and destroy norms. Thus the vicious campaign to undermine Mr. Barr’s credibility, an operation that has now been joined not only by Democrats and the press, but also by Justice Department alumni and even the federal judge presiding over Mr. Flynn’s case.

The press spent all week flogging an open letter from 1,900 former Justice Department employees calling on Mr. Barr to resign for having “assaulted the rule of law” by withdrawing the charges against Mr. Flynn. Never mind that this crew is an insignificant fraction of the tens of thousands of former department employees who didn’t sign a letter. Many stories also conveniently neglected to mention that the letter was organized by Protect Democracy, a nonprofit formed in 2017 by former counsels for President Obama.

The proof of the skullduggery behind these attacks and press stories is in the name they don’t mention: U.S. Attorney Jeff Jensen. He’s the man Mr. Barr tapped in January to review the Flynn case, and who made the recommendation to withdraw the charges. Career prosecutors worked on the withdrawal brief. No one has dared suggest Mr. Jensen is anything but a fine lawyer—because they can’t. He spent 10 years at the FBI and 10 as a career prosecutor. His involvement refutes the critics’ assertion that this was a “politicized” decision by Mr. Barr on behalf of Mr. Trump. So they’ve excised him—and the career prosecutors—from the story.

Then there’s Judge Emmet Sullivan’s decision to join the smear campaign against Mr. Barr. Rather than grant the prosecution’s request to withdraw the Flynn case, Judge Sullivan appointed a retired judge, John Gleeson, to oppose the effort and to investigate whether Mr. Flynn engaged in perjury—an offense with which he wasn’t charged—by changing his plea. Mr. Gleason is singularly unsuited for this task. A former prosecutor, he once worked alongside Mueller “pit bull” Andrew Weissmann, who as a member of Mr. Mueller’s team helped railroad Mr. Flynn. And Mr. Gleeson has admitted his palpable bias in a Washington Post op-ed this week that urged Judge Sullivan to deny the prosecution motion and leave Mr. Flynn’s conviction in place.

All this highlights the nakedly political nature of Judge Sullivan’s actions. From a purely legal perspective, this is an insignificant case; “lying to the feds” charges are a dime a dozen, and even Mr. Mueller’s prosecutors initially recommended little or no prison time for Mr. Flynn. The judge’s moves are simply over the top. More important, they are legally and ethically dubious. As no less than Judge Gleeson once wrote in an opinion: “The government has near-absolute power . . . to extinguish a case that it has brought.” Judge Sullivan is providing ample evidence of hostility toward a defendant—of a malevolent intent to punish—that would be strong grounds for appeal.

The only reason to do it is to provide Mr. Barr’s critics a talking point to counter the ugly truths the attorney general is revealing.

The bright light in this morass of rough justice and partisan slander is Mr. Barr himself. He knew what was coming and appears unfazed and unwilling to be rolled into meekness. The country is lucky to have a top law-enforcement officer who cares more about justice and his department’s reputation than about the former officials who abused its power. The more they howl, the more obvious their guilt.

Write to kim@wsj.com.

I agree with Kimberley Strassel, who was the first redhead since Margaret Thatcher I wanted to bang because of her ability to express political thought. (I'm normally partial to Latinas.)

However, I don't agree the country is lucky to have Barr as AG. The problem is that Flynn was the exception, someone rescued from the nightmare of prosecutorial abuse. Barr wrote the book on Mass Incarceration. Literally. It's called "The Case for More Incaraceration," and he and associates published it when he was Bush's AG. Barr favored (and I believe still favors) long prison sentences and polices like three strikes and you're out. And prison for nonviolent drug offenders. The Trump administration undid some of the extremes advocated by Barr with the First Step Act that was passed in 2018, prior to Barr becoming attorney general.

While the First Step Act has resulted in lots more commutations than before, Trump has directly pardoned and paroled very few people. Maybe less than any modern president. This may be Barr's fault.

I don't like my tax dollars being used to incarcerate people who shouldn't be in jail. Or to pay for welfare for people who shouldn't have been prosecuted for felonies who can't get jobs because of criminal records.

I'm not sure why Trump appointed him when he's not solicitous of the White House's views on criminal justice reform. I can see Bolton, for example, because it enabled Trump to play good cop/bad cop on defense and foreign policy. But Barr is in a position of real power, to manage things the way he wants to.

[LexusLover]

The Kumola Presidency ....

[Tiny]

Originally Posted by LexusLover

The Kumola Presidency ....

America is going to disintegrate into anarchy? I'm not worried about that at all. I'm worried they'll do the opposite.

Historically Joe and Kamala have done a lot to lock people up and throw away the key. Kamala wants to fuck people like us over, as evidenced by her part in shutting down Backpage and some AMP's.

Here's a bit about their histories:

https://reason.com/2020/10/03/the-ca...tics-of-panic/

https://reason.com/2019/06/03/kamala...-be-president/