brickhistory
-
Posts
2,091 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
57
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Blogs
Downloads
Wiki
Everything posted by brickhistory
-
Brits were calling it "Dave" a while back. Dunno currently.
-
And this is why we can't break nice things... https://dailycaller.com/2018/05/17/air-force-sorry-tweet-terrorists/
-
So much for comity. (See what I did there?) And as I stated, it is interesting to note how the same facts can be looked at and two different conclusions drawn. I look forward to the current Ambassador to the UN requesting the IDs of multiple US citizens as the last one did. I look forward to the current DNI lying under oath to Congress as the last one did. I look forward to the current FBI director providing government-owned and classified at the time (per the DOJ IG) memos to a 'friend' who also happened to be an FBI special employee who in turn leaked that information to the press. I look forward to the next NIE being produced and reviewed by the current CIA director's hand-picked analysts by only the FBI, CIA, and, if memory serves, one other instead of the entire IC as is the SOP. To which the then director of the NSA disagreed with the findings, but the dissenting section was also omitted unlike every other NIE. And other facts that are known. So conspiracy theory? I'm not thinking so, but I do know that those on the other side of the spectrum would be lighting torches in the street if the roles were reversed. And they are going to be if those who abused, or allowed to be abused, the instruments of national power for partisan political advantage. Politics is a full-contact sport. No problem with politicians engaging in mud fights. Professional, executive branch institutions and individuals are not supposed to knowingly help one side or the other. If those who have done so aren't punished now, it will only get worse.
-
If you have classified e-mails on your personal server, you can be charged under the Espionage Act of 1917 among other USC violations. Numerous examples from the previous Administration that didn't involve handing over secrets to another country, just had classified where they shouldn't have. As to the rest of your post, I disagree I stand by my interpretation of the facts/info that I know of to expect government powers to be misused even more often and further. edited to add: Interesting to note that two reasonably intelligent (an assumption regarding both) people can read an article and draw largely different conclusions as to the important points. 🍺
-
FBI/DOJ's story on the when and why they started investigating the Trump campaign continues to unravel. See NYT for poorly written article. Informative because it states, including exactly when said investigation began, so to me, that implies the leaker was involved in order to know such details, and that involved a small, unofficial group of FBI agents, five or less. Who happened to be part of the same group who were on the Hillary e-mail/espionage investigation. Poorly written because it contradicts itself by stating mid-way through the article that the senior DOJ Nat'l Security lawyer was involved and that then Deputy DOJ Atty Gen Yates said they were low-key efforts. So she knew about it. And that Comey, then Director of the FBI was briefed occasionally on it. So he knew. So, sure, I probably need to apply a fresh coat of peanut butter to my tinfoil hat, but here is another piece of the powerful law enforcement and/or IC institutions of government being used for political gain or intel in order to acquire gain. Sure as sh1t, the right will do it as well. No complaining when it does if heads don't roll now. -Unmasking of numerous US citizens who just happen to be opposition party -FBI Director leaking classified to the press -FISA warrants obtained using opposition research etc etc etc/
-
Agreed. Although the author stated a cogent truism as noted by the "17 years of careerists captured in one sentence, Big Blue has been given numerous intel tippers and target markings. But the institution always has and always will simply shrug with a "It's not me, it's you."
-
Whether you think it for good or bad, Trump does seem to be actually doing things. Including one that his predecessors of both parties said the US should do, but always held off doing so. https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/united-states-opens-its-israeli-embassy-in-jerusalem/ar-AAxfV7K?OCID=ansmsnnews11
-
So Nobel Peace Prize winner and former President Barack Obama has taken to making derogatory statements about the current Administration's actions in public venues. Today, two former Obama NSC staffers published a NYT editorial recommending that European countries expel US Ambassadors (I know, they should be dead ones, but I digress...) over the US' withdrawing from the Iran deal. Because "if the US doesn't live up to sacred agreements, then this is expected action. " You know, the deal signed by one guy but not a binding treaty and unsigned by another guy as if it never existed.
-
Iran Lied . . . No One Is Surprised
brickhistory replied to FlyinGrunt's topic in General Discussion
It was a bad deal to start with. Not to mention the second most egregious example by the previous Administration to do an end run around the founding contract of our system of government - the US Constitution. Any formal agreement (treaty) between the US and any other country that binds us to any action or behavior isn't valid until it is presented to and ratified by the Senate. This J-POS as well as the even worse Paris Climate Accord were done via Obama's infamous "phone and pen." And just as easily undone (except for DACA for some reason espoused by one lower court judge) by the next Administration. If it were such a good deal for the US, then why didn't Obama present it to the Senate? Because he knew he couldn't get it through, so he simply ignored them. And they let him. They voluntarily abrogated one of their basic responsibilities. Which disgusts me even more than the J-POS did. -
Speaking of trying to reverse an Administration's (potential) policy: https://www.bostonglobe.com/news/nation/2018/05/04/kerry-quietly-seeking-salvage-iran-deal-helped-craft/2fTkGON7xvaNbO0YbHECUL/story.html I thought it was frowned upon (*cough* Logan Act *cough*) for a private citizen to engage in foreign policy. Pretty sure the FBI had a little chat to new NSC Director Flynn about this. Does Kerry get a pass?
-
Previous guy (I know it's not PC to reference the past lest one learn from it) got the Nobel Peace Prize for not being George W. Bush. I'd be fine if this guy got it for not being Hillary.
-
So no one can compare the current Administration's accomplishments to the last one. But the last one gets credit for what's occurring now? That's convenient. Ah well, it's still not Hillary in the White House.
-
SecState Clinton was responsible for the allocation of the Department's budget, regardless of it had been increased or not. The Ambassador on the ground requested, repeatedly, for reliable help. Which was denied repeatedly. I'm betting security at the Lichtenstein Embassy could've been cut to shift some funds, but that's just humorous now. Regardless, a US Ambassador was murdered under the watch of the previous Administration. Which you have conveniently just declared that "whataboutism" is invalid. Which is ironic since the current Administration has stated publicly that much of its agenda is to undue the buffoonery of the previous Administration. Sooo, how does one make the apples to apples comparison if you declare that the old apple can't be looked at? Either way, I reject the premise. But just for fun, here's some "whataboutisms: What about the record number of federal judges approved and in office under the current Administration? What about the potentially historic nK upcoming visit? Whether it's successful or not is still TBD admittedly. What about the consecutive quarters of very strong economic growth? What about the consecutive quarters of lowering unemployment including and especially among minorities? And the list could go on. Compared to that, not having designated but not yet confirmed by the Senate (except, of course, for the just confirmed gay one to Germany so there's that bigotry thing not happening again. And this will be the second time that the Senate's role in confirming the nominated people for all those ambassadorships is ignored), does seem to be a case of effective prioritization. The diplomatic relations between the US and various countries seems to be humming along. With or without a formal ambassador in place. Which is infinitely better than having a dead ambassador. But I'm old-fashioned that way.
-
Iran Lied . . . No One Is Surprised
brickhistory replied to FlyinGrunt's topic in General Discussion
1. Ask for our money back. 2. Submit any agreement to the Senate for ratification. You know, Constitutionally. Turns out that "having a phone and pen" can be undone by the next guy (except for DACA, it seems). 2a. Spy on the Senate so we know what they are thinking https://www.cnn.com/2014/07/31/politics/cia-spying-senate-apologize/index.html (still cannot fathom the then-majority Democrats letting this one slide...imagine if it were today...) 3. State "It shall be the policy of the US Government that any attack upon Israel using any form of WMD is considered to be an attack upon the United States by the nation of Iran as well as the by the country that such an attack originates from and will be retaliated with all instruments of national and military power. With no restrictions on those instruments." 4. If a nation wants nukes, it will get them. Non-proliferation is a chimera if a nuke is wanted bad enough. -
Really, you are going with that? Unconfirmed in the appointment by the Senate as opposed to KIA despite the repeated and denied requests for further, reliable security in a rapidly deteriorating situation like Libya was (albeit too close to the 2012 election to risk repudiating the "everything is fine" doctrine) sure seems like a better result. Results do seem to matter to the current guy to the dismay of the entrenched of both political parties. Not empty, hollow words like the last one. Not counting, of course, "I'll have more room, heh heh, to maneuver after the next elections." Those seemed to have had results as well.
-
Are all these harrumphs for ST2 for getting hammered and then going to see it? Asking for a friend...
-
Any experience with these? https://promagindustries.com/smith-wesson/623-smi-28-smith-wesson-shield-933-10-rd-blue-steel-magazine.html or these? https://www.magguts.com/products/smith-wesson-shield-9mm-2-magguts
-
It's still early and it's only to the best of my recollection, but Obama (and Clinton since she was the SecState) does lead Trump in one important category: Ambassadors killed: Obama/Clinton Trump 1 0 We can discuss "leading from behind" in another post...
-
Dept of Justice IG recommends criminal charges for fired former Deputy FBI Director McCabe. Gonna be a good day, Tater...
-
BLUF: Still not Hillary in the White House. Which is enough. Or any of the 16 other Republican candidates in 2016. Yet the party in the majority in the House and Senate are acting more as the opposition than the current victors.
-
And therein lies the problem. The senior levels of the FBI appear to have been tainted. Strzok certainly is/was. Mueller is a past Director of the FBI as well as a close friend of fired Director Comey's whose leak of classified self-memos to the NYT triggered the call for the special investigation. Appearances do matter.
-
Although I think you intended to refute my post - nowhere did I imply that Mueller won't "find anything,"- you actually make my point. I am unfamiliar with the American judicial system that investigates someone until they find something. I don't impugn Mueller's overall integrity, but he's bud's with Comey, was the Director of the FBI who very well could be involved with all these shenanagins, and his crack team of associates do seem to run in a particular ideological bent. As one example, FBI CI guy Struck(sp?). True, he did fire him after the notorious anti-Trump texts were made public, but was it because they became public that he fired him? All of these indicators would seem to add up to not being an impartial guy for this investigation. Appearances matter. Ask Steven Hatfill about Mueller's infallibility.
-
Clinton was investigated and impeached because of the opposition political party. Not for getting a BJ, but for lying under oath. Wasn't smart for the GOP to do then and it blew up in their faces (errr. sts). Trump is being investigated with his own party controlling the levers of power. Telling how much the establishment on both sides don't want his outsiderness. He's rocking their boat however chaotically he is doing it. So he's being investigated after firing an executive branch official who serves, like all do, at the pleasure of the President. An open-ended investigation that has carte blanche to go anywhere, covering any activity, at any time in Trump and his associates lives. Not sure I could withstand such an open-ended investigation without them finding something or, if not, for 'obstruction of justice' and/or 'lying to federal investigators' when even an "I don't remember" can be indicted as such. Not sure many of us could. Now national level politics is a dirty business because of the many dollars that can accrue from the activity, but our intel agencies spying on, and revealing to the media, the private conversations of Americans, the leaking of classified information by a SecState/candidate, the head of the FBI, his deputy, the lead CI investigator, etc, etc doesn't bother you, it should. Or knowingly lying multiple times by lying to a FISA court (itself an aberration of what is supposed to be our open judicial system). Or the weaponizing of the IRS against political opponents which happened. IRS admitted it and paid millions in fines. That should bother you. As just a start. And not because Obama and Co. did it. But because it was done and there were no consequences. As least as of to date. What do you think the GOP is likely to do with their power? And the next guys? Each time, the boundary will be pushed just a little further because the likelihood of negative repercussions to those misusing the powers of the federal government grows smaller each time. Yes, I do want you to get off my lawn, but more importantly, I want you to get off of my Constitution.
-
Did not see that one coming. Hook, line, and sinker for my initial response on seeing the pic. Well played.
