I would really (really!) like at least one Democratic Senator to have the FBI Director explain what a g*ddamn FISA warrant is, what itâs for and how itâs obtained.
GOPers: Chris Wray is a Democrat!
Schumer: It is not done. This is very serious stuff.
I think the signal here is that impeachment is off the table until after the election. The termites are well dug in and they like the conditions they have created just fine.
Jeepers. If Bill Barr wants to know how the Russia investigation started, maybe he should read the Mueller Report.
So what is this âpersonallyâ business? Was there no follow up on this?
Meaning that Wray is a careful man. We need to get Mueller before Congress FAST.
The Mueller Report is only one side of the story, the false narrative put forth by the deep state, angry Democrats. The counterpoint is the story told by the voices in Trumpâs head and the conspiracy theorists embraced by Barr. We report, you decide.
I understand that, I just wish someone would have asked him exactly what he meant by that .
Countdown to Wray ouster: 5, 4, 3 . . .
He said he was helping Barr with Barrâs personal review of the âcircumstances at the Department and the FBI relating to how this investigation started.â
When a circle jerk of self-supporting douche-bags canât even come up with a plausible reason for their own horseshit, itâs time to call the glue factory.
You forgot to add âAngryâ before Democrat.
Follow up: Director Wray, the question was put to you on a professional basis, not a personal one. Letâs rephrase, Have you or any other person or persons in the Bureau uncovered evidence of illegal (and here again I stress illegal) activity of the kind that Mr. Barr describes using the colloquial term âspyingâ directed against the Trump campaign? Answer or no.
âI donât think I personally have any evidence of that sort,â Wray said.
Thatâs because no such evidence exists. This is just another GOP propaganda campaign, based on absolutely nothing. Please make it stop.
Wray is very good at threading the needle. Donât forget his purpose before the committee today was to review the FBI budget request.
Iâm not defending him, but do we really want the FBI Director to be political?
It already is political. Right now and will probably stay that way. Need to work with what is not with what weâd like it to be.
A law enforcement agency, acting on credible information, presents that information to a judge, who then approves a search warrant. Executing that warrant is clearly âspying.â If the target is a Trumpist, that is. Anyone else, not so much.
Gee, because there was none?
These little things matter. We might look at Wrayâs comments as tepid, but in the world of DC this is push back. Trump wonât be able to fire him and the weakness of his position will be exposed. Many people disobey his illegal orders.
What the Dems need to do is follow through on the wording of the contempt resolution and treat everything as part of an impeachment inquiry. That will provide Dems a maximalist position in the courts, and also a strong position from which to market. The idea that Trump is somehow so damaged that one doesnât need impeachment to vote him out of office really lacks coherence. You have to fight to win. This fight was presented to the Dems to take up. They have to take the critical steps. If they do, they will be rewarded and the rewards will come sooner than a lot of folks think. It doesnât take much to break this Administration. It only requires a bit of resolve and consistency of approach.
I know just about anyone can be president in the US. Only requirements are being 35 years old, citizen, and have 14 years of residency.
This is not 1776 anymore. We need the final candidates for each party appearing on the ballot to go through an FBI background check equal to a security clearance background check.
If our president actually needed security clearance, does anyone think Trump could pass a government security clearance check?
I know it would require amending the Constitution, but I think itâs something that should be done.