BREAKING: Trump DOJ seized Apple data belonging to Schiff and others in "leaks probe"

Schiff will be on Rachel Maddow coming up next

he has reacted on twitter

Stop trolling, OP. Go back to Parler. You don't belong here.

Pelosi reacts

Didn't Judy Garland die in 1969?

R2 hi deplorable. Guess what your fave Trump admin was the most corrupt in US history so fuck off

R4 = Larry King confusing Judy and Merrick.

The DOJ is too busy making sure that schools that take federal money can discriminate against gay students to pay attention to this.

this has never been done in US history

to have the DOJ going after a member of congress

They only went after Democrats

Including a child.

Jesus fucking Christ. Any fucking prosecutor who went along with this should be dragged through the street.

this began under Sessions in 2017/18 but Barr had a prosecutor working on it once he became AG

Katie Benner is one of the few reasons the NYT is still relevant. She cancels out scum like Bret Stephens.

Sessions and Barr should both be subpoenaed to appear before the House to testify about this

CUNTS

time for Barr and Sessions to be disbarred

R14, not just them. Any prosecutor who went along with it --whether current or former-- should be as well.

Schiff on Maddow now

The DOJ using an antiquated view of the executive branch will hasten the demise of this county. Trump is corrupt scum on an unprecedented level and he needs to be treated as such. They cannot apply old rules to someone this loathsome.

Our laws are fucking bullshit.

Every day I think I can’t hate that orange motherfucker more than I already do.

But I do. I hate him more every day.

I don't hate him nearly as much as the assholes who went along with it - esp., those who knew they were abusing the public's trust.

I know it was the justice dept, but wtf Apple? That's a crazy breach of privacy.

CNN also covering it

Adam Shiff is the walking, talking embodiment of WIMP. He completely failed in pinning Dump and his administration on what is now proven was Russian collusion. He can’t even express himself while Devin Nunez literally ran circles around him and the White House lawn. Please, please remove him from any present and future committees

2021: I can't wait to see what the new DOJ is going to do about this!

2022: I can't wait to see what the new DOJ is going to do about this.

2023: Uh, I said I can't wait to see what the DOJ will do about this....

2024: Heil, T***p.

You are an enormous moron, r22. And...

[quote] Devin Nunez literally...

Look up the meaning of the word, you fucking pig-whore.

[quote] 2024: Heil, T***p.

Gee, I wonder who R23 is.

R2 Do you accuse everyone who posts damning evidence of Dump’s corruption of being Parler members? It seems to be a pattern with you.

I'm a fucking Democrat who is sick and fucking tired of seeing T***p get away with everything, r25. If they continue to do nothing about the orange shitstain, it is giving permission for it to happen again. Hitler failed once too.

R27 troll.

[quote]Adam Shiff is the walking, talking embodiment of WIMP.

Go fuck yourself. Schiff is a former prosecutor, and a damn good one. The House impeachment managers laid out a strong case for impeachment in early 2020; sadly his jury was the US Senate, half of whom are still firmly lodged up Donald's asshole.

I'm sure you've got some masturbatory fantasy in your head of a shirtless Rock coming out of nowhere and bashing the bad guys with a folding chair. Real life doesn't quite work that way.

I don't even understand R2's angle. Is he stupid considering Parler is for pro-Trump clowns and the OP clearly isn't a deplorable or is it a very dumb attempt at humor/trolling?

Swalwell on Don Lemon now

he was 1 of the others whose Apple data was seized

R20, Apple was ordered by a judge to turn over the information. We need to Know which judge did this.

Well, we know the judge who allowed the CNN thing was in the Eastern District of VA, so maybe there was a two-fer

R24 is a fucking frau cunt! Look up what exactly? Yes, it was Nunes sneaking into the White House at night. There’s footage if it walking across the fucking lawn you POS!

R34 troll.

r29. I was referring to the Russian collusion investigation, not Dump impeachment you dolt.

Straight up fascism.

Ohhhh….someone sucking Scihff cock? You have very poor taste. I’m simply stating that he was not successful in nailing Russian collusion which is being established now.

Now shut your queefing hole!

R36 R38 Trumper troll.

How am I a Trumper troll? Of course I wanted Schiff to nail Dump’s ass. Please put down the crack pipe.

If the current DOJ refuses to do anything about this, then we'll just have to assume each and every one of our senators and representatives are being threatened and/or blackmailed.

We already know the ones not licking Trump's shit encrusted pooper are dealing with threats to their own lives and those towards their families from vile, trash Trump supporters. By gleaning personal data from Democratic representatives, blackmail is the least they'd attempt engaging in!

Trump, his enablers and supporters are the lowest. Scumbags.

It doesn't fucking matter what you think of Schiff, what the Trump DOJ did is fascist thug BULLSHIT! If we lived in a true democracy, every MFer involved would be in prison for their treachery.

federal prosecutors on tv tonight are advocating for Garland to take action

if not then what's the point? This would allow for future abuses of power by other corrupt presidents

This is incredible.

We have a DLer who worked at the DOJ, I'd like to hear from him about this.

I now despise the word "unprecedented". Hey bitch on the news, how about you honest-up and say "vile" or "disgusting" or "horrific" or even "embarrassing" in regards to Trump and his shitbag crew?

Fuck your "unprecedented" bullshit!

Yes! And even now the Dems and Merrick’s DOJ can’t get anything done in nailing these assholes! Even news reporters find this obvious and are baffled as to why Dems can’t get land a single blow. Of course reporters want to be protected from partisan attacks by usurping the DOJ as the President’s personal free law firm.

Sadly after watching Rachel Maddow the last two nights I have ZERO faith in Merrick Garland in doing what needs to be done. But we’ll see.

Garland’s DOJ…..crickets.

Is Garland too busy sobbing in a corner somewhere or what? Does he not understand he has less than 3 years to get ANYTHING done? My Nana was speedier than him and she had to use a walker.

Here's the problem: All of these intelligent, by-the-book people are accustomed to certain norms and Trump took a steaming pile of shit on all of them and they have no clue how to handle it. They've never dealt with something like this before and they're trying to handle this using whatever old tools they have. We can't even use Nixon as the marker of corruption anymore, it is Trump x infinity. We had a fucking criminal for president and no one has any clue as to how to deal with all of this blatant criminality.

Here's an idea: Arrest the motherfucker and shoot any deplorable terrorist who tries to stop it. These assholes want "law and order," we'll give it to them.

[quote] We have a DLer who worked at the DOJ, I'd like to hear from him about this.

Yes we do.

Would love to hear this former DOJer thoughts also.

R51 sadly you're exactly right. Trump keeps benefiting from all the "by the book" types who are afraid to step on any toes meanwhile he cuts everyone else's toes off

Maybe pull a Putin move and declare Dump and Magats as domestic terrorists, just like he did to Navalny. Then lock up or shoot ‘em Stand Your Ground style!

Agree, R51. Since everything is now "unprecedented" 🙄, you know what? RE-SET IT. Put the hammer down! So what if it gets the 47th president or the 51st president in trouble? MAYBE whomever they are, they shouldn't have indulged in illegal activities! No more deals or insider trading or not paying taxes or any of the other shit that they get away with!

Start with Trump and hold them ALL to a higher standard from now on. Shouldn't we expect more from our leaders, anyway? Not less?

R51 for Attorney General.

[quote]Ohhhh….someone sucking Scihff cock? You have very poor taste.

Your mom doesn't seem to think so.

[quote]I’m simply stating that he was not successful in nailing Russian collusion which is being established now.

a. we're discussing the DOJ pulling Congressional phone records which proves fuck-all about Trump's connection to Russia; b. "collusion" is a bullshit term that isn't legally actionable and just reinforces your credentials as a MAGA troll.

Adam Schiff, May 2019, on the Mueller report:

[quote]“Mueller confirmed today that Russia engaged in multiple systematic efforts to interfere in the 2016 election and the U.S. political system, and underscored that this ‘deserves the attention of every American.’ These facts are indisputable, spelled out in great detail in his report, and lay bare the sinister and sophisticated nature of Russia’s attack.

[quote]“Despite the president’s ‘no collusion’ mantra, Mueller in fact found countless contacts between Russian officials and agents, and Trump campaign associates. These communications and actions were deeply compromising, and raise serious counterintelligence concerns that the Committee must follow. Perhaps most damning of all, Mueller found that Trump and his campaign sought to benefit from a hostile foreign intelligence operation. The Special Counsel determined that there was insufficient evidence to charge a broader conspiracy, but this should not inure us to how unethical and corrupt these actions were and how they undermined our national security.

Sounds pretty fucking collusiony to me.

Thank you for reinforcing my point.

This is far worse than what Nixon did.

Nixon is in hell right now, watching this unfold and saying, "Fuck, why couldn't I do that?"

Garland is friends with Barr. They’re both having a scotch and laughing. Bookmark me. Nothing will be done about this. Where has Garland been the past 4 months when voting rights have been under assault? Why hasn’t the DOJ sued GA? Or AZ where this farcical “audit” is happening? Where is he?

It’s a big club and we ain’t in it.

Yawn. Yet another scandal showing how corrupt this president was and obviously had no respect for the rule of law, government or its institutions.

Consequences for this corrupt piece of shit's newest corruption and lawlessness?

ZERO

R61. Any link?

Dear r34, you fucking moron.

[quote] literally ran circles

Nunes did not literally run in circles around anyone like a five-year old playing a game in a schoolyard. That's why saying he literally did is stupid.

So learn what the word literally means before you use it again, you dumb pig-whore.

[quote] you dumb pig-whore.

This is what I wake up to read…

Fast approaching the 20 names on Nixon's Enemies List. Though so far none have the star power of a Paul Newman, who was on Nixon's list.

Is the Trumper here awake yet? Ready to screech about the "wimpy Democrats?"

I'll screech about wimpy Democrats instead, R68.

Say what you want about Republicans, they get what they want and aren't afraid to break some rules or knock some heads together to get what they want, then dare any god damned Democrat to do a thing about it.

If Democrats had any balls, Joe Manchin would have been spayed and neutered back in January. Just start fucking around with Manchin's hillbilly constituents' SSI payments. Once they can't afford to pay their meth dealers, the blowback to Manchin would be fierce and he'd be completely defanged. .

R69, it really is sickening that Manchin and every Republican from shit red states with no money have any power, let alone so much power. That fucking WV or KY or MS or LA or every one of these fucking fed. aid dependent states gets to dictate anything is vomit-inducing. Schumer needs to fucking go. I will not vote for him when he runs again. He needs to say out loud who fucking pays for everything and has most of the god damned populations. Enough is enough. The Republicans aren't going to do shit for you, Chuck, nor is DINO Manchin, so WTF are you being nice? Say out loud who pays the god damned bills and which states have no fucking money.

So people without money should get less governmental representation than the rich?

R71, people with no fucking money in KY have no business being Republicans and then attempt to tell high tax-paying WOMEN in NY they shouldn't be allowed a choice over their own bodies or high tax-paying gay people in CT they have no right to marry.

White racist idiots living in trailer parks with no fucking money on welfare have no business voting Republican to stick it to immigrants running restaurants who pay taxes.

And it isn't merely about money. How the fuck do you think it's right that WV with a pop. smaller than BROOKLYN should have a greater say than NY or CA or NJ or CT.

Do you really think it's fair when 12 red state senators represent a population smaller than ONE blue state? The states that pay the most in taxes AND have higher populations are beholden to the idiocy of the south and parts of the Midwest.

Preach, R72!

I didn't say anything about the population inequality in American government. I was pointing out the very ridiculous and dangerous suggestion that poor people shouldn't have as much say in government as rich people.

R74, here's the thing: As we are now, it is the wealthiest who get to dictate the terms. You're acting as though that isn't the current situation. The difference is that they get to dictate the terms via the poorest in red states who vote for representation that specifically represents the wealthiest. Low income people in red states vote Republican out of hate for their fellow citizen.

So the difference is that if the wealthiest states actually got to dictate the terms, the poorest in red states wouldn't be living in squalor because they'd actually get the help that they need because that what Dems VOTE for.

that's*

R74 I think his point is that they shouldn’t have [italic]more[/italic] say, either. But even that is overlooking the point: States with smaller populations shouldn’t have more power than states with larger populations.

It’s no one’s fault that some regions are more heavily populated than others. The Electoral College is, to put it bluntly, unconstitutional.

R77, exactly. More than even the money situation is the population situation. It is insanity how the Senate is considered "split." No, it isn't. Dems represent millions more people and yet have to fight tooth and nail for everything. I'll never forget NY Senators voting for disaster aid during whatever natural disaster LA was having at the time and then Hurricane Sandy happened and LA's senator voted AGAINST NY/NJ/CT getting money. EXCUSE ME? You're voting against us getting our money for help, but we vote for you to get our money for help?

The money situation offends me more not because I'm anti-poor. It's because as a NYer, I have to listen to a shit like McConnell tell NY to "go bankrupt" during the pandemic. The arrogance of these people representing piss-poor states contributing nothing yet acting as though they should control the purse strings. They really act as though they are the ones keeping the lights on.

I assume nothing will come of it, at least for Trump.....It's something new every other week and they have not charged him with anything

Because Republicans exist - that's why we will never get any justice. Not for anything.

Hey guys, just checking in to drop some major news today...

The office all decided to order hoagies for lunch after a week long debate!

See ya, suckers.

[quote] The arrogance of these people representing piss-poor states contributing nothing yet acting as though they should control the purse strings. They really act as though they are the ones keeping the lights on.

Love, you’re veering off point again.

The fact of the matter is this: It is not a government’s responsibility to appoint electors to make decisions on behalf of voters; that’s what voting is for. The majority is the majority, and if you don’t like how the majority is voting, then you are well within your rights and should be encouraged to persuade others of your views and to support candidates that align better with your expectations.

Strong-arming large swathes of the population to do things your way is unethical and, quite frankly, disturbing.

R82, you seem to be confused about the meaning of "majority." The Republicans in the Senate represent, as R78 said, a substantial minority (around 40%) of senatorial voters. The Senate is an innately unrepresentative institution, and it's only gotten more so with the widening population differences. Yes, the rich, populous, diverse blue states keep the poor, underpopulated, homogeneous moocher red states afloat.

R83 Actually, dear, I am not confused about the meaning at all. You seem to have missed my point.

R82, I believe in one person, one vote and that's what it comes down to - and the Senate was formed at a time that didn't anticipate a powerful minority abusing that power via things like the filibuster.

You can think whatever you want about my view, but as it stands, it is preposterous that a minority population which contributes very little towards the upkeep, wants to control everything including how people live their own lives. There is nothing normal about our system. It's why we don't have money for universal healthcare, but an insane amount for defense.. Because the minority pop. with no money, gets to dictate where our money goes.

You want to talk about this being about "wealthy" people? Manchin's daughter jacked up the price of epipens, by what? 500%. Perhaps if the "wealthy" majority in blue states had power reflective of both that wealth and majority, poor people in red states wouldn't be struggling to pay for medication.

[quote] I believe in one person, one vote and that's what it comes down to

R85 Exactly. And I do too.

But understand that it is offensive to listen to a senator from KY tell a state to "go bankrupt" knowing full-well his state depends on that state. When I talk about these states having no money, I really don't mean poor people should have no voice, I'm saying I find it preposterous that they do in fact -on top of not contributing- want to dictate to the majority where the money goes and how the majority should live their lives. In other words, they don't merely want a voice, they want to silence ours.

Did the thread derailment just happen, or was it deliberate?

R88, I'm done. And I didn't mean it to be deliberate. Apologies.

Back DOJ-Schiff.

Incels, foreigners...

You keep starting your posts by complaining about the undemocratic Senate then slide over to arguing that the richer states should have a greater say in policy because they are richer, a very anti-democratic idea.

Exactlly! R23....such bullshit!

I thought this might be an old thread when asshole was potus...and someone bumped it. No....this is recent. WTF...who the fuck is trump now.. really. Ok..wimpy Dems...lets go!

How the hell did one man do all this damage to our system?

"Election officials and their families are living with threats of hanging, firing squads, torture and bomb blasts, interviews and documents reveal. The campaign of fear, sparked by Trump's voter-fraud falsehoods, threatens the U.S. electoral system."

The shit keeps being smeared in our faces...even with him out of office...a fucking civilian now. It just won't stop..and it's being allowed to happen. Where are the protections against this sort of crap? These people aren't even in office now. I'm really losing hope for this country.

Absolutely fucking disgusting, R94. No election worker should be in fear of their lives or their families lives for DONALD TRUMP.

No employee or government worker should be in fear of their lives or their families lives because of him, either.

They need to treat the scum who are making those threats as the terrorists they are and lock them up. And KEEP them locked up!

[quote]The Senate is an innately unrepresentative institution, and it's only gotten more so with the widening population differences.

The Senate was designed to give every state 2 Senators regardless of their population. That's the whole point of the Senate!

The problem is that the Senate has too much power, it wasn't meant to be more powerful than the House. The House also needs to have a major overhaul of Representatives because that's where the true inequality lies, there are states with too many Representatives and that's a problem.

The people who say the Senate should be based on population of individual states are just describing the House, which we already have.

[quote] No election worker should be in fear of their lives or their families lives for DONALD TRUMP.

If they’re not going to go after the politicians, they need to start going after their psychotic supporters, and they need to start sharing their names with the public. I say, hunt the unhinged down - it shouldn’t be that difficult - and start special reporting on them in the news.

Agree, R98!

Name and shame, r98.

The problem is, the Quilt is strong and will view these terrorists as martyrs.

How in the hell is fat orange cunt still managing to pull strings at the DOJ? Is Garland that much of a pushover?

Why are Democrats such fucking spineless pussies? Pelosi seems to be the only fucking Democrat who knows how to kick ass when she's had enough.

NBC News: DOJ internal watchdog to investigate Trump-era leak hunt targeting lawmakers, journalists:

R100, as I said earlier in the thread, the problem is that Dems in particular are so by-the-book that they have no clue what to do about this. Garland and the DOJ are attempting to apply existing laws to a level of corruption and criminality unseen before by a president. They keep using "He was the president" as some sort of "get out of jail" free card. That's the problem.

Why exactly should the president be above the law or immune from prosecution for anything done during his presidency when we all know what he did was criminal? Some use the excuse that this will allow future presidents to abuse their power to punish enemies....gee, do I have news for them about a past president: HE ALREADY DID.

The EJ case is a prime example of Garland being way too by-the-book. Trump essentially calling her "too ugly to rape" is in no way in the service of the American people.

POLITICO: Former Attorney General William Barr distanced himself from reports that the Trump DOJ seized communications records belonging to two prominent Democratic lawmakers who were spearheading investigations into Trump.

Barr said that while he was attorney general, he was “not aware of any congressman’s records being sought in a leak case.” He added that Trump never encouraged him to zero in on the Democratic lawmakers who reportedly became targets of the former president's push to unmask leakers of classified information.

[quote]"not aware"

So he knew.

No waiting. Get rid of the current people still at the DOJ who were a part of this and go after any former prosecutors currently at white shoe law firms. You just know some of these people are currently making lots of money in private practice after they've done this. Why should they be allowed to get away scot-free?

Can someone break down the issue here? The Trump DOJ wanted to find the source of the leak of classified information. As part of that investigation, they had some kind of suspicion that certain people like Schiff and Swalwell might be involved, so they seized their phone records. That search found nothing.

What am I missing here? It doesn't seem that far fetched that Schiff or Swalwell might have been a source for some of the leaks, so why are folks so outraged that their records were seized as part of an investigation?

I hate Trump with an unbridled passion and hope he dies from disfiguring syphilis and rots in hell... but I don't see what the issue is here... which means I'm pretty sure I'm missing something. Was the investigation unlawful or something?

[quote]What am I missing here? It doesn't seem that far fetched that Schiff or Swalwell might have been a source for some of the leaks, so why are folks so outraged that their records were seized as part of an investigation?

a. it's banana republic shit; b. no legal precedent for this shit whatsoever; c. no probable cause provided for going after Schiff or Swalwell (they had no evidence indicating either of them leaked the information), Trump just wanted revenge; d. it's banana republic shit.

Hope that clarifies this for you.

R106, they specifically targeted Democrats incl. the child of one of them. He was using the DOJ specifically to target his "enemies." It was politically-motivated.

R106, it's also a case of one branch of government spying on another, which was until now unprecedented (a word that means nothing now in the age of Trump).

R106, what you are missing is that the searches were unconstitutional. You can’t conduct searches and seizures without probable cause. Guesswork or suspicion is not enough.

[quote] a. it's banana republic shit; b. no legal precedent for this shit whatsoever; c. no probable cause provided for going after Schiff or Swalwell (they had no evidence indicating either of them leaked the information), Trump just wanted revenge; d. it's banana republic shit. Hope that clarifies this for you.

It does somewhat. Thank you.

I think you're wrong about legal precedent, though. See the attached legal explanation regarding leak laws.

Not sure about the probably cause. Were they not required to have a search warrant?

I totally get that the orange fuckwit was probably approaching the leaks in a completely self-serving manner with little regard (if any) for any National Security implications, and also that he was likely using the system to harass his opponents. Of all the shit he did, I just don't feel as outraged by this particular thing as I am by some of his other moments of the shitshow.

[quote] what you are missing is that the searches were unconstitutional. You can’t conduct searches and seizures without probable cause. Guesswork or suspicion is not enough.

Thanks, r110. That does raise the level of concern. If they seized the records without a valid, lawful warrant, that's alarming and should be prosecuted.

R112, they might have gotten a warrant, but it’s hard to believe that there was sufficient evidence to support it.

[quote]I totally get that the orange fuckwit was probably approaching the leaks in a completely self-serving manner with little regard (if any) for any National Security implications, and also that he was likely using the system to harass his opponents.

But that's just it. His *motivation* for doing it is why this is huge. The DOJ used their authority in the service of nefarious motivation - that's what should frighten you.

I don't think there's a limit to Trump's dirty deeds. He's a monster as well as his cronies.

Is Bill Barr retired or is he in private practice?

CNN reporting just now that the Trump administration subpoenaed info on 73 numbers and 36 emails from Apple. Apple says the subpoena contained no info about who the investigation was targeting or why. The subpoena covered the phone users' records back to the beginning of their accounts.

Gee, should we take bets on whether or not a single one of those 73 was a Republican?

"Apple believes similar subpoenas were sent to other technology companies."

Microsoft already said they were contacted, too

R64.r65

You are a horse-fucking CUNT. Get over your juvenile mentality. How the fuck do you know if Nunes did not run in circles?

Once again, shut your queefing hole!

R121 Why me?

Some people around her are *so* anti-semantic!

^here

I am betting Trump was using the IRS in some underhanded way also, people were wanting to see his taxes, you just know he wanted to see some of his enemies taxes.

I don't doubt Trump abused many institutions. I expect a cockroach like him to do so, because that's what scum does. What sickens me are all of the people who knew better and went along with it. They have no excuse that makes them look good.

R122. There’s this juvenile cunt that is obsessed with one of the words I used in a post. The stupid cunt missed the entire point of the text.

Yes, it’s semantics.

Is it time for Garland to be moved out? Can we start this narrative yet?

Then can we say hello to Sally Yates? She knew what was going to go down with the Republicans way back when she warned us about Paul Manafort. Now that’s a whip-smart woman!

Garland is clearly book smart, not street smart. We need someone who knows how to deal with thugs.

God yes, Sally Yates. We need her. Special prosecutor time?

Oops, meant Michael Flynn not Paul Manafort. I still believe she knew about the Repugs and their Russian collusion.

[quote] How the fuck do you know if Nunes did not run in circles?

So your argument is now that Devin Nunes may have LITERALLY run in circles around Schiff?

[quote] Get over your juvenile mentality.

Oh, the irony.

When Barr says that he wasn’t aware, is he simply lying or admitting that he was the least competent person for this job? How would it be possible for Trump to do this behind his back?

What are the Dems doing about any of this...I wish we would play dirty as the deplorables do. I get a sinking feeling they will get away with everything as usual

R133, the person actually behind all of this could be Rod Rosenstein. The Apple and Microsoft subpoenas were issued under Jeff Sessions, who was recused from any matter concerning Trump's contacts with Russia. Rosenstein, as Sessions's deputy, would had to have signed off on this. (Rosenstein has declined to comment so far). It also appears, though, that after the investigation lead to nothing, Barr brought in someone from another office to revive it, so Barr is almost certainly lying now about not being "aware" of what was going on. Remember, he's not under oath, he can always "remember" new things if put under oath.

R134, there's an ongoing investigation into this.

"we can't do anything to him he's president" to "we can't do anything to him because he's not president anymore"...

Fuck Barr! Just think: more juicy stuff may come out in the near future in regards to Jeffrey Epstein.

R132. I’m guessing this queefing cunt is actually attached to a real Russian slut! Just ignore her since she is probably bi-polar and going through a manic, psychotic episode.

Now Rod Rosenstein is claiming he knew *nothing* about the subpoenas. Apparently they just issued themselves.

Democrats play by the rules....repubs don't play by the rules, and make up their own along the way to suit them. Democrats have to think outside of the box, get creative and maybe get a little dirty, too. That's the only way to deal with today's GQP.

It won't happen until we get rid of wimps like Schumer.

Apparently, the subpoenas spontaneously generated themselves. Funniest thing.

R142, yeah, we've had subpoenas before which have led to nothing. When I see concrete punishment/consequences for even a single one of these people and their actions, get back to me.

Would it be possible to forge subpoenas?

Rosenstein had to have known things were going on because he supposedly discussed recording Trump and the 25th Amendment in 2018.

So someone explain to me the point of the 25th amendment.

Apple informed former White House counsel Don McGahn and wife that their records were sought by DOJ in 2018:

Speaking of Nunes:

"Trump's DOJ tried to unmask a Twitter account mocking Devin Nunes. Think about that."

I think everyone is corrupt. Some a lot more than others..or are just blatant about it. The others try to put on a concerned and outraged act..or feign ignorance.

[quote]Apple informed former White House counsel Don McGahn and wife that their records were sought by DOJ in 2018:

One of the reasons I’m a Democrat and not a Republican is that I don’t want to belong to a party that is sleazy and breaks the law to get power. That said, I wish we could counter the sleaze of the Republican Party with something other than more sleaze.

I want to know what exactly the laws are for if they're not actually applied?

WTF is the 25th Amendment for? WTF is the Hatch Act for? WTF is the point of any law designed to hold a POTUS accountable when it isn't even enforced because "He was president" or "He's no longer president" ? If this were a Democrat who had done even one of these things, he'd already be in prison. I don't doubt it for a second.

We've just had the most egregious violations to the oath of office of any president over and over and over again, and he isn't being held accountable. Why?

Since the laws aren't being applied anymore, and are being eroded by repubs at a pretty quick pace.... changing them...and getting away with it, how do you counter this by applying these laws? They're meaningless now. That's what I mean by outside of the box thinking by Democrats. Democrats want to go by the protocols and the book...it doesn't work anymore. So.....how do Demcrats fight this? What should they do?

Exactly, R152. That's why people like Garland can't be effective. He is a brilliant man, but far too literal in how he views the law. He needs to understand Trump and everyone who enabled him is criminal scum who violated their authority to unspeakable levels. They cannot be protected by what their roles were because they completely violated those roles.

They need to be treated as a foreign enemy would, because that is who they are. They are terrorists. We are witnessing the beginning of the end of this country if these people are not brought to justice. That is not hyperbole. A democratic country doesn't fall in a day.

[quote] Since the laws aren't being applied anymore, and are being eroded by repubs at a pretty quick pace.... changing them...and getting away with it, how do you counter this by applying these laws? They're meaningless now. That's what I mean by outside of the box thinking by Democrats. Democrats want to go by the protocols and the book...it doesn't work anymore. So.....how do Demcrats fight this? What should they do?

This is exactly right, and it's frustrating. The previous administration wantonly broke so many laws, it's difficult to keep count. Democrats weren't able to do anything about it (and in many instances, it doesn't seem like they even tried to do anything about it.) If a Democrat tries to follow suit and act the way that the previous administration did, the Republicans would do everything in their power to prosecute and unseat that person.

I'm not sure what the Democrats are trying to prove - it's not like we really trust them anyways. They may as well play dirty like their Republican counterparts. . . or at least be willing to bend the rules.

Nothing will come of this. I mean, we had an insurrection that has already been whitewashed. The Dems are weak and roll over every time.

The Dems won the Presidency, Senate and House and still act like pussies. And I'm fucking tired of Biden's "bipartisan" bullshit. Fuck that. Stop with the mealy-mouth crap. Remind every god damned voter every fucking day that they got extra money in their pockets solely because of Democrats. Republicans are killing this fucking country. There is no point in talking to them like they're humans. They're parasites.

The Dems will lose in '22 and they deserve to do so because they have no idea how to wield power. They really are pathetic. Schumer in particular deserves to be out as majority leader because McConnell still acts like he is.

I'm really feeling that the Democrats are just not into it.

Democrats are scared to be democrats.

Republicans are brave in being themselves.

This is just regular government bureaucracy. Remember when Mueller didn't investigate Trump's finances because he thought the FBI was doing it and the FBI didn't investigate it because they thought Mueller was doing it? These things happen... again and again and again.

You know what I remember? Countless hearings on Benghazi.

Since no fucking laws matter and no protocol matters, WTF should Dems wait for the Reps to agree to a hearing on January 6th? WTF would happen if the Dems just held the hearings without those terrorists? Who in the hell is going to "punish" them if they do it? Ron Johnson?

Fucking hold the God damned hearings and see what the Reps do about it. Have every last Capitol PO tell the American people what happened to them and let's see the Republicans attempt to defend it. WTF is stopping the Dems from telling the GOP to go fuck themselves. WHAT?

...Many times these bureucracies don't even communicate with each other. Each want their own terrain. No cohesiveness....as evidence with January 6. Some are secretly (or not) in agreement and go along with this.

*bureaucracies...oh dearing myself..lol^^

I think, in the end, many Democrats feel that they'll be ok...in the long run. They may be voted out, but with the many years of their political careers...they have built an excellent healthcare for themselves, will write a book, become speakers, commanding a nice fee..have amassed a lot of money to ride off into the sunset of their lives very comfortably. They will have their ranches, gated communities and will not feel the impact of what the rest of the country will feel. All politicians are like this. It's the most dishonorable profession.

r163, I fear you're right. Plus very few people have "clean hands" once you start digging around. No one wants their family exposed. IMO Joe Manchin has been bought and paid for with threat of family scandal or regular corruption. Two seconds of Googling uncovers plenty to raise suspicions.

Off topic, but do you want to know the silver bullet way for each of us peons to get excellent healthcare? Very simple: require that ALL members of Congress and the US President get the same healthcare as the citizens! That’s right. Put their asses on Medicare and have them pay out of pocket for the supplemental portion. Problem solved and it will become the law in less than a month.

There should be term limits...like with the President.

R165, a lot of people have suggested that. It is preposterous that an asshole like Rand "Mr. Libertarian" Paul, not only represents a god damned socialist state dependent on the govt, but he has healthcare paid for by taxpayers and then went to fucking Canada for his surgery.

He fights against taxpayers getting what he has.

Good point r164. But our excellent “justice system” was quick to throw Martin Shkreli’s ass in jail for doing the exact same thing as Manchin’s daughter.

You're right, R164. Very few, if any politician, have "clean" hands. There's a lot of dirt to hang over their heads.

He investigated his OWN fucking lawyer.

I'd like a Wine-Bank.

Martin Shkreli was only convicted of securities fraud — basically running a Ponzi scheme, bilking investors in one of his companies to pay off investors in a prior company. Like Manchin's daughter, he was never held accountable for jacking up drug prices.

But they went after him because of the outrage for jacking up the price. Bet if you dug around Manchin’s activities a little bit, you’d find some choice nuggets, as well.

R172, jacking up drug prices is probably not illegal.

Also: how has this turned into an “everyone is corrupt” screed? These are likely crimes committed by Republicans.

I recall both Dems and Reps trying to make it difficult for people to go to Canada to buy meds after it became more frequent and there were actually bus pkgs catering to the market. The D and R claiming they couldn't be sure it was safe. Yes, I'm sure the drugs in Canada are not safe - that's the reason you wanted to stop people (esp., seniors) from going up there, not the fact that both parties are bought by BigPharma and they will force us into paying $500 for meds that can be bought for $25 in Canada.

They were all dead certain Trump would be President forever, and they could do anything they wanted without retribution.

I think Biden must have been sent by God.

[quote]They need to be treated as a foreign enemy would, because that is who they are. They are terrorists.

I agree. And in my opinion, Donald Trump is a terrorist leader no different than Osama bin Laden. They were just saying on TV yesterday about how his supporters are threatening poll workers now. That's why he's kept off Twitter because they know he could activate his supporters to commit a violent act at any moment.

Democrats are complete idiots for not calling him this every single day. Don't say "the former president" and instead say "the terrorist leader." Because that's what he fucking is.

(Regarding imported medication from Canada - hello, most of our meds are made cheaply in India now.. I’d trust Canada before India.)

I doubt any of those DOJ subpoenas were illegal in and of itself either. It simply is unethical or immoral. We have Dubya’s Patriot Act to thank for that. Repugs are the root cause of a lot of the fuckery we are going through now. There’s just too many assaults on our country to enumerate on this thread.

When was the last time Republicans weren't the cause of fuckery? I'm thinking Lincoln.

"I don't belong to an organized political party, I'm a Democrat." --Will Rogers

[bold]GET IT TOGETHER, GUYS.[/bold] You get one shot at this. One.

Barr was not invited back to his old position at Kirkland & Ellis, nor was his successor, Jeff Rosen. Their actions in office prompted the partners to find them too radioactive to come back.

Congressmen are not above the law. They are subject to investigation the same as everyone else.

Apple data ⚖️ Tax returns? We know which is more destructive folks!

Wow, R182. I wonder if more names will surface who are already in private practice, because with the new admin, a lot of federal prosecutors resigned since many were installed by Trump. Wonder if we'll find out if any of them were involved in this mess.

[quote] I doubt any of those DOJ subpoenas were illegal in and of itself either. It simply is unethical or immoral.

The subpoenas were issued by a grand jury and approved by a judge. It’s unethical or immoral to have Congressmen treated the same way under the law as every other person? I’m not seeing why they should be regarded as above the law.

R186, we don't know enough to say that this was lawful or appropriate. Following procedure alone does not guarantee lawfulness. Frankly, no one should have their personal information seized without the opportunity to challenge that seizure without a very good reason, and here have no idea what that reason might have been.