Wednesday morning links

" James Woods Nails CNN With Three Story Headlines About Wiretapping Trump Team

How is this different from Watergate?" I was thinking this exact thing the day they said Manafort had been taped even when talking to Trump. Funny how things ares seen differently when Dems are doing something dirty.

#1 JC on 2017-09-20 08:28 (Reply)

Obama being president made ALL the difference.

#1.1 Sam L. on 2017-09-20 12:11 (Reply)

QUOTE:

How is this different from Watergate?

They had a court-ordered warrant issued under a law passed by Congress.

#1.2 Zachriel on 2017-09-20 14:23 (Reply)

If you are talking FISA, you are not aware of the following:

1) There is no defense in the FISA court, only a judge and the prosecutor. No one is there to stand up for the targeted person with exculpatory evidence or any pushback against the request.

2) FISA is notorious for rubberstamping almost every request they receive. Very very few get turned down.

3) You should be worried that last year the Obama admin was scolded by FISA for overstepping its bounds many times.

Some info that you should be worried about:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/obama-administration-had-restrictions-on-nsa-reversed-in-2011/2013/09/07/c26ef658-0fe5-11e3-85b6-d27422650fd5_story.html?utm_term=.3a3d4836096c

http://guardianlv.com/2015/06/obama-increases-nsa-surveillance-on-u-s-soil-to-find-hackers/

Those are just a few. Not so good to just say 'because he got a warrant' all was well and good and within the law.

I have a huge problem with the fact that Manafort was under investigation in 2014, then they dropped it b/c they found NOTHING. Yet, when Manafort joined Trump's campaign, the FBI was magically interested in Manafort all over again? Not believable in the least. I don't care what you say Zachriel, most NORMAL people would look at what happened and say, "Obama spied on the opposition during a presidential campaign." And you are naive if you look the other way and claim it was all 'legal.'

#1.2.1 MissT on 2017-09-20 14:59 (Reply)

MissT: 1) There is no defense in the FISA court, only a judge and the prosecutor.

That's true of most wiretap warrants. The suspect is not told. That would rather defeat the purpose of the wiretap.

MissT: 2) FISA is notorious for rubberstamping almost every request they receive.

Investigators will not normally go to a judge unless they think they can establish probable cause.

MissT: 3) You should be worried that last year the Obama admin was scolded by FISA for overstepping its bounds many times.

So you agree the courts do act in an oversight capacity.

MissT: Some info that you should be worried about ...

Sure. Perhaps the authority of the government should be curtailed. Talk to your Congress. None of that has much to do with the Manafort warrant, which was specific to the person, and required probable cause of a crime.

Returning to the original point:

QUOTE:

How is this different from Watergate?

They had a court-ordered warrant issued under a law passed by Congress.

#1.2.1.1 Zachriel on 2017-09-20 15:55 (Reply)

Of course the left has been very critical of the FISA courts saying they just rubber stamp requests. In this, there seems to be some truth.

The FISA courts are supposed to grant warrants related to foreign intelligence, thus the name. I'm not sure how wire tapping the Trump campaign team is related to foreign intelligence.

#1.2.1.1.1 mudbug on 2017-09-20 19:17 (Reply)

mudbug: Of course the left has been very critical of the FISA courts saying they just rubber stamp requests.

Sure. Perhaps the FISA courts should be subject to more restrictions. Talk to your Congress.

Keep in mind that the Manafort warrant was specific to the person, and required probable cause of a crime. In addition, a standard court also provided the government a no-knock warrant, and they have informed Trump's former campaign manager that he is a target of a criminal investigation. While we don't know all the particulars, there does seem to be more than sufficient evidence for the government to move forward.

mudbug: I'm not sure how wire tapping the Trump campaign team is related to foreign intelligence.

There is strong evidence that Russia attempted to interfere with the U.S. presidential election, and that they attempted to use people, wittingly or unwittingly, within the Trump campaign, to that end.

#1.2.1.1.1.1 Zachriel on 2017-09-21 10:29 (Reply)

Just in case the Zzzz forgot, there was no FISA at the time.
I know, I know you weren't born yet.
Also, Nixon didn't do anything that hadn't been done before by former U.S. Presidents.

It Didn't Start With Watergate
by Victor Lasky

#1.2.2 drowningpuppies on 2017-09-20 17:17 (Reply)

I have not thought very much of Ken Burns since his first piece"Civil War". After that he quickly became the darling of the Hollywood/New York left. I did not expect much from the Viet Nam piece. I am of that generation so I am watching "Viet Nam".

While watching last night I realized something that may be of interest to MF. My realization came as the film documents the growing voice of protest in the US against the war in Viet Nam--took awhile for Communist China to work it's "Community Organizing" into Viet Nam--took a few years. That is the part that caused me to see events here in the US during the past 40 years in a different light. I believe we have come to that moment in the communist organizing timeline whereby those who have been dedicated to "bringing down America" will not accept Trump's election under any circumstance. We all knew that before, but now I see it as the "point of no return". The steady, drip, drip, drip of de-stabilizing our younger generations has come to such a pitch and such a scale we will not be able to turn them back on course. I think Tillerson understands that as do some of the other "advisor" to the president.

#2 Another One on 2017-09-20 12:03 (Reply)

"How is this different from Watergate?"

They were successful. (Besides the obvious difference in the response.)

#3 Formerly known as Skeptic on 2017-09-20 12:42 (Reply)

Bill Clinton demonstrated that if you decide not to do the honorable thing and resign, it's next to impossible to get you out of office. That showed that Richard Nixon was a stupid chump for resigning. As a result. by the time of Obama, Obama regularly was doing things routinely that would have theoretically gotten you impeached but nothing happened (spying on political opponents; using the IRS to target opponents and grant nonprofit status to only those organizations that support you and the leftist progressive viewpoint; routinely issue illegal regulations and executive orders that are in direct violation of U.S. law; enter into illegal "treaties" with enemy states like Iran, and with multinational bodies where you purport to act as though the treaties are legal even though no attempt at getting the consent of the Senate was ever attempted; have your Justice Department support one political candidate and cover up their crimes while targeting others; etc. etc. etc. etc.).

#3.1 Jim on 2017-09-20 14:35 (Reply)

Adding a pear to your apples to make the pie really complements them, and makes for a nice dish.

#4 DrTorch on 2017-09-20 13:50 (Reply)

New England tradition seems mostly limited to specifically apple pie for breakfast. The Pennsylvania Dutch tradition going back to the early German settlers of the late 17th century and lasting until only recent decades included pies for breakfast, mostly fruit pies, but basically any kind of pies.

Woodstoves in kitchens were heated overnight for warming the house, and it was a shame to waste fuel when a delicious pie could be part of a hard working farm family's breakfast. Pie quality is a point of pride among the PA Dutch wives.

Today, the Amish and plain Mennonites often continue that practice where their families still occupy and operate a farm. The "fancy" Dutch, old time PA Germans who were not part of the plain Anabaptist churches, but many of whom spoke the dialect at home, have mostly abandoned the breakfast pies as they assimilate into the modern culture. They don't need such a hearty breakfast in their easier current lives.

#5 Ray Beiler on 2017-09-20 14:53 (Reply)

Three cheers for apple pie for breakfast!!! Whether in Vermont or not. Highly recommended.

I like this amusing "definition" of a Yankee, but I don't know where it came from. The link says E.B. White. I've also seen it attributed to Robert Frost. I've never found a definitive sourcing. I do know it's been around a while. I remember reading a version of it in the Burlington Free Press (the largest newspaper in Vermont) when I was growing up in the late 60s or early 70s.

Click here for a good discussion from 2003 on this "definition" of a Yankee. Written by someone from Connecticut.

#6 The Switchel Philosopher (Link) on 2017-09-20 22:04 (Reply)

Is Egyptian Cotton racist too?

#7 annieoakley on 2017-09-21 14:00 (Reply)

Add Comment

Name
Email	(Your e-mail will not show in your comment)
Homepage
In reply to
Comment	By commenting on this site you agree to the site rules listed here. Email addresses will not be displayed and will only be used for email notifications. Quick reference guide: [i] italics [/i], [b] bold [/b], [u] underline [/u], [url] (web address) [/url]. More tips here. Enclosing asterisks marks text as bold (word), underscore are made via _word_. E-Mail addresses will not be displayed and will only be used for E-Mail notifications. To prevent automated Bots from commentspamming, please enter the string you see in the image below in the appropriate input box. Your comment will only be submitted if the strings match. Please ensure that your browser supports and accepts cookies, or your comment cannot be verified correctly. Enter the string from the spam-prevention image above: BBCode format allowed
	Remember Information? Subscribe to this entry

Maggie's Farm

Our Recent Essays Behind the Front Page

Categories

Quicksearch

Links

Blog Administration

RSS Readers

Wednesday, September 20. 2017

Wednesday morning links