All errors should be reported to DonSurber@gmail.com

Thursday, March 28, 2019

Trump will release the FISA warrants

Timing is everything. With the Mueller report in, President Donald John Trump is about to lay the trump card down.

Sean Hannity asked him on national TV whether he plans to release the FISA warrants that allowed the Obama administration to spy on him.

"I do, I have plans to declassify and release. I have plans to absolutely release. I have some very talented people working for me, lawyers, and they really didn't want me to do it early on. ... A lot of people wanted me to do it a long time ago. I'm glad I didn't do it. We got a great result without having to do it, but we will. One of the reasons that my lawyers didn't want me to do it, is they said, if I do it, they'll call it a form of obstruction," our president said.

The documents should be a hoot, based on the nonsense that was in the Russian dossier.

Or maybe it will just be legal jibber-jabber.

Who besides the insiders knows?

But if the swamp critters believe this is over, well, in the words of Bluto Blutarsky in "Animal House," it ain't over until we say it is over.

And President Trump said, "Frankly, thought it would be better if we held it to the end. But at the right time, we will be absolutely releasing."

Using America's national defense apparatus to spy on the political opposition makes Watergate look like a third-rate burglary.

Two years ago, President Trump tweeted that Obama wiretapped him. The press called him nuts.

The president told Hannity last night, "When I said there could be somebody spying on my campaign, it went wild out there.

"They couldn't believe I could say such a thing. As it turned out, that was small potatoes compared to what went on. ... Millions and millions [spent] on the phony dossier, and then they used the dossier to start things. It was a fraud, paid for by Hillary Clinton and the Democrats."

Two words of advice to Obama's Plumbers: Lawyer up.

20 comments:

  1. If he'd released them a year or two ago, he might not have lost the House. I don't see how releasing facts can be obstruction. I don't see how any president can criminally obstruct his own DoJ--he might commit a political crime, but not a legal one under the Constitution.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Not a lawyer, and if someone in here is, then please explain. How can there be obstruction of justice when there was no crime?

      Delete
    2. He wants all of the bad news to come out just before the next election. He's a master at building anticipation for the next act. Would you vote for a Democratic Party when all of their leaders are discredited and some are going to prison? Personally I don't think the Deep State will allow our Justice system to really nail the perpetrators. Smolett anyone??

      Delete
    3. An example of such.
      You got divorced years ago. It was nasty. The ex wife called the cops after an argument and a year later you take a plea deal on a charge of misdemeanor domestic violence. Two years ago the ex cooperated in having the records sealed. Nine months ago you attempted to purchase a shotgun for jome defense but were denied by the background check. Confused by the denial you attempt to call your state dept of law enforcement to find out why. After multiple calls and nothing but busy signals you let it go. Now you have been charged with lying on a Form 4473. A felony. Looking at five to ten years.
      One of the elements required of the crime is an intent to deceive. The crime you are charged with did not occur because that element was not present. You answered no to the question about whether you had ever been convicted of a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence in a sincere belief that it did not legally need to be disclosed because the record had been sealed. Jurors decide no crime has occurred because prosecutors fail to adress that element entirely. However your going to talk to the clerk prior to the trial to try to remind the clerk of your confusion and asking for the phone number of the Department that had issued the denial. Your next trial could well be for witness tampering and obstruction of justice.
      So no underlying crime but the reaction to being questioned was to go talk to the clerk. Obstruction.
      BTW-Juror not defendant.

      Delete
    4. Jake, most people who vote for donks know they are electing a crook. They don't care.
      There are a few like Nonny the ninny who still believe HiLlARy is as putrid as fresh fallen snow.... Pure, I meant pure.

      Delete
    5. If Trump had released the FISA warrants before the election, the Democrat and the Press (but I repeat myself) would have cried "Obstruction!!!!!" 24/7.

      But now what are the Dems gonna say? ¿Mueller is a Russian Bot?

      Delete
    6. Well, ralphie boy, open your eyes, so you may see.

      Hindsight second what iffing is one thing; what iffing thru the orifice of your butt hole is not the same thing.

      And "losing the house" in the midterms exposed quite a lot of chicaneries in each state.

      The democrats, testing the effectiveness of these chicaneries, also exposed them. For MAGA to see.

      Plus, there are other, far more invigorating effects that are daily being seen and noted.

      Invigorating to MAGA.

      As catalysts for the approaching 2020 deluge of MAGA.

      Open your wittle eyes, ralphie boy.

      Catch up with the clarity Norton has.

      Delete
  2. Trust The Donald. His sense of timing is impeccable. You've been listening to Ann Coulter for too long.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Agree. And no longer read or listen to so much as a word from Coulter.

      Delete
    2. Agree Coulter is irrelivant. Presidents have power. He' s going to use it.

      Delete
    3. Agree - Coulter lost me when she turned on D.J.Trump.

      All her books in the trash.

      Delete
    4. Same here. Coulter went rogue for not-enough reason.

      Delete
    5. Not sure what happened to her. Doesn’t make sense unless she wasn’t getting enough attention from all sides - just the right side wasn’t enough?

      Delete
  3. At one point, he was going to declassify some related documents, and then pulled back because the Brits requested he do so. I have long _suspected_ that it had something to do with British internal politics, including Brexit, which might have weakened the government. That is all coming to an end.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Once Obama, Hillary and the DNC's role in this treasonous corruption is exposed, it will be like a sweater unraveling.

    Rigging the election and the attempted overthrow of Trump was not a stand-alone event.

    Hopefully, all the rot purposely planted in the government and media will be exposed.

    ReplyDelete
  5. holding back for the next midterm election in '22.

    ReplyDelete
  6. I do hope he uses all the "phrases" used against him, in his counter-attacks.

    ReplyDelete
  7. The president ran to help this country move forward, not to look backwards. But he now realizes that this Police State crime wave will happen again unless it is addressed.

    The president used the layman's term "treason" to describe it. Although it is a betrayal like treason, the actual term is "sedition".

    Treason is what Obama did in helping Iran fund terrorism and build nukes. Sedition is what Obama did when he unleashed the entire National Security apparatus against our system of free and fair elections, our peaceful transfer of Executive Power established by George Washington himself.

    Like an Auto-Immune Disease attacking the Body Politic, the institutions we created to protect our freedoms were turned inward to prevent our freedoms.

    This can never happen again.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The perpetrators, co-conspirators, enablers, etc, need to be pounded so hard, that in future administrations, anyone who suggests "maybe we could plant a story." will find themselves fired so fast, it will take a week for his severance check reach him.

      Delete
  8. Watching Spielberg's Lincoln demonrats will never change dejavu

    ReplyDelete