Punk wrote:Fox News as a source.
They are the most unbiased news channel in the world.
Punk wrote:Fox News as a source.
Keyser wrote:Punk wrote:Fox News as a source.
They are the most unbiased news channel in the world.
Punk wrote:Keyser wrote:Punk wrote:Fox News as a source.
They are the most unbiased news channel in the world.
Thankfully none of their news anchors have been smeared for sexually abusing colleagues, sacked etc and all of their opinion pieces are 100% accurate. Oh no wait....
Stooo wrote:Punk wrote:Keyser wrote:Punk wrote:Fox News as a source.
They are the most unbiased news channel in the world.
Thankfully none of their news anchors have been smeared for sexually abusing colleagues, sacked etc and all of their opinion pieces are 100% accurate. Oh no wait....
Yeah but fuck those libturds. One of these specimens was caught literally flinging shit at the wall of a restaurant who refused service (a vote was taken by the staff) to SHS, yeah flinging shit like a fucking monkey
Fox on all day...
Trump reportedly directed Michael Cohen and Eric Trump to keep Stormy Daniels quiet
President Trump directed his son Eric and former attorney Michael Cohen to coordinate a legal effort to keep Stormy Daniels from publicly describing her alleged tryst with Trump, the WSJ reports.
Eric Trump enlisted a Trump Organization lawyer to help with the paperwork, the report says. A month after Trump told Cohen to formulate a legal response to Daniels, she shared her account on "60 Minutes."
Cannydc wrote::flog:
Cannydc wrote::whogives:
Roll on November.
The re-introduction of sense to the US political world.
ATXn;D wrote:
Judicial Watch: Federal Judge ‘Shocked’ Clinton Aide Granted Immunity by Justice Department
October 17, 2018
Court Criticizes State Department for Providing False Statements on Clinton Emails
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today that in his opening remarks at a Friday, October 12 hearing, U.S. District Court Judge Royce C. Lamberth strongly criticized the U.S. Department of State, stating, “The information that I was provided was clearly false regarding the adequacy of the [Clinton email] search and… what we now know turned out to be the Secretary’s email system.”
Turning his attention to the Department of Justice, Judge Lamberth said that he was “dumbfounded” by the agency’s Inspector General report revealing that Cheryl Mills had been given immunity and was allowed to accompany former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to her FBI interview:
I had myself found that Cheryl Mills had committed perjury and lied under oath in a published opinion I had issued in a Judicial Watch case where I found her unworthy of belief, and I was quite shocked to find out she had been given immunity in — by the Justice Department in the Hillary Clinton email case. So I did not know that until I read the IG report and learned that and that she had accompanied the Secretary to her interview.
(In an April 28, 2008, ruling relating to Mills’ conduct as a White House official in responding to concerns about lost White House email records, Judge Lamberth called Mills’ participation in the matter “loathsome.” He further stated Mills was responsible for “the most critical error made in this entire fiasco … Mills’ actions were totally inadequate to address the problem.”)
Lamberth also complained that the Justice Department attorney representing the State Department was using “doublespeak,” and playing “word games.”
The hearing had been ordered by Judge Lamberth regarding a request from Judicial Watch for testimony under oath from Clinton, Mills and several other State Department officials regarding the State Department’s processing of Judicial Watch’s FOIA request and Clinton’s emails. The State Department still opposes all of Judicial Watch’s requests for additional discovery into the Clinton email scandal.
Judge Lamberth said he was relieved that he did not allow the case to be shut down prematurely, as the State Department had requested:
The case started with a motion for summary judgment [seeking to close the case] here and which I denied and allowed limited discovery because it was clear to me that at the time that I ruled initially, that false statements were made to me by career State Department officials and it became more clear through discovery that the information that I was provided was clearly false regarding the adequacy of the search and this – what we now know turned out to be the Secretary’s email system.
I don’t know the details of what kind of IG inquiry there was into why these career officials at the State Department would have filed false affidavits with me. I don’t know the details of why the Justice Department lawyers did not know false affidavits were being filed with me, but I was very relieved that I did not accept them and that I allowed limited discovery into what had happened.
Judge Lamberth also said the State Department was using “doublespeak” and word games:
THE COURT: The State Department told me that it had produced all records when it moved for summary judgment and you filed that motion. That was not true when that motion was filed.
MR. PRINCE: At that time, we had produced all –
THE COURT: It was not true.
MR. PRINCE: Yes, it was – well, Your Honor, it might be that our search could be found to be inadequate, but that declaration was absolutely true.
THE COURT: It was not true. It was a lie.
MR. PRINCE: It was not a lie, Your Honor.
THE COURT: What – that’s doublespeak.
***
PRINCE: There’s strong precedent saying that items not in the State’s possession do not need to be searched….
THE COURT: And that’s because the Secretary was doing this on a private server? So it wasn’t in the State’s possession?… So you’re playing the same word game she played?
In March 2016, Judge Lamberth granted “limited discovery” to Judicial Watch:
Where there is evidence of government wrong-doing and bad faith, as here, limited discovery is appropriate, even though it is exceedingly rare in FOIA cases.
***
[Judicial Watch] is certainly entitled to dispute the State Department’s position that it has no obligation to produce these documents because it did not “possess” or “control” them at the time the FOIA request was made. The State Department’s willingness to now search documents voluntarily turned over to the Department by Secretary Clinton and other officials hardly transforms such a search into an “adequate” or “reasonable one. [Judicial Watch] is not relying on “speculation” or “surmise” as the State Department claims. [Judicial Watch] is relying on constantly shifting admissions by the Government and the former government officials.....
“President Trump should ask why his State Department is still refusing to answer basic questions about the Clinton email scandal,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “Hillary Clinton’s and the State Department’s email cover up abused the FOIA, the courts, and the American people’s right to know.”
Watch additional comments from Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton here.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.judici ... tment/amp/
Pussy Groper wrote:ATXn;D wrote:
Judicial Watch: Federal Judge ‘Shocked’ Clinton Aide Granted Immunity by Justice Department
October 17, 2018
Court Criticizes State Department for Providing False Statements on Clinton Emails
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today that in his opening remarks at a Friday, October 12 hearing, U.S. District Court Judge Royce C. Lamberth strongly criticized the U.S. Department of State, stating, “The information that I was provided was clearly false regarding the adequacy of the [Clinton email] search and… what we now know turned out to be the Secretary’s email system.”
Turning his attention to the Department of Justice, Judge Lamberth said that he was “dumbfounded” by the agency’s Inspector General report revealing that Cheryl Mills had been given immunity and was allowed to accompany former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to her FBI interview:
I had myself found that Cheryl Mills had committed perjury and lied under oath in a published opinion I had issued in a Judicial Watch case where I found her unworthy of belief, and I was quite shocked to find out she had been given immunity in — by the Justice Department in the Hillary Clinton email case. So I did not know that until I read the IG report and learned that and that she had accompanied the Secretary to her interview.
(In an April 28, 2008, ruling relating to Mills’ conduct as a White House official in responding to concerns about lost White House email records, Judge Lamberth called Mills’ participation in the matter “loathsome.” He further stated Mills was responsible for “the most critical error made in this entire fiasco … Mills’ actions were totally inadequate to address the problem.”)
Lamberth also complained that the Justice Department attorney representing the State Department was using “doublespeak,” and playing “word games.”
The hearing had been ordered by Judge Lamberth regarding a request from Judicial Watch for testimony under oath from Clinton, Mills and several other State Department officials regarding the State Department’s processing of Judicial Watch’s FOIA request and Clinton’s emails. The State Department still opposes all of Judicial Watch’s requests for additional discovery into the Clinton email scandal.
Judge Lamberth said he was relieved that he did not allow the case to be shut down prematurely, as the State Department had requested:
The case started with a motion for summary judgment [seeking to close the case] here and which I denied and allowed limited discovery because it was clear to me that at the time that I ruled initially, that false statements were made to me by career State Department officials and it became more clear through discovery that the information that I was provided was clearly false regarding the adequacy of the search and this – what we now know turned out to be the Secretary’s email system.
I don’t know the details of what kind of IG inquiry there was into why these career officials at the State Department would have filed false affidavits with me. I don’t know the details of why the Justice Department lawyers did not know false affidavits were being filed with me, but I was very relieved that I did not accept them and that I allowed limited discovery into what had happened.
Judge Lamberth also said the State Department was using “doublespeak” and word games:
THE COURT: The State Department told me that it had produced all records when it moved for summary judgment and you filed that motion. That was not true when that motion was filed.
MR. PRINCE: At that time, we had produced all –
THE COURT: It was not true.
MR. PRINCE: Yes, it was – well, Your Honor, it might be that our search could be found to be inadequate, but that declaration was absolutely true.
THE COURT: It was not true. It was a lie.
MR. PRINCE: It was not a lie, Your Honor.
THE COURT: What – that’s doublespeak.
***
PRINCE: There’s strong precedent saying that items not in the State’s possession do not need to be searched….
THE COURT: And that’s because the Secretary was doing this on a private server? So it wasn’t in the State’s possession?… So you’re playing the same word game she played?
In March 2016, Judge Lamberth granted “limited discovery” to Judicial Watch:
Where there is evidence of government wrong-doing and bad faith, as here, limited discovery is appropriate, even though it is exceedingly rare in FOIA cases.
***
[Judicial Watch] is certainly entitled to dispute the State Department’s position that it has no obligation to produce these documents because it did not “possess” or “control” them at the time the FOIA request was made. The State Department’s willingness to now search documents voluntarily turned over to the Department by Secretary Clinton and other officials hardly transforms such a search into an “adequate” or “reasonable one. [Judicial Watch] is not relying on “speculation” or “surmise” as the State Department claims. [Judicial Watch] is relying on constantly shifting admissions by the Government and the former government officials.....
“President Trump should ask why his State Department is still refusing to answer basic questions about the Clinton email scandal,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “Hillary Clinton’s and the State Department’s email cover up abused the FOIA, the courts, and the American people’s right to know.”
Watch additional comments from Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton here.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.judici ... tment/amp/
https://www.judicialwatch.org/press-roo ... e-records/
Latest Travel Expense Details Total $3,024,036.50, bringing total for presidential travel expenses to $17,224,938.46
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today that it filed a Freedom of Information (FOIA) lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Homeland Security for Secret Service records about expense costs associated with President Trump’s travel between December 22, 2017, and April 28, 2018 (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security (No. 1:18-cv-01851).
Judicial Watch filed suit after the Secret Service failed to comply with multiple FOIA requests seeking travel for the following trips:
President Trump traveled to his Mar-a-Largo estate in Palm Beach, Florida between December 22, 2017-January 2, 2018 for the Christmas holiday
President Trump traveled to Atlanta, Georgia, on January 8, 2018, for the NCAA National Championship game
President Trump traveled to Mar-a-Lago between January 12-15, 2018
President Trump traveled to Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania on January 18, 2018, where he attended a rally at H&K Equipment Co. to discuss tax cuts
Eric Trump traveled to Mar-a-Lago between Jan. 19-21
President Trump traveled to Mar-a-Lago on February 6 for meetings
President Trump traveled to Mar-a-Lago between February 17-19 for President’s Day weekend and visited the survivors of the Parkland school shooting
President Trump traveled to Pennsylvania on March 10 to campaign for GOP House candidate Rick Saccone
President Trump traveled to Mar-a-Lago between March 23-25 and March 30-April 1
Trump traveled to Mar-a-Lago between April 20-22, when he hosted a Republican National Committee roundtable.
Trump traveled to Michigan on April 28 to hold a rally in lieu of attending the White House Correspondents’ Dinner in Washington, D.C.
In a separate lawsuit, Judicial Watch received Secret Service expense records totaling $3,024,036.50, which brings the known total for presidential travel expenses to $17,224,938.46 and includes the operation of Air Force One.
Judicial Watch obtained the documents through a January 2018 Freedom of Information (FOIA) lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Homeland Security after it failed to respond to several FOIA requests for VIP travel expense records of the Trump family between June and October 2017 (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security (No. 1:18-cv-00161)).
The Secret Service records show:
President Trump traveled to his Bedminster, NJ golf club from June 30-July 3. The Secret Service spent $219,251.03 on hotels, $119,543.03 on air/rail, and $27,871 on miscellaneous for a total of $398,727.24
President Trump traveled to Bedminster from July 14-16 and $206,627.47 was spent on hotels, $55,986.50 on air/rail, $12,752.20 on car rentals and $9,254 on miscellaneous for a total $284,620.17
President Trump made various trips for a vacation to Bedminster and New York from August 4-21.
In Bedminster, the Secret Service spent $908,506.51 on hotels, $20,528.68 on rental cars, $14,371.11 on air/rail, and $2,300 on miscellaneous for a total of $945,706.30.
In New York, they spent $486,365 on hotels, $12,345.62 on air/rail, and $2,726.42 on rental cars for a total of $501,457.04
President Trump traveled to Phoenix for a campaign rally on August 22. The Secret Service spent $131,189.41 on hotels, $25,251.22 on air/rail, and $21,898 on rental cars for a total of $178,338.63
President Trump traveled to Missouri to appear at a rally as a kickoff for tax reform at the Loren Cook Company on August 30. The Secret Service spent $26,159.34 on hotels, $13,921.17 on air/rail, and $2,740 on car rentals for a total of $42,820.51
President Trump traveled to Huntsville, AL, on September 22 to campaign for Sen. Luther Strange, and $22,701.06 was spent on hotels: $2,000 on car rentals and $500 on miscellaneous for a total of $25,201.06
President Trump then spent the weekend at Bedminster, returning to the White House on September 24. In Bedminster, the Secret Service spent $428,732 on hotels, $3,055.20 on air/rail, $65.70 on rental cars and $16,420 for miscellaneous for a total of $448,272.90 For a fucking weekend?
President Trump traveled to Bedminster from September 29 to October 1. The Secret Service spent $171,391.68 on hotels, $8,611.30 on air/rail, $2,482.17 on car rentals, and $16,407.50 on miscellaneous for a total of $198,892.65
The Secret Service records provide costs for meals, hotels, air/rail, car rentals and other incidentals incurred during personal travel by the president and his family.
“The Secret Service is a mess when it comes to transparency on its basic operations,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “Presidential travel is too expensive, and, in particular, taxpayers subsidize too much of the bill for presidential campaign travel. President Trump would do well to reform and demand a better, less expensive way to move him around the country.”
Why are the US taxpayer paying for Trump's fucking family that are very wealthy AND working for this shit?
Return to News, Politics And Current Affairs
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 32 guests