myiW Current Conditions and Forecasts Community Forums Buy and Sell Services
 
Hi guest · myAccount · Log in
 SearchSearch   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   RegisterRegister 
witch hunts by right wingers past and present
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    iWindsurf Community Forum Index -> Politics, Off-Topic, Opinions
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
mac



Joined: 07 Mar 1999
Posts: 17742
Location: Berkeley, California

PostPosted: Sat Jan 21, 2023 8:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

mat-ty wrote:
vientomas wrote:
Hey Maddy!!! Where are the indictments? Nada!!!! Laughing Laughing Laughing Laughing Laughing

It was a conspiracy that Fox News portrayed as one of the greatest � if not the greatest � political scandals in American history.

Tucker Carlson called it a "domestic spying operation" that was "hidden under the pretext of national security." Laura Ingraham characterized top Obama administration officials as having been "exposed." And Sean Hannity flatly declared it to be the "biggest abuse of power, corruption scandal" the country had ever seen.

That was back in May. This week, however, the conspiracy theory collapsed when The Washington Post reported that a Justice Department investigation into the supposed scandal quietly ended with no charges.


https://www.cnn.com/2020/10/14/media/fox-news-unmasking-obamagate/index.html




We already have one guilty plea moron, indictments are on the way after the election without question.. by the way stupid the investigation has expanded to include HRC...

You guys are getting all wet about a last minute minor spinoff off of the main investigation...Most likely they saw inappropriate and questionable behavior but not something that would land a conviction in Washington... move on to bigger fish.


Ha Ha Ha
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
real-human



Joined: 02 Jul 2011
Posts: 14834
Location: on earth

PostPosted: Tue Jan 31, 2023 12:31 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/trump-s-justice-department-goons-oversaw-an-actual-witch-hunt-while-he-screamed-about-one/ar-AA16TZeS?ocid=winp2fptaskbarhover&cvid=f5fc506ecb1b42789e26f0b20859750d

Trump's Justice Department Goons Oversaw an Actual Witch Hunt While He Screamed About One


Quote:
Sorry, but even in this age of goldfish-brain news cycles, we cannot allow a certain development from last week to just fade into obscurity. You may remember that Donald Trump, American president, loved to say the investigation into whether his campaign coordinated with Russia's effort to influence the 2016 election was a "witch hunt" pursued by shadowy bureaucrats with an ax to grind. In his telling, that investigation was opened for political reasons, without justification, and that's why it dragged on forever and ultimately concluded with Special Counsel Robert Mueller declaring "NO COLLUSION!" and shooting off a bunch of confetti like a gender reveal. It was such an egregious violation that it required a counter-investigation overseen by Trump's attorney general, Bill Barr, and his hand-picked hard-nosed prosecutor, John Durham. They would find justice.

Well, the counter-investigation was everything he said about the Russia investigation, as a fantastic report from the New York Times laid out last week. The former took way longer than the latter and failed to uncover anything they said it would. But more than that, it was an actual witch hunt. By the summer of 2020, it was clear Durham had failed, and the Justice Department inspector general published a report that found no evidence the FBI was politically motivated in 2016. But Trump was absolutely losing it on Fox News, floating that Obama and Biden would be indicted for their offenses against him— "the single biggest political crime in the history of our country"—and the only way they wouldn't be was if his two pet prosecutors, Barr and Durham, decided to be "politically correct." (God forbid!) Enter the Times:

Against that backdrop, Mr. Barr and Mr. Durham did not shut down their inquiry when the search for intelligence abuses hit a dead end. With the inspector general’s inquiry complete, they turned to a new rationale: a hunt for a basis to accuse the Clinton campaign of conspiring to defraud the government by manufacturing the suspicions that the Trump campaign had colluded with Russia, along with scrutinizing what the F.B.I. and intelligence officials knew about the Clinton campaign’s actions.
So having failed to produce the goods in time to give Trump some political ammunition for the 2020 election, they just kept the investigation going with an entirely new focus? They came up with nothing, so they started to work the name "Clinton" in there? How is that even the same investigation? It isn't, except for one crucial respect: It continued as a vehicle for Trump's shadowy accusations against his political opponents. As long as the investigation was "ongoing," he had extra salt on his claims that anyone caught up in it was disgustingly corrupt. In this respect, it's a lot like the Ukraine extortion that got Trump impeached the first time: He just wanted Zelenskyy to announce Ukraine was opening an investigation into the Bidens. The subtext, of course, was that Trump would do the rest.

Durham seems to be another guy whose lifelong reputation for honest work could not survive a run-in with Donald Trump.
Durham seems to be another guy whose lifelong reputation for honest work could not survive a run-in with Donald Trump.
© Getty Images
It's clear from his public behavior throughout that Barr—again, the attorney general of the United States—also considered the investigation a political endeavor. As the Times traces, Barr fought the inspector general's report, fearing its (honest) conclusions could endanger his and Durham's probe. He was on Fox News all the time misrepresenting what their counter-investigation was doing and what it had uncovered about the original investigation, just as he'd done with his "summary" of the Mueller report. He waited until after the 2020 election to admit their probe had failed to find evidence to support the conclusion they'd decided on beforehand. And most appallingly, there was The Italian Job.

...Italian officials — while denying any role in setting off the Russia investigation — unexpectedly offered a potentially explosive tip linking Mr. Trump to certain suspected financial crimes. Mr. Barr and Mr. Durham decided that the tip was too serious and credible to ignore. But rather than assign it to another prosecutor, Mr. Barr had Mr. Durham investigate the matter himself — giving him criminal prosecution powers for the first time — even though the possible wrongdoing by Mr. Trump did not fall squarely within Mr. Durham’s assignment to scrutinize the origins of the Russia inquiry...
This all remained secret until this Times report, in which there are some further observations about Barr's public behavior. After it became public that Durham's probe now included a criminal investigation, without any specifics about the crime in question, the entire news media was operating on the assumption that it was the Russia investigators who were now under full-on criminal scrutiny. This was false—Trump was under criminal investigation! But "Mr. Barr, who weighed in publicly about the Durham inquiry at regular intervals in ways that advanced a pro-Trump narrative," the Times notes,"chose in this instance not to clarify what was really happening."


So the probe of the Russia investigation actually uncovered possible financial crimes by Donald Trump, but when there was only a partial leak (and who leaked that?), Barr allowed a narrative that was close to the opposite of reality to blossom in the media, all because it was to Trump's political benefit during an election? Oh, and by the way, knowing all this, is the public supposed to have confidence that whatever allegations made by the Italians were properly investigated by Durham and Barr?

And here's where we might mention how amazing it's been to watch the discussion about Trump and Russia play out. Somehow, "famously amoral lout comes to friendship of convenience with authoritarian strongman" is now considered liberal QAnon—Blueanon—and the counterstory pushed by the biggest public liar in American history has gained broad acceptance. Yeah, the liberals who started talking about Trump being a "Russian asset" lost the plot, but his 2016 campaign manager's previous job was working for pro-Russian interests in Ukraine. Paul Manafort also worked directly for one of Putin's closest allies, Oleg Deripaska, a guy who has overseen political influence campaigns in countries all over the world. The Senate Intelligence Committee, at the time controlled by Republicans, published a report that found that "Manafort hired and worked increasingly closely with a Russian national, Konstantin Kilimnik. Kilimnik is a Russian intelligence officer," and that "Manafort sought to secretly share internal campaign information with Kilimnik." At the time, Manafort was millions of dollars in debt to Deripaska and was working for the Trump campaign for free.

Maybe Trump was entirely innocent as all this was going on, unaware of his campaign manager's connections, just as those allegations from the Italians may have been nothing. It's not like this guy had to shutter his university and his foundation after allegations of fraud. It's not like his flagship company has been convicted of fraud. He was not, in fairness, charged with conspiring in the 2016 Russian influence campaign, though that investigation was hindered by Trump's repeated obstruction of justice. But considering that Trump was yelling "witch hunt" while his cronies conducted an actual witch hunt, we should probably keep an eye on the new "Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government" his allies just rolled out.

_________________
when good people stay silent the right wing are the only ones heard.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
real-human



Joined: 02 Jul 2011
Posts: 14834
Location: on earth

PostPosted: Fri Feb 24, 2023 11:50 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

look at the case itself unreal that this is happening in the usa... a right wing witch hunt and more...

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/one-of-the-trumpiest-judges-in-america-thinks-far-right-texas-officials-are-going-too-far/ar-AA17THpM?ocid=winp2fptaskbarhover&cvid=bc3c9c93886a44a5ac6864f74bcd64a7&ei=6

One of the Trumpiest Judges in America Thinks Far-Right Texas Officials Are Going Too Far


Quote:
Can the government arrest and jail citizens for criticizing public officials? The answer might seem obvious in light of the First Amendment. In the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals, however, it is not. Instead, the court has blessed the detention of one Texas resident for daring to criticize state officials, and may be on the brink of doing so again. This approval of censorship by force should come as no shock from the far-right 5th Circuit. What’s unusual is who has decided to take the strongest stance against it: James Ho, an ultra-conservative Donald Trump nominee. In two recent major cases, Ho has vociferously condemned Texas’s brutal retaliation against critics of the government, condemning the practice as “totalitarian.” It is an ominous sign of the 5th Circuit’s increasingly authoritarian jurisprudence that Ho must beg his colleagues to safeguard the most foundational guarantees of free speech.


Ho is an unlikely candidate for this role. Since his appointment in 2018, he has gained notoriety as a hard-right firebrand eager to fight the culture wars from the bench. He fills his opinions with trollish partisan rhetoric, railing against abortion, gun control, vaccine mandates, cancel culture, and the “woke Constitution.” Recently, he announced that he would boycott clerks from Yale Law School, asserting (dubiously) that the school silenced conservative voices. As a rule, you would not want Ho to be in charge of protecting your constitutional rights, unless you have the kind of grievance that would resonate with Tucker Carlson

And yet, in two of the most disturbing First Amendment cases of the decade so far—Gonzalez v. Trevino and Villarreal v. Laredo—Ho has emerged as an impassioned opponent of crass, carceral censorship. Start with Gonzalez. In 2019, 72-year-old Sylvia Gonzalez ran a successful campaign for city council in Castle Hills, Texas, a town of 5,000. She heard from residents that the current city manager, Ryan Rapelye, was doing a poor job. So, once on the council, Gonzalez launched a nonbinding citizen petition urging the council to replace Rapelye.

After a council hearing on the city manager, Gonzalez briefly placed the petition papers in her binder. When the mayor, Edward Trevino, asked her for the petition, she located the papers and handed them to him. At the time, both Gonzalez and Trevino said that her misplacement of the petition was a mistake. Yet this brief exchange formed the basis of an alleged conspiracy that would eventually place Gonzalez in jail.

Trevino, it turns out, saw Gonzalez as an enemy. As mayor, he had appointed Rapelye to be city manager, and he was infuriated that the new councilmember contested his decision. At this point, the city’s Police Chief John Siemens—whom Trevino had also appointed—deputized a friend, Alex Wright, to investigate Gonzalez. (Wright was not a detective or even a law enforcement officer of any kind.)

Wright claimed that, when Gonzalez placed the petitions in her binder, she violated an obscure Texas law that bars individuals from “conceal[ing]” any “government record.” Normally, a person charged with such a minor crime is asked to appear before a judge at a specific date. But Wright allegedly deployed a process that’s usually reserved for violent felonies, ultimately procuring an arrest warrant. So Gonzalez turned herself in at the local jail. There, she was forced to don an orange shirt and sit handcuffed to a metal bench for a day. Jail staff would not allow her to stand up or use the bathroom in privacy.

When the district attorney caught wind of these events, he dropped all charges. Gonzalez then sued the group said to be behind the arrest, accusing them of retaliating against her in violation of the First Amendment. In July, a three-judge panel of the 5th Circuit ruled against her. The panel reasoned that law enforcement had probable cause to arrest Gonzalez, and that she had not proven that “similarly situated individuals” had engaged in the same “criminal conduct” without getting arrested. Thus, she failed to demonstrate that the arrest was a retaliation against her free speech. The majority granted immunity to Trevino, Siemens, and Wright.


The 5th Circuit then considered rehearing the case en banc, with every judge weighing in. On Wednesday, the full court refused to revisit it by a 10–6 vote. Six judges dissented, including Dana Douglas, Joe Biden’s new addition to the court. Yet Ho was the only dissenter to write an opinion. He sounded furious. The 5th Circuit, he wrote, had left the American people “vulnerable to public officials who choose to weaponize criminal statutes against citizens whose political views they disfavor.” He decried Gonzalez’s “tormenters-in-office” for violating “the most fundamental value in American democracy” by using the “coercive powers of government to punish and silence their critics.” And he insisted that Gonzalez had every right to sue them for their “heinous” and “unconstitutional” scheme to arrest her for “stating unpopular viewpoints.”

“In America, we don’t allow the police to arrest and jail our citizens for having the temerity to criticize or question the government,” Ho declared. It turns out, though, that we do—at least in the 5th Circuit.

Gonzalez marked the second time that Ho has castigated his colleagues for flouting these principles. In another recent case, Villarreal v. Laredo, the 5th Circuit considered the plight of Priscilla Villarreal, a resident of Laredo, Texas. A citizen journalist, Villarreal puts her reporting on Facebook, often live-streaming from car crashes, crime scenes, and other events of public interest. She then provides her own unfiltered commentary on the footage.

Unsurprisingly, Villarreal has repeatedly earned the ire of Laredo officials. In one report, she noted that the district attorney dropped an arrest warrant for a relative of Marisela Jacaman, a member of his own staff. In another, she live-streamed police officers strangling a driver they had pulled over. Law enforcement expressed their contempt for her journalism.

In 2017, Villarreal uncovered the name of one local who died by suicide and another who died in a car crash. In both cases, she called a police officer to confirm their identities—a standard reporting practice. When Laredo officials discovered these calls, they secured a warrant for her arrest. Why? Prosecutors cited a provision of Texas law—one they had never before enforced—that criminalizes the act of soliciting or receiving nonpublic information “from a public servant” with “intent to obtain a benefit.” Prosecutors alleged that Villarreal violated this law because she sought the “benefit” of more Facebook followers.

Who approved the arrest warrant application? None other than Marisela Jacaman, the district attorney staffer whom Villarreal criticized for allegedly helping to get a relative off the hook.

So Villarreal turned herself in. While the police booked her, officers allegedly took pictures of her in handcuffs and openly mocked her. She was then taken to a local jail. A judge threw out the charges, finding the law unconstitutionally vague.

Later, Villarreal filed a lawsuit alleging that Laredo officials violated her First Amendment rights. In August, a three-judge panel led by Ho ruled in her favor. In his majority opinion, Ho framed the case as a simple one: “If the First Amendment means anything,” he wrote, it surely means that a citizen journalist has the right to ask a public official a question, without fear of being imprisoned.” It should “be patently obvious to any reasonable police officer,” he continued, “that the conduct alleged in the complaint constitutes a blatant violation of Villarreal’s constitutional rights.” He therefore denied the officials immunity.

In a concurrence to his own majority opinion, Ho went further. “This is an exceedingly troubling case,” he opined. “It’s beyond the pale when law enforcement officials weaponize the justice system to punish their political opponents.” It is, in fact, downright “totalitarian.” Prosecutors’ view of Texas law would “condemn countless journalists” to arrest and incarceration. That, Ho concluded, cannot be squared with the First Amendment.

That wasn’t the end of the story. The full 5th Circuit voted to rehear the case—a sign that a majority of judges may disagree with Ho. During oral arguments in January, he questioned the defendants’ lawyers incredulously. “You can’t arrest people for asking questions of their government for information,” he said. The lawyer responded that, when an individual seeks the information outside of a formal public records request, they are, indeed, breaking Texas law. There is a real chance that the 5th Circuit will soon permit this criminalization of journalism.

A cynic might say that Ho has seized on this issue to prove he isn’t a partisan hack, or to draw accolades from a hostile media. The more straightforward explanation is that, on this issue, Ho is not a lunatic, and so he can see his colleagues’ lunacy with unusual clarity. It should not be difficult to understand why government conspiracies to jail critics are a danger to the First Amendment. It is only a tough task for far-right judges whose desire to back the blue blinds at all costs overrides freedom of expression. It’s gravely concerning that Ho, of all people, has had to step up as the 5th Circuit’s voice of reason

_________________
when good people stay silent the right wing are the only ones heard.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
real-human



Joined: 02 Jul 2011
Posts: 14834
Location: on earth

PostPosted: Sun Jun 25, 2023 10:37 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Duram testifying... he lied under oath from my standpoint.

Congressman Schiiff beats the piss out of Duram on the stand so the right wing do is centure him. again duram did not even know trump used the russian stealing of dem email over 100 times to attack clinton. Did not even know previous to trump asking russia to break us and international laws to hack Clinton no such attacks had occured on clinton and the dnc but shortly after begging russia that there was massive attacks within hours. Again 4-5 years and he did not even know such basic info that he would not testify to. Hence he is a liar... and should return the total amount spent on a investigation. Also he admitted he could not indict anyone but the three he did and NO-ONE told him he was not allowed to.

he was not dismissed by Biden, allowed another 2-3 years. Either was the fed prosecutor in charge of investigating Biden and his son. He was kept on and no one stopped him from charging.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ch_PLStY_jg

[size=20][b]major... we was in the hotel where the planning was jan 5th, Flynn, stone meadows, lawyers rudy, Kerrick, oath keepers heads, Alex Jones, Bannon, apparently all who have plead the 5th in their depositions.

well alex Jones top guy wo works for Infowars has reached a plea agreement... hahahahah

this is a great video of all these false claims by right wingers debunked.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ag6rH27_Kqk


and another entire Schiff questioning

'Yes Or No?!': Sparks Fly Between Jim Jordan, Adam Schiff, And More In Epic Supreme Court Debate

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k9dUGa3PUgQ

_________________
when good people stay silent the right wing are the only ones heard.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
real-human



Joined: 02 Jul 2011
Posts: 14834
Location: on earth

PostPosted: Wed Jun 28, 2023 8:37 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

another lie that has cost us probably 10s of millions of dollars and damaged democracy where people being heros working for elections will not want to do so due the concern of the hate by the right wing... The right wing loves their hate and lies.

added for voting, the right wing still makes sure there are lines in minority areas for what 8 hours and now the right wing under their lies has added no one may give a person including an elderly person assistance like a bottle of water if hot and in line to 8 hours, or even a chair. Right wingers are the most despicable in-humans on the planet. May they rot in a hot place for eternity when the pass, they have earned that for their actions. May they actually have a real judge they deserve.


https://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/maddowblog/georgia-election-board-finds-no-conspiracy-no-fraud-2020-results-rcna90368?

Georgia election board finds no conspiracy, no fraud in 2020 results


Quote:


Donald Trump clung to his “suitcases full of ballots” lie for years, but Georgia’s state board of elections has now formally rejected the lie as “false.”

June 21, 2023, 8:45 AM MDT
By Steve Benen

It’s no secret that Donald Trump lied about Georgia’s 2020 elections, but as the NBC affiliate in Atlanta reported overnight, state officials have now officially closed the book on one of the most notorious Republican claims.

Officials said Tuesday that the State Election Board had dismissed the case related to the “suitcases full of ballots” allegations at State Farm Arena on Election Night 2020. The State Farm Arena episode was central to former President Donald Trump’s claims that Georgia had fraudulent election results in favor of President Joe Biden. Instead, the long-running investigation by the state determined the claims related to that night were “false and unsubstantiated.”

To be sure, these are not exactly new revelations. Nevertheless, officials on Georgia’s state board of elections yesterday took the formal step of closing the case altogether.

“We are glad the state election board finally put this issue to rest,” Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger said. “False claims and knowingly false allegations made against these election workers have done tremendous harm. Election workers deserve our praise for being on the front lines.”

In a press statement, Raffensperger said the conspiracy theories were scrutinized by investigators from his office, as well as special agents with the FBI and GBI, who collectively concluded that there was “no evidence of any type of fraud as alleged.” They similarly found that allegations of wrongdoing against election workers were “unsubstantiated and found to have no merit.”

In case anyone needs a refresher, let’s revisit our earlier coverage and review how we arrived at this point.

In the immediate aftermath of his election defeat, Trump said election workers in Atlanta corrupted the vote tallies by taking improper ballots from suitcases. The claims were immediately discredited, not just by independent journalists, but also by his own Justice Department. As Rachel noted on the show several months ago, former acting Deputy Attorney General Richard Donoghue told the outgoing president directly that the matter had been reviewed by federal law enforcement and the accusations were baseless.

After one conversation in which the then-president referenced an imagined suitcase filled with fraudulent ballots, Donoghue told Trump, “No, sir, there is no suitcase. You can watch that video over and over. There is no suitcase. There is a wheeled bin where they carried the ballots. And that’s just how they moved ballots around that facility. There’s nothing suspicious about that at all.”

Trump, in other words, was told the truth, which he rejected. Worse, the Republican turned his lies into attacks that put innocent election workers in danger: Trump and some of his rabid followers decided that Shaye Moss and her mother, Ruby Freeman, who had taken a temp job helping count ballots, were directly and personally responsible for including fake ballots in Georgia’s election tally.

He kept the smear campaign going — for roughly two years.

Recommended

MADDOWBLOG
Kevin McCarthy scrambles after accidentally speaking his mind

MADDOWBLOG
In classified docs case, Trump adds ‘bravado’ claim to evolving story
In fact, Trump claimed to have evidence against them in the form of a video in which Moss and Freeman could be seen doing their jobs. What conspiracy theorists said were “suitcases” of bogus ballots were really just standard boxes used locally to transport actual ballots.

The video — which showed nothing nefarious or untoward — nevertheless made the rounds in conservative media and in far-right circles, with Republicans insisting that the images showed election fraud, reality be damned. Trump even put it on screen during one of his post-defeat political rallies. It was around this time when radical activists threatened the women’s lives and showed up at their homes.

Freeman, a retiree who started a small boutique business selling fashion accessories, was forced to flee her house, close her business, and move to an undisclosed location on the advice of the FBI for her own safety.

These women, who’d done nothing wrong, were terrorized because of a ridiculous lie.

On Tuesday, a member of Georgia’s state board of elections requested that Moss and Freeman receive a formal letter “affirmatively telling them that the matter has been dismissed.”

_________________
when good people stay silent the right wing are the only ones heard.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
real-human



Joined: 02 Jul 2011
Posts: 14834
Location: on earth

PostPosted: Tue Aug 29, 2023 1:40 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

which witch are we being bewitched by?
_________________
when good people stay silent the right wing are the only ones heard.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
real-human



Joined: 02 Jul 2011
Posts: 14834
Location: on earth

PostPosted: Sat Dec 09, 2023 11:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

https://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/maddowblog/gops-vance-seeks-investigation-op-ed-criticized-trump-rcna128757?cid=eml_maddow_20231208&user_email=e73377d3e40790eecbf6a99203e1476ea2a23c644c2045abd739b8f9e629a73b&utm_source=Sailthru&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=TRMS%2012/8/23&utm_content=Final&utm_term=Rachel%20Maddow%20Show

GOP’s Vance seeks investigation into op-ed that criticized Trump


Quote:

If Robert Kagan hoped to generate some conversation with a lengthy Washington Post opinion piece last week, he succeeded. Kagan, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution and an editor at large for the Post, presented a provocative warning to the public, arguing that the United States faces the possibility of a “dictatorship” if Donald Trump is returned to the White House.

Sen. J.D. Vance — a former Trump critic turned sycophant — evidently wasn’t persuaded by Kagan’s case. On the contrary, the Ohio Republican this week sent a letter to Attorney General Merrick Garland and Secretary of State Antony Blinken seeking some kind of investigation into the published piece. From the senator’s letter:

“I wish to address to your attention a recent opinion piece published in the pages of a widely-circulated American newspaper. Based on my review of public charging documents that the Department of Justice has filed in courts of law, I suspect that one or both of you might characterize this article as an invitation to ‘insurrection,’ a manifestation of criminal ‘conspiracy,’ or an attempt to bring about civil war.”

In other words, Vance, a Yale-educated lawyer, believes the Post op-ed might have crossed a legal line.

In his correspondence, the GOP lawmaker went on to note that Kagan’s wife, Victoria Nuland, is a senior official in the State Department — and Vance is interested in seeing her security clearance reviewed in light of her husband’s opinion piece for the Post. The Ohioan also wondered in his letter “whether the editors of The Washington Post, having put Kagan’s call to arms in print, might have conspired to suppress the vote.”

In a press statement touting his letter, the senator further characterized Kagan as a “left-wing journalist” — a curious label given Kagan’s record as a prominent neoconservative voice and former aide to Republican officials — before directing people to Fox News’ coverage of his efforts.

As my MSNBC colleague Hayes Brown explained well, Vance’s letter is a partisan stunt, not a serious argument. What’s more, it’s coming from a politician who continues to earn a reputation for unseriousness.

But of particular interest is the irony to which the Republican senator appears indifferent.

Kagan’s fears of a Trump dictatorship — published before Trump told a national television audience of his willingness to create a “Day One” dictatorship — specifically referenced the future of news organizations.

_________________
when good people stay silent the right wing are the only ones heard.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    iWindsurf Community Forum Index -> Politics, Off-Topic, Opinions All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5
Page 5 of 5

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum

myiW | Weather | Community | Membership | Support | Log in
like us on facebook
© Copyright 1999-2007 WeatherFlow, Inc Contact Us Ad Marketplace

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group