New evidence tying Hunter Biden business to communist China and Russia

  • You are viewing Orangepower as a Guest. To start new threads, reply to posts, or participate in polls or contests - you must register. Registration is free and easy. Click Here to register.
Feb 7, 2007
1,658
241
1,693
Denver
Are you saying Congress should investigate the President based on fabricated documents paid for by the political opposition and foreign actors? I thought we were concerned about foreign actors influencing our politics here?

Regarding Benghazi,

There was/is an FBI investigation, ongoing.

There was a Senate Select Committee on Intelligence.

There Five House Committees: Armed Services, Foreign Affairs, Intelligence, Judiciary, Oversight and Government Reform. Which of these committees don't have some responsibility to what happened in Benghazi?

There was a State Department Accountability Review Board as required by the Omnibus Diplomatic and Anti terrorism Act of 1986.

Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, co-chaired by Joe Lieberman.

And then there was the House Select Committee in May 2014 which was triggered because of State Department documents released on April 29, 2014, to Judicial Watch which included previously unreleased emails "that House panels had been unable to receive even after issuing a subpoena," were obtained by Judicial Watch under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA):

Tell us which committee shouldn't have investigated and why they should ignore what happened. After all, isn't it the responsibility of Congress to investigate and correct policy and or law that may have lead to missteps that were taken?

And in regards to public opinion and political theater, welcome to politics.....
I mean the proof is again in the pudding. If all those investigations were necessary. What came of them?

For Trump's investigations his personal attorney, campaign staff, and a half dozen others got CONVICTED OF FELONIES. Millions of dollars in fraud were recovered.

Why is this so hard for you to grasp?
 

cowboyinexile

Have some class
A/V Subscriber
Jun 29, 2004
17,485
10,530
1,743
40
Fairmont, MN
Why is this so hard for you to grasp?
It's not hard for him to grasp. He's blindly partisan. He truly believes this election was stolen and the Supreme Court failed in their duties to overturn it. Some wanted this to happen. He's a little surprised it didn't.

The funny thing is, if Georgia goes blue and elects democratic senators, no matter what the dems do it will be a complete travesty of justice for him. Every new judge will be a liberal who wants to eat an aborted baby. Every law that is passed will lead us to socialism. Harris will wheelchair a rambling Biden into his house so they can personally collect his guns.

Seriously, we elected someone who is probably more historical Republican than the con man we had for the last 4 years and that will somehow lead us to socialism. And this election was stolen because dear leader said so.

That's the blind partisan mantra right now.
 

Cimarron

It's not dying I'm talking about, it's living.
Jun 28, 2007
53,292
17,930
1,743
I mean the proof is again in the pudding. If all those investigations were necessary. What came of them?

For Trump's investigations his personal attorney, campaign staff, and a half dozen others got CONVICTED OF FELONIES. Millions of dollars in fraud were recovered.

Why is this so hard for you to grasp?
You ignored my questions to your comments. Are they difficult to understand?

And regards to your comments on pudding, pudding in Washington has a sour taste.

edit: your reply was a snooze. So...

You are fine with investigations based on fabricated documents paid for by political opponents and foreign actors. Is that only if it's targeting a Republican? Or does it matter what party affiliation they are?

You don't think Congress has oversight responsibility to investigate what led to international terrorist acts against the United States. Same questions here, does it matter who is sitting in the White House?

Pretty sad.
 
Last edited:

Cimarron

It's not dying I'm talking about, it's living.
Jun 28, 2007
53,292
17,930
1,743
It's not hard for him to grasp. He's blindly partisan. He truly believes this election was stolen and the Supreme Court failed in their duties to overturn it. Some wanted this to happen. He's a little surprised it didn't.
Nice to know you know so much about a person you know nothing about.
 

Cimarron

It's not dying I'm talking about, it's living.
Jun 28, 2007
53,292
17,930
1,743
311Cowboy

Former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, said under oath.

I never saw any direct empirical evidence that the Trump campaign or someone in it was plotting [or] conspiring with the Russians to meddle with the election.”

Andrew McCabe, former deputy director of the FBI. Under oath said.

"there is a lot of information in the Steele reporting. We have not been able to prove the accuracy of all the information,” he answered. Pressed further to confirm that he did not know if Christopher Steele’s dossier was true, McCabe said, “That’s correct.”

Samantha Power, former US ambassador to the United Nations under oath stated.

Asked whether she had seen evidence of Russian interference, she said, “I am not in possession of anything—I am not in possession and didn’t read or absorb information that came from out of the intelligence community.”

Former National Security Adviser Susan Rice stated under oath.

“I don’t recall intelligence that I would consider evidence to that effect that I saw prior…to my departure,”

You seem dead set against "useless" investigations, so tell us. Why was their a criminal investigation when no one knew of any evidence that suggested there was collusion between Trump and Russia?

Is it against the law to knowingly lie to a FISA Court?
 
Last edited:
Feb 7, 2007
1,658
241
1,693
Denver
You ignored my questions to your comments. Are they difficult to understand?

And regards to your comments on pudding, pudding in Washington has a sour taste.

edit: your reply was a snooze. So...

You are fine with investigations based on fabricated documents paid for by political opponents and foreign actors. Is that only if it's targeting a Republican? Or does it matter what party affiliation they are?

You don't think Congress has oversight responsibility to investigate what led to international terrorist acts against the United States. Same questions here, does it matter who is sitting in the White House?

Pretty sad.
What question are you talking about? Your first question was why was I comparing this to the Mueller investigation when I never did.

What prosecutor was on it? None, it never got assigned because nothing in the 10 investigations and $7 million spent warranted a prosecutor. Trey Gowdy did head up investigations and he is a former prosecutor though.

Yes, I am absolutely OK with investigations looking into the FACT that Russia obtained critical voting and DNC data through cyber crimes. That has been confirmed by bipartisan committees like 5 times. With that fact and Trump openly asking for Russia's help in public. You literally must investigate that.

Now I accept the results. Trump possibly was just being an idiot and Russia may have done this on their own. They literally just did another cyber attack on the US in the last few weeks too. That too needs to be investigated.
 
Feb 7, 2007
1,658
241
1,693
Denver
311Cowboy

Former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, said under oath.

“I never saw any direct empirical evidence that the Trump campaign or someone in it was plotting [or] conspiring with the Russians to meddle with the election.”

Andrew McCabe, former deputy director of the FBI. Under oath said.

"there is a lot of information in the Steele reporting. We have not been able to prove the accuracy of all the information,” he answered. Pressed further to confirm that he did not know if Christopher Steele’s dossier was true, McCabe said, “That’s correct.”

Samantha Power, former US ambassador to the United Nations under oath stated.

Asked whether she had seen evidence of Russian interference, she said, “I am not in possession of anything—I am not in possession and didn’t read or absorb information that came from out of the intelligence community.”

Former National Security Adviser Susan Rice stated under oath.

“I don’t recall intelligence that I would consider evidence to that effect that I saw prior…to my departure,”

You seem dead set against "useless" investigations, so tell us. Why was their a criminal investigation when no one knew of any evidence that suggested there was collusion between Trump and Russia?
The Russians hacking attempts and obtaining of Voter registration data and DNC emails happened. Do you believe that happened?

Trump openly asked Russia to find Clinton's emails is a speech. Do you believe that happened?

I believe both. So yes I think an investigation is worth happening.

If you can sit and justify 10 investigations into Benghazi that showed no American criminal activity. How can you not justify an investigation into the security of our elections? Esecially when it found so many people guilty of cover ups, lying, and fraud?
 

Cimarron

It's not dying I'm talking about, it's living.
Jun 28, 2007
53,292
17,930
1,743
What question are you talking about? Your first question was why was I comparing this to the Mueller investigation when I never did.

What prosecutor was on it? None, it never got assigned because nothing in the 10 investigations and $7 million spent warranted a prosecutor. Trey Gowdy did head up investigations and he is a former prosecutor though.

Yes, I am absolutely OK with investigations looking into the FACT that Russia obtained critical voting and DNC data through cyber crimes. That has been confirmed by bipartisan committees like 5 times. With that fact and Trump openly asking for Russia's help in public. You literally must investigate that.

Now I accept the results. Trump possibly was just being an idiot and Russia may have done this on their own. They literally just did another cyber attack on the US in the last few weeks too. That too needs to be investigated.
The questions in the comments you responded to.

Foreign governments have been interfering in international elections since the beginning of our country and well before that. It's nothing knew. In fact the USA does it all the time, we in fact send military to other countries to interfere in elections.

We've even done it to our best allies.

Obama campaign advisor used federal money to build anti-Netanyahu campaign organization

https://www.aei.org/foreign-and-def...visor-used-fed-money-anti-netanyahu-campaign/

Why wasn't anyone prosecuted? Is that not illegal?
 

Cimarron

It's not dying I'm talking about, it's living.
Jun 28, 2007
53,292
17,930
1,743
If you can sit and justify 10 investigations into Benghazi that showed no American criminal activity.
Investigations aren't always about criminal activity. It's about finding out what and why something happened and how we can do a better job.

I'll admit and I've said it many times, much of what you see going on in Washington is political theater.

Obama called Bush "un-American" and the hate against Bush was high. They claimed Bush stole the election, on and on. Now, they are all best buddies? Does that tell you anything about Washington?
 
Feb 7, 2007
1,658
241
1,693
Denver
The questions in the comments you responded to.

Foreign governments have been interfering in international elections since the beginning of our country and well before that. It's noting knew. In fact the USA does it all the time, we in fact send military to other countries to interfere in elections.

We've even done it to our best allies.

Obama campaign advisor used federal money to build anti-Netanyahu campaign organization

https://www.aei.org/foreign-and-def...visor-used-fed-money-anti-netanyahu-campaign/

Why wasn't anyone prosecuted? Is that not illegal?
Something tells me we don't have laws about other countries elections. But that is an amazing deflection.
 
Feb 7, 2007
1,658
241
1,693
Denver
Investigations aren't always about criminal activity. It's about finding out what and why something happened and how we can do a better job.

I'll admit and I've said it many times, much of what you see going on in Washington is political theater.

Obama called Bush "un-American" and the hate against Bush was high. They claimed Bush stole the election, on and on. Now, they are all best buddies? Does that tell you anything about Washington?
OK, so maybe the investigations into Trump and Russia were about doing a better job with election security? Is that not worth pursuing? I seem to have heard lots of concerns about that recently with something else.
 

Cimarron

It's not dying I'm talking about, it's living.
Jun 28, 2007
53,292
17,930
1,743
OK, so maybe the investigations into Trump and Russia were about doing a better job with election security? Is that not worth pursuing? I seem to have heard lots of concerns about that recently with something else.
So, that's why you appoint a federal prosecutor rather than a simple investigation?

Is it a crime to lie to a court in a sexual harassment lawsuit?
 

Cimarron

It's not dying I'm talking about, it's living.
Jun 28, 2007
53,292
17,930
1,743
It certainly takes the absolute guaranteed talking point away about calling it a witch hunt, politically motivated, or never Trumpers. It sure makes it hard to make those claims when Trump hand picked the people investigating him.
If you understand Washington it doesn't at all.

What it does show is who is blindly partisan along political party lines.
 
Apr 14, 2009
659
112
1,593
What a sack of poo!
Rump is talking about trying to use the military to redo the election.
Are you wingnuts going to give the anarchist in the Oval office a pass on treason?