Our Team: Election Riggers Я Us
(Cabal Leader, Info Dumper, Legal Cover)
Another more recent update on the following update and posts related therein from here (via The AP) in part:
AG Barr said a lot at his press conference – this in part which may also be posted below (Note: Some if this information may be duplicated below): “The DOJ has the obligation to have an open door to anybody who wishes to provide us information that they think is relevant. As I did say to Senator Graham, we have to be very careful with respect to any information coming from the Ukraine. There are a lot of agendas in the Ukraine, a lot of cross currents. And we can't take anything we received from Ukraine at face value. We had established an intake process in the field so that any information coming in about Ukraine could be carefully scrutinized by the department and its intelligence community partners, so that we could assess its provenance and its credibility. And that is true for all information that comes to the department relating to the Ukraine, including anything Mr. Giuliani might provide.”
The prospect that Giuliani is providing potentially damaging information about one of the president’s political rivals to the DOJ he is under Federal investigation is likely to deepen criticism from Democrats that Barr acts more like the president’s personal lawyer than the attorney general.
For example: Federal prosecutors in NY are investigating Giuliani’s business dealings, including whether he failed to register as a foreign agent. Giuliani also was a main character in Trump’s impeachment, which centered on Trump’s dealings with Ukraine’s president and whether he abused his office by seeking an investigation into the Bidens and a debunked conspiracy about them being involved in 2016 election interference, and not Russia. Appearing on Fox Giuliani said he has a document that relates to Hunter Biden along with a DNC memo allegedly documenting communications with a reporter.
Noteworthy: Hours after Barr's comments, the House Judiciary Committee Chairman, Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-NY) sent a letter to the DOJ demanding that Barr answer a series of questions about Giuliani's information from Ukraine that formed some 11 questions about the so-called DOJ process, such as who would be involved, and whether or not it would be shared with the White House, saying specifically in part: “Any official relationship between Mr. Giuliani and the DOJ raises serious questions about conflicts of interest — both for the DOJ generally, and for you, specifically.”
Nadler's letter also notes that one of Giuliani's associates, Lev Parnas, said some time ago that the AG had been briefed on efforts to pressure the Ukraine government to investigate Democrats. Parnas, BTW, is charged with illegally funneling foreign money into U.S. political campaigns, but the DOJ said last year that Parnas' claims were “100% false.” (No further info on that aspect).
Original post follows from here:
Note: The update below follows my previous post here and the post below after this update.
WASHINGTON (Reuters) – AG Barr has confirmed that the DOJ has received candidate’s information from Trump’s personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani but that anything originating from Ukraine also saying: “It should not be taken at face value.”
This confirmation from Barr comes just one day after the Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) said on “Face the Nation” that “the DOJ had created a process so that Giuliani could provide information from Ukraine sources and then the DOJ would see if it could be verified.”
As for Graham, he said he would refrain from his own probe of the Bidens and concentrate instead on the FISA decisions to issue warrants that led to a FBI investigation into Trump's 2016 campaign and Carter Page that contained some false information that came to light by the DOJ IG last month.
Note: This all ties into what Trump told ABC News in that George Stephanopoulos interview from the Oval Office when he asked Trump if he would accept foreign help in his 2020 campaign.
Trump said he’d consider any foreign-sourced information that would help his 2020 re-election saying: “There is nothing wrong with listening. If somebody called from a country — Norway — and said: ‘We have information on your opponent.’ Oh. I think I’d want to hear it.”
Okay, so my question: Who decides if it’s true, false, or skillfully planted disinformation? Info regarding:
* Official malfeasance
* Money laundering
* Fraud of some kind
* Some more serious crime
That might be considered “helpful,” but who decides making sure it’s true or not:
Simple misinformation: Which is information placed by a simple mistake or error and not put in place covertly with malice, intent, or some nasty evil purpose.
To ensure that it is not:
Disinformation: Information skillfully and purposely placed with the full intent to cause harm, wide civil and political disruption, distrust among citizens, and to create and spread chaos.
Note: Disinformation in more modern times is used covertly to disrupt or topple established governments, competing political systems around the globe for self-interests and for political, military, financial, or for more devious purposes.
AG Barr further said: “We have to be very careful with respect to any information coming from the Ukraine. There are a lot of agendas in the Ukraine. There are a lot of cross-currents, and we can't take anything we receive from the Ukraine at face value.”
Keep in mind that only recently did the all-GOP run Senate acquit Trump largely along party lines on two impeachment charges that he had abused his power by asking Ukraine to investigate his political rival, former Vice President Joe Biden and his son Hunter Biden, who had served on the board of Burisma, the Ukrainian energy company.
Remember that Trump based his demands on unfounded allegations of corruption by the Bidens relating to activities in Ukraine.
Barr further said: “The DOJ had created that intake process in the field that will be used to assess the provenance and credibility of any information. That is true for all information that comes to the department relating to the Ukraine, including anything Giuliani might provide.”
Barr then acknowledged that the DOJ is now receiving and scrutinizing such materials.
The FBI's No. 2, Dep Director David Bowdich when asked whether or not the information related to the Bidens was included and whether or not they were under FBI investigation, he stopped short simply saying: “I am not going to talk about any investigations as I never would. We do not talk about open investigations.”
(That is the proper and standard answer that the FBI or other police agencies give in response to such a question and rightly so).
My 2 cents: This is very troublesome on these points:
1. Barr says DOJ will accept any OPPO info on any candidate for the 2020 campaign. Why and what kind of info I wonder (and who are the sources).
2. Who does that info, if not criminal for the FBI to investigate, benefits? (In this case, it is painfully obvious: It is Barr’s boss who is running for reelection: Donald J. Trump).
3. Getting info from foreign sources or second-hand info from Giuliani (also from his foreign sources) is highly questionable and if used by any campaign in an Ad, flyer, voter materials, or rally speeches is 100% illegal IAW 52 USC 30121: Contributions and donations by foreign nationals (it is truly a thing of value).
Sadly, Trump’s base doesn’t trust information or facts unless it comes from Trump himself (or via Fox and Friends/or Hannity) and then they believe it all totally and worse, nearly lock-step. That is very troubling.
Barr’s message to me sounds like he is saying: We must do all we can to get President Trump reelected otherwise we are out of a job, big money, power, and prestige – we must keep him in office and along the way (my hunch) to “f-word – the DEMS.”
B/L: Trump has to win not to be known as a disgraced first term president. My message to all American voter is simple therefore:
Vote as if our existence depends on it – surely it does
Thanks for stopping by.
No comments:
Post a Comment