OMNIPOTENT at it's finest

OMNIPOTENT at it's finest was created by homeagain

www.businessinsider.com/trump-weighs-bar...-leader-calls-2020-2

OMNIPOTENT.....the king considers NO ONE should be dialed into foreign leader calls...(of course, ONLY those select stooges that bow
to his every whim are invited).....the unleashing of the egocentric idiot is breath taking in it's completeness. WATCH WHAT HAPPENS
14 Feb 2020 11:25 #1

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Replied by homeagain on topic OMNIPOTENT at it's finest

homeagain wrote: www.businessinsider.com/trump-weighs-bar...-leader-calls-2020-2

OMNIPOTENT.....the king considers NO ONE should be dialed into foreign leader calls...(of course, ONLY those select stooges that bow
to his every whim are invited).....the unleashing of the egocentric idiot is breath taking in it's completeness. WATCH WHAT HAPPENS

[/b]


www.cnn.com/2020/02/18/politics/federal-...ger-stone/index.html

2,000 is a TON of concerned officials......a meeting is being called to address the audacity of
the king....you are watching democracy disintegrate before your very eyes.
18 Feb 2020 09:30 #2

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Replied by FredHayek on topic OMNIPOTENT at it's finest

Maybe he is worried about leaks from Democrats who want to sabotage any current negotiations? It has happened before.
#35
18 Feb 2020 16:15 #3

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Replied by Blazer Bob on topic OMNIPOTENT at it's finest

homeagain wrote:

homeagain wrote: www.businessinsider.com/trump-weighs-bar...-leader-calls-2020-2

OMNIPOTENT.....the king considers NO ONE should be dialed into foreign leader calls...(of course, ONLY those select stooges that bow
to his every whim are invited).....the unleashing of the egocentric idiot is breath taking in it's completeness. WATCH WHAT HAPPENS

[/b]


www.cnn.com/2020/02/18/politics/federal-...ger-stone/index.html

2,000 is a TON of concerned officials......a meeting is being called to address the audacity of
the king....you are watching democracy disintegrate before your very eyes.


I think you are looking in the wrong place to see democracy disintegrate.

18 Feb 2020 17:11 #4

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Replied by Rick on topic OMNIPOTENT at it's finest

homeagain wrote:

homeagain wrote: www.businessinsider.com/trump-weighs-bar...-leader-calls-2020-2

OMNIPOTENT.....the king considers NO ONE should be dialed into foreign leader calls...(of course, ONLY those select stooges that bow
to his every whim are invited).....the unleashing of the egocentric idiot is breath taking in it's completeness. WATCH WHAT HAPPENS

[/b]


www.cnn.com/2020/02/18/politics/federal-...ger-stone/index.html

2,000 is a TON of concerned officials......a meeting is being called to address the audacity of
the king....you are watching democracy disintegrate before your very eyes.

2000 isn't a very big number when it comes to Trump hating lawyers and judges, especially if paid by taxpayers.
18 Feb 2020 20:18 #5

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Replied by ScienceChic on topic OMNIPOTENT at it's finest

Do you have proof that each and every one of those lawyers and judges are "Trump haters?"

From homeagain's link:

The actions prompted more than 2,000 former Justice Department officials who served in Republican as well as Democratic administrations to sign a statement calling on Barr to resign.


At what point does Trump's behavior cross the line? Only when it impacts you (meant in the general sense, not replying to anyone here in particular) personally? He has now attacked a federal judge and a juror. The judge is a member of another branch of government that is meant to be a check and balance to his, does not serve under him, and she is doing her job. The juror is an ordinary citizen who was screened and chosen for that jury duty by both the prosecution and defense - any one of us could be a juror. How would you feel if the President of the United States attacked you personally for a decision you made while doing your civic duty?

This is not normal or acceptable behavior from the person leading the Executive Branch of the government.

The principle of the Constitution is that of a separation of legislative, Executive and Judiciary functions, except in cases specified. If this principle be not expressed in direct terms, it is clearly the spirit of the Constitution, and it ought to be so commented and acted on by every friend of free government. ~Thomas Jefferson, January, 1797

[T]o preserve the republican form and principles of our Constitution and cleave to the salutary distribution of powers which that [the Constitution] has established... are the two sheet anchors of our Union. If driven from either, we shall be in danger of foundering.
~Thomas Jefferson, letter to Judge William Johnson, June 12, 1823

Of one man in especial, beyond anyone else, the citizens of a republic should beware, and that is of the man who appeals to them to support him on the ground that he is hostile to other citizens of the republic, that he will secure for those who elect him, in one shape or another, profit at the expense of other citizens of the republic. It makes no difference whether he appeals to class hatred or class interest, to religious or anti-religious prejudice. The man who makes such an appeal should always be presumed to make it for the sake of furthering his own interest. ~ Theodore Roosevelt, Address delivered at the Sorbonne, Paris, Apr. 23, 1910

Federal judges' association calls emergency meeting after DOJ intervenes in case of Trump ally Roger Stone
Kevin Johnson, USA TODAY | February 17, 2020

WASHINGTON – A national association of federal judges has called an emergency meeting to address growing concerns about the intervention of Justice Department officials and President Donald Trump in politically sensitive cases, the group’s president said Monday.

Philadelphia U.S. District Judge Cynthia Rufe, who heads the independent Federal Judges Association, said the group “could not wait” until its spring conference to weigh in on a deepening crisis that has enveloped the Justice Department and Attorney General William Barr.

Rufe, nominated to the bench by President George W. Bush, said the group of more than 1,000 federal jurists called for the meeting last week after Trump criticized prosecutors' initial sentencing recommendation for his friend Roger Stone and the Department of Justice overruled them.

Trump also took a swipe at the federal judge who is set to preside at Stone’s sentencing hearing Thursday.

The hope of a secure and livable world lies with disciplined nonconformists who are dedicated to justice, peace and brotherhood. ~Martin Luther King, Jr.

The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it. ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is. ~Winston Churchill

Your scars exist, but it’s your courage that defines you. ~Nalini Singh
18 Feb 2020 21:51 #6

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Replied by Blazer Bob on topic OMNIPOTENT at it's finest

SC, you (collectively) have set the bar too high. Muller was going to prove he was in Putin's pocket. There have been countless other hair on fires since then.

It is like the boy who cried wolf. The more times you call wolf the more people want to kick the Shepard boy.
18 Feb 2020 22:34 #7

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Replied by Rick on topic OMNIPOTENT at it's finest

ScienceChic wrote: Do you have proof that each and every one of those lawyers and judges are "Trump haters?"

From homeagain's link:

The actions prompted more than 2,000 former Justice Department officials who served in Republican as well as Democratic administrations to sign a statement calling on Barr to resign.


At what point does Trump's behavior cross the line? Only when it impacts you (meant in the general sense, not replying to anyone here in particular) personally? He has now attacked a federal judge and a juror. The judge is a member of another branch of government that is meant to be a check and balance to his, does not serve under him, and she is doing her job. The juror is an ordinary citizen who was screened and chosen for that jury duty by both the prosecution and defense - any one of us could be a juror. How would you feel if the President of the United States attacked you personally for a decision you made while doing your civic duty?

How would you feel if you were a defendant and found out the jury foreman had an extreme bias against you that wasn't disclosed?

As for my statement about Trump haters, I'm using my common sense. Do you know of anybody that is indifferent when it comes to liking Trump or is it your experience that people either love him or hate him? The Russia joke was investigated by all Trump haters and not one who was a supporter or even someone who would question all the shady and illegal methods used to take him down.

And one more thing, when you say Trump "attacks" someone, you're basically saying he doesn't have a right to criticize anyone he disagree's with. Being a judge or a juror does not give you some kind of immunity from scrutiny. Like it or not, even the president has the right to free speech. I can think of many instances when Obama criticized police officers before he had any facts and I don't remember you saying anything about that.
19 Feb 2020 07:47 #8

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Replied by Blazer Bob on topic OMNIPOTENT at it's finest

Do you have proof that each and every one of those lawyers and judges are "Trump haters?"


"Campaign Donations Show Letter Demanding Barr’s Resignation Comes From Leftist Hacks Pretending To Be ‘Bipartisan’
Had liberal outlets bothered to act like journalists, they would have quickly discovered evidence of a partisan bias underlying the letter calling for William Barr’s resignation.
Margot ClevelandBy Margot Cleveland
FEBRUARY 19, 2020
“More than 1,100 former federal prosecutors and Justice Department officials called on Attorney General William P. Barr on Sunday to step down after he intervened last week to lower the Justice Department’s sentencing recommendation for President Trump’s longtime friend Roger J. Stone, Jr.,” The New York Times reported on Sunday—if you can call it reporting.

Not once in the 800-word article did the Times address the overwhelming evidence that the thousand-plus signatories were politically motivated critics of President Donald Trump. In fact, to the contrary, the Times claimed “the former Justice Department lawyers” “came from across the political spectrum” to sign the open letter that condemned “President Trump’s and Attorney General Barr’s interference in the fair administration of justice.” Those actions, the much-touted letter claimed, “require Mr. Barr to resign.”

The letter and the charge that Barr interfered “in the fair administration of justice” focused on the decision last week by senior Department of Justice officials to override the recommendation lower-level prosecutors had made for a nine-year prison sentence for Roger Stone. The AG’s office viewed a nine-year sentence recommendation as too severe for Stone’s non-violent offenses but did not make a specific recommendation for an appropriate prison sentence.

Barr denied politics played any role in the DOJ’s decision and the Justice Department stressed that no one had discussed the Stone case with anyone at the White House. And there is no evidence to the contrary. Nonetheless, several Democrats pounced, pushing for Barr to resign, or, as Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Elizabeth Warren threatened, be impeached.

Over the weekend and earlier this week, left-leaning media outlets coalesced on the latest anti-Trump conspiracy theory, using the letter of the former DOJ employees to bolster the appearance of impropriety. In addition to the Times, Jennifer Rubin at the Washington Post pointed to the 1,100 signatories as evidence of Trump’s misconduct and Barr’s supposed acquiescence. (At least Rubin wrote under the opinion category, unlike the Times article.)

NPR likewise parroted the misleading claim that “the signatories on a letter have worked under both Republican and Democratic administrations,” when interviewing Julie Zebrak, one of the signatories and a former DOJ attorney of nearly 20 years. NPR did provide a tad of pushback, though, asking Zebrak what she would say to listeners who dismiss what she says as “partisanship.” Zebrak’s reply followed the same misdirection, noting that “if you look at the list, you’ll see that almost everyone on that list has served through multiple administrations, including Republican and Democrat.”

That may well be true, but as Peter Strzok and Lisa Page proved beyond doubt, you can be an extreme, left-leaning, hate-filled partisan and work in (and against) Republican administrations. Had the New York Times, the Washington Post, NPR, or any of the other liberal outlets bothered to act like journalists instead of the PR arms of Democratic and anti-Trump outfits, they would have quickly discovered evidence of a partisan bias underlying the letter calling for Barr’s resignation.

First, as The New York Times noted, “Protect Democracy, a nonprofit legal group, gathered the signatures from Justice Department alumni and said it would collect more.” Here’s what the Times and other outlets failed to report: Protect Democracy was founded in 2017 by Ian Bassin, who was the associate White House counsel for President Barack Obama from 2009-2011, and Justin Florence, who also served in the Office of the White House Counsel as a special assistant to the president and associate counsel of the president.

Bassin is also the president of the liberal American Constitution Society and Florence had also served as a senior counsel on the Senate Judiciary Committee for Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.). Protect Democracy also boasts a Who’s Who of the Never Trump resistance as advisors, such as failed presidential candidate Evan McMullin and running mate Mindy Finn.

The media also missed the reality that this latest attack on Barr (and in turn Trump) is nothing but a recycling of Protect Democracy’s earlier outrage over the Robert Mueller report. Shortly after the special counsel’s report issued, the same outfit ran the same “we are former federal prosecutors” who “served under both Republican and Democratic administrations” schtick to argue that Trump should have been charged with multiple felonies for obstruction of justice. As the following snippet shows, the signatories, for the most part, overlapped as well."...

thefederalist.com/2020/02/19/campaign-do....Xk1aM5k7B1M.twitter
19 Feb 2020 10:14 #9

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Time to create page: 0.418 seconds
Powered by Kunena Forum
sponsors
© My Mountain Town (new)
Google+