Obama, Hezbollah, Cocaine, Iran Deal

[Deranged Rhino]

2 minutes ago, Taro T said:

 

Even if these accusations turn out to be true, they'd be entering truly uncharted territory by indicting a former President.  Not sure whether that would be the right way to go as it would seriously undermine our tradition of peaceful transfer of executive power.

 

Feel similarly about potential indictments agai nst the last Democrat chosen to run for the general election.

 

We're in a real bad place if 1/2 these accusations pan out.  But it truly is fascinating reading.

 

I hear you and agree in part. I know I'm building this up, and have been for three months. But that's because I've been STUNNED by the evidence I've found and the people I've interviewed. I mean floored. I should find the Iran Deal thread and repost some of my gems from there, I was FOR the deal at the time. That's how much I've moved on some issues. Not because I've been influenced by right wing talking points or Russian propaganda, but because I've seen actual evidence. Heard stories from professionals in the IC that I can't ignore when I see their predictions playing out across various cable news channels every night. 

 

I do believe we are in a period of incredible change. As in, the rules from as recently as 2016 no longer apply. I'm not talking about the end of the world or any apocalypse or anything like that. Actually quite the opposite. We are being freed, and allowed to chart our own destiny as a country for the first time in our lifetime. It won't be a quick fix, it'll take years. But it really does look to be a very positive shift. From what happened in Saudi Arabia, to what's happening in Iran, to what (looks to be) about to happen here, these aren't separate events. They're the result of the premise I laid out in the original post in the Deep State thread: 

 

A control system that's existed for a long, long time has been overthrown. 99% of this was done covertly. What we are seeing now globally are the public results of that power shift. The puppets whose strings have been cut are being exposed and dealt with by the people they sold out. We really were a breath away from losing our constitutional republic. I know that to be a fact even if it sounds extreme. People in high offices - across party lines - actively worked to weaken this country and strengthen its enemies. There will have to be consequences paid on the public stage to atone for this.

 

I think we will see some big names get indicted - but you're right that it COULD be capped at certain level to avoid total upheaval. It really could. 

 

But everything I'm reading and seeing and hearing is incredibly compelling. If even just a taste of what I've been laying out here and in other threads really does go public... I think it's going to be impossible to put the genie back in the bottle. 

 

They were SO sloppy. And they got ensared by the very tools of oppression they built to contain us. It's hilarious, or will be when we get to the other side. 

[Nanker]

Can we at least find John Kerry hanging from a noose at the end of this? 

[3rdnlng]

14 minutes ago, Taro T said:

 

Even if these accusations turn out to be true, they'd be entering truly uncharted territory by indicting a former President.  Not sure whether that would be the right way to go as it would seriously undermine our tradition of peaceful transfer of executive power.

 

Feel similarly about potential indictments agai nst the last Democrat chosen to run for the general election.

 

We're in a real bad place if 1/2 these accusations pan out.  But it truly is fascinating reading.

It begs the question, do we allow our "royalty" to get away with treasonous acts because well, they're royalty? What kind of precedent does that set for the future? As far as a peaceful transfer of power the power has already been transferred regardless of how unpeaceful Obama, Hillary and their cohorts wanted to make it.

[3rdnlng]

4 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

I hear you and agree in part. I know I'm building this up, and have been for three months. But that's because I've been STUNNED by the evidence I've found and the people I've interviewed. I mean floored. I should find the Iran Deal thread and repost some of my gems from there, I was FOR the deal at the time. That's how much I've moved on some issues. Not because I've been influenced by right wing talking points or Russian propaganda, but because I've seen actual evidence. Heard stories from professionals in the IC that I can't ignore when I see their predictions playing out across various cable news channels every night. 

 

I do believe we are in a period of incredible change. As in, the rules from as recently as 2016 no longer apply. I'm not talking about the end of the world or any apocalypse or anything like that. Actually quite the opposite. We are being freed, and allowed to chart our own destiny as a country for the first time in our lifetime. It won't be a quick fix, it'll take years. But it really does look to be a very positive shift. From what happened in Saudi Arabia, to what's happening in Iran, to what (looks to be) about to happen here, these aren't separate events. They're the result of the premise I laid out in the original post in the Deep State thread: 

 

A control system that's existed for a long, long time has been overthrown. 99% of this was done covertly. What we are seeing now globally are the public results of that power shift. The puppets whose strings have been cut are being exposed and dealt with by the people they sold out. We really were a breath away from losing our constitutional republic. I know that to be a fact even if it sounds extreme. People in high offices - across party lines - actively worked to weaken this country and strengthen its enemies. There will have to be consequences paid on the public stage to atone for this.

 

I think we will see some big names get indicted - but you're right that it COULD be capped at certain level to avoid total upheaval. It really could. 

 

But everything I'm reading and seeing and hearing is incredibly compelling. If even just a taste of what I've been laying out here and in other threads really does go public... I think it's going to be impossible to put the genie back in the bottle. 

 

They were SO sloppy. And they got ensared by the very tools of oppression they built to contain us. It's hilarious, or will be when we get to the other side. 

You have evolved over the years that I have "known" you here. Our first encounter of any consequence had to do with PC and race. We went back and forth and I thought you were a snowflake, even though that term was not in use then. We wouldn't have that argument today, but I don't know if it's because you have changed or you don't have that liberal girlfriend looking over your shoulder anymore. Seriously, I have grown from laughing at your conspiracy theories (well, not all of them) to looking into your claims somewhat re the deep state. You've added a lot to this board, specifically regarding deep state issues and I no longer take your postings with a grain of salt. Thank you for sharing the extensive work you have put in and I think that as much as you might be anal I don't think you have your head up your ass.

[Taro T]

1 hour ago, 3rdnlng said:

It begs the question, do we allow our "royalty" to get away with treasonous acts because well, they're royalty? What kind of precedent does that set for theinfuture? As far as a peaceful transfer of power the power has already been transferred regardless of how unpeaceful Obama, Hillary and their cohorts wanted to make it.

 

Absolutely, if this stuff is true that question has to get asked and answered.  Absolutely hate the idea that some (heck, any) are above the law & maybe the people that were bright enough to bring this into the open (again if it turns out to be true) can figure out how to punish the transgressions without fundamentally changing our republic.  

 

But not sure that our current leaders are up to that task.  If they aren't, is it better to have the crimes brought to light but not punished (similar to the way South Africa ended apartheid) as a teaching & concilliatory gesture or is it better to punish them all & let the chips fall where they may.  Don't have that answer.

[KevinRome]

9 minutes ago, 3rdnlng said:

You've added a lot to this board, specifically regarding deep state issues and I no longer take your postings with a grain of salt. Thank you for sharing the extensive work you have put in

 

I concur, the deep state stuff has panned out. Thanks DR, your efforts weren’t for naught.

[3rdnlng]

6 minutes ago, Taro T said:

 

Absolutely, if this stuff is true that question has to get asked and answered.  Absolutely hate the idea that some (heck, any) are above the law & maybe the people that were bright enough to bring this into the open (again if it turns out to be true) can figure out how to punish the transgressions without fundamentally changing our republic.  

 

But not sure that our current leaders are up to that task.  If they aren't, is it better to have the crimes brought to light but not punished (similar to the way South Africa ended apartheid) as a teaching & concilliatory gesture or is it better to punish them all & let the chips fall where they may.  Don't have that answer.

Watcha think, give them the choice of pleading guilty to high crimes but then pardoning them? I might go along with that if a little community service was required. Makes me think of "Band of Brothers" and the episode where the wife of a German general had to help bury the concentration camp dead. Hillary would fill that role very well.

[Taro T]

51 minutes ago, 3rdnlng said:

Watcha think, give them the choice of pleading guilty to high crimes but then pardoning them? I might go along with that if a little community service was required. Makes me think of "Band of Brothers" and the episode where the wife of a German general had to help bury the concentration camp dead. Hillary would fill that role very well.

 

Provided there is also some sort of lobbying/government employment ban associated w/ the plea deal, that would probably be the best option.

 

Not sure that ban would survive after the pardon though.  Will leave answering that to someone more versed in Con Law.

[3rdnlng]

2 minutes ago, Taro T said:

 

Provided there is also some sort of lobbying/government employment ban associated w/ the plea deal, that would probably be the best option.

 

Not sure that ban would survive after the pardon though.  Will leave answering that to someone more versed in Con Law.

C'mon, you're smarter than this. No one is going to hire a leper.

[Taro T]

56 minutes ago, 3rdnlng said:

C'mon, you're smarter than this. No one is going to hire a leper.

 

Pretty sure Marv Albert went right back to work for NBC after he got out of jail.  

 

These people have powerful friends that would be fine w/ bringing them back after something else becomes the news du jour.  Thisis still America & they'll find folks that would allow them to show they've reformed if they aren't explicitly barred from returning.

[3rdnlng]

1 minute ago, Taro T said:

 

Pretty sure Marv Albert went right back to work for NBC after he got out of jail.  

 

These people have powerful friends that would be fine w/ bringing them back after something else becomes the news du jour.  Thisis still America & they'll find folks that would allow them to show they've reformed if they aren't explicitly barred from returning.

So, pleading guilty to high treason will get them a pass with the public? Their plea deals would have to agree with something equivalent to disappearing from the public too. Even so, they would be toast, the kind that is all crust.

[TtownBillsFan]

On 12/19/2017 at 9:43 AM, Tiberius said:

At least Iran doesn't have a nuclear bomb. 

I really don't get you, dude.  Are you just a troll, or do you believe this stuff?  I'm one step from just putting you on ignore.  I hate to, because you're one of the few left-wingers on here.  But you're so silly-over-the-top, it seems trollish.  I like good back-and-forth of ideologies, but you so poorly represent the left, I'm thinking you're trolling.

[DC Tom]

1 hour ago, Taro T said:

 

Pretty sure Marv Albert went right back to work for NBC after he got out of jail.  

 

 

Martha Stewart still unemployed?  

1 minute ago, TtownBillsFan said:

I really don't get you, dude.  Are you just a troll, or do you believe this stuff?  I'm one step from just putting you on ignore.  I hate to, because you're one of the few left-wingers on here.  But you're so silly-over-the-top, it seems trollish.  I like good back-and-forth of ideologies, but you so poorly represent the left, I'm thinking you're trolling.

 

Ignore him.  He's really this big a !@#$ing idiot, good only for the occasional laugh.

[Tiberius]

10 hours ago, Deranged Rhino said:

This also belongs in the deep state thread, but I'll put the original here: 

 

Is 45 lining up treason charges for 44?

 

A bold idea, certainly. But is there any substance to it? Let's dig into it a little deeper and find out.  

 

This story hasn't gotten nearly enough ink, though that's about to change since Sessions and the DOJ just opened a fresh investigation into this scandal:

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/12/22/sessions-orders-doj-review-after-report-obama-administration-gave-hezbollah-pass.html

 

First, remember who Hezbollah is. They've been listed by the State Department as a terrorist organization since 1997. They are fanatically anti-American and, outside of AQ, have killed more Americans around the globe than any other terrorist outfit. The Americans killed include both civilians and military (1983 Berlin bombing). Their reach and power have grown through associations with a rogue's list of American enemies: Iran primarily, but also (at times) North Korea, Syria, Russia, Cuba and Venezuela. 

 

But don't be mistaken, Hezbollah is Iran. They consider the Mullahs to be their leaders, and are merely an extension of the Islamic state.

 

Even the loathsome former DNI Clapper agrees:  

http://www.dia.mil/News/Speeches-and-Testimonies/Article-View/Article/570863/statement-for-the-record-worldwide-threat-assessment/

(more background)

https://www.cfr.org/interview/hezbollah-connection-syria-and-iran

 

Iran has been on the State Department's list of terrorist sponsors since 1984. In June 2016 the State Department declared Iran to be the world's number one state sponsor of terrorism. Their number one target is Israel, followed closely by the United States. Iran has committed acts of terror and attacked America through Hezbollah and other Jihadi groups, including cyber attacks on American banks:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyberwarfare_in_Iran#Attacks_by_Iran

 

The point is that both Iran and Hezbollah have been US enemies for decades, carrying out operations against civilian and military targets alike across the globe. But no one knew much about Hezbollah's operation inside the US until the brilliant (and shocking) politico article which started this thread:

https://www.politico.com/interactives/2017/obama-hezbollah-drug-trafficking-investigation/

 

If you haven't read that, do. Sit down while reading. It's not only long, it's shocking. It lays out in detail how 44 was so obsessed with getting the Iran deal done, he was willing to allow Hezbollah to operate unchecked INSIDE the US, running drugs and human trafficking networks.

 

The article paints a vivid picture of 44 actively working to strengthen Iran's power in the Middle East as well INSIDE the United States through a drug trafficking network. Those drugs were being brought into the poorest and most vulnerable communities. The very ones who voted him into office. Yet, 44 felt it was more important to not piss off Iran and let Hezbollah flourish - US citizens be damned. 

 

The Iran deal was all 44, make no bones about it, even though it was framed as an international push. The details were finalized in April of '15 and signed in January '16. There was INTENSE opposition to this deal the entire time. Knowing this, 44's administration was spying on Americans illegally - domestic groups and members of Congress opposed to the deal. (sound familiar?) 

http://www.tabletmag.com/jewish-news-and-politics/229062/did-the-obama-administrations-abuse-of-foreign-intelligence-collection-start-before-trump

 

One of the most vocal opponents to the deal was Trump: 

 

There is evidence that the deal itself violated the terms of other treaties the US was a part of, and was also unconstitutional. But 44's administration cared not for law, so they went ahead anyway: 

http://thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/foreign-policy/250793-how-the-iran-deal-violates-the-constitution

 

Due to the MSM doing 44's bidding, almost no details of the deal were known prior to 2017. And once those details started to come out, they were absolutely staggering. Here are just a few: 

 

* As part of the deal, 44 freed known spies and terrorists in US custody - as many as 35. The US got 4 citizens back. 

https://www.politico.com/story/2017/04/24/obama-iran-nuclear-deal-prisoner-list-details-237381

 

* 44 signed the deal while US prisoners were still being held hostage, rather than demanding their release first - not a violation of law but a disgrace and attack on long precedent. 

 

* The payout wasn't in dollars, but $400 million in Swiss Francs and 1.3b in European notes. 44 organized the swap of US dollars for these currencies to make the deal. 

 

* However, there was a difficulty with the $1.3b total, because of a long standing US gov't rule that limited a payout to $1b in total... so to avoid that, 44 and his team split the request into 13 separate requests of $999,999,999.99 each and a top out of $10,390,236.28. 

 

* Each time the payout was loaded onto pallets and onto a waiting, unmarked Iranian cargo plane which took it to Tehran. 44 sought no assurances that money would stay in Tehran, which is ASTONISHING  considering some of that money most certainly ended up in Hezbollah's and other terrorist outfits hands. 

 

* The deal gifted the Mullahs another $100b+ by lifting the sanctions (which as we've seen, did NOT trickle down to the people, hence the protests now)

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/feb/3/iran-claims-100-billion-windfall-from-sanctions-re/

 

 

Those are just a few examples of how shockingly bad this deal was. And how badly 44 wanted to push it through. S. 110 of Article III of the Constitution & 18 U.S. Code 2381 are quite clear:

 

"Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere is guilty of treason."

 

Does this fit the bill? Let's see:

 

Did 44 owe an allegiance to the US? Yes. 

Are Iran and Hezbollah enemies of the US? Yes.

Did 44 adhere to them? Yes. 

Did he give them aid and comfort? Yes - even worse he actively sought to make them stronger. 

 

Will Trump actually try to charge 44 with this? Remember, Trump despises Obama. It really sounds personal with him: 

http://www.businessinsider.com/donald-trump-obama-isis-2016-6

 

Does that mean he'll actually try to indict a former POTUS for treason? I'm not sure. But the DOJ investigating this sure doesn't seem like a good sign for 44. 

Was Obama at the Trump Tower meet with the Russians? 

6 hours ago, TtownBillsFan said:

I really don't get you, dude.  Are you just a troll, or do you believe this stuff?  I'm one step from just putting you on ignore.  I hate to, because you're one of the few left-wingers on here.  But you're so silly-over-the-top, it seems trollish.  I like good back-and-forth of ideologies, but you so poorly represent the left, I'm thinking you're trolling.

No, you are the troll 

[/dev/null]

1 hour ago, Tiberius said:

No, you are the troll 

[Tiberius]

11 hours ago, Deranged Rhino said:

This also belongs in the deep state thread, but I'll put the original here: 

 

Is 45 lining up treason charges for 44?

 

A bold idea, certainly. But is there any substance to it? Let's dig into it a little deeper and find out.  

 

This story hasn't gotten nearly enough ink, though that's about to change since Sessions and the DOJ just opened a fresh investigation into this scandal:

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/12/22/sessions-orders-doj-review-after-report-obama-administration-gave-hezbollah-pass.html

 

First, remember who Hezbollah is. They've been listed by the State Department as a terrorist organization since 1997. They are fanatically anti-American and, outside of AQ, have killed more Americans around the globe than any other terrorist outfit. The Americans killed include both civilians and military (1983 Berlin bombing). Their reach and power have grown through associations with a rogue's list of American enemies: Iran primarily, but also (at times) North Korea, Syria, Russia, Cuba and Venezuela. 

 

But don't be mistaken, Hezbollah is Iran. They consider the Mullahs to be their leaders, and are merely an extension of the Islamic state.

 

Even the loathsome former DNI Clapper agrees:  

http://www.dia.mil/News/Speeches-and-Testimonies/Article-View/Article/570863/statement-for-the-record-worldwide-threat-assessment/

(more background)

https://www.cfr.org/interview/hezbollah-connection-syria-and-iran

 

Iran has been on the State Department's list of terrorist sponsors since 1984. In June 2016 the State Department declared Iran to be the world's number one state sponsor of terrorism. Their number one target is Israel, followed closely by the United States. Iran has committed acts of terror and attacked America through Hezbollah and other Jihadi groups, including cyber attacks on American banks:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyberwarfare_in_Iran#Attacks_by_Iran

 

The point is that both Iran and Hezbollah have been US enemies for decades, carrying out operations against civilian and military targets alike across the globe. But no one knew much about Hezbollah's operation inside the US until the brilliant (and shocking) politico article which started this thread:

https://www.politico.com/interactives/2017/obama-hezbollah-drug-trafficking-investigation/

 

If you haven't read that, do. Sit down while reading. It's not only long, it's shocking. It lays out in detail how 44 was so obsessed with getting the Iran deal done, he was willing to allow Hezbollah to operate unchecked INSIDE the US, running drugs and human trafficking networks.

 

The article paints a vivid picture of 44 actively working to strengthen Iran's power in the Middle East as well INSIDE the United States through a drug trafficking network. Those drugs were being brought into the poorest and most vulnerable communities. The very ones who voted him into office. Yet, 44 felt it was more important to not piss off Iran and let Hezbollah flourish - US citizens be damned. 

 

The Iran deal was all 44, make no bones about it, even though it was framed as an international push. The details were finalized in April of '15 and signed in January '16. There was INTENSE opposition to this deal the entire time. Knowing this, 44's administration was spying on Americans illegally - domestic groups and members of Congress opposed to the deal. (sound familiar?) 

http://www.tabletmag.com/jewish-news-and-politics/229062/did-the-obama-administrations-abuse-of-foreign-intelligence-collection-start-before-trump

 

One of the most vocal opponents to the deal was Trump: 

 

There is evidence that the deal itself violated the terms of other treaties the US was a part of, and was also unconstitutional. But 44's administration cared not for law, so they went ahead anyway: 

http://thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/foreign-policy/250793-how-the-iran-deal-violates-the-constitution

 

Due to the MSM doing 44's bidding, almost no details of the deal were known prior to 2017. And once those details started to come out, they were absolutely staggering. Here are just a few: 

 

* As part of the deal, 44 freed known spies and terrorists in US custody - as many as 35. The US got 4 citizens back. 

https://www.politico.com/story/2017/04/24/obama-iran-nuclear-deal-prisoner-list-details-237381

 

* 44 signed the deal while US prisoners were still being held hostage, rather than demanding their release first - not a violation of law but a disgrace and attack on long precedent. 

 

* The payout wasn't in dollars, but $400 million in Swiss Francs and 1.3b in European notes. 44 organized the swap of US dollars for these currencies to make the deal. 

 

* However, there was a difficulty with the $1.3b total, because of a long standing US gov't rule that limited a payout to $1b in total... so to avoid that, 44 and his team split the request into 13 separate requests of $999,999,999.99 each and a top out of $10,390,236.28. 

 

* Each time the payout was loaded onto pallets and onto a waiting, unmarked Iranian cargo plane which took it to Tehran. 44 sought no assurances that money would stay in Tehran, which is ASTONISHING  considering some of that money most certainly ended up in Hezbollah's and other terrorist outfits hands. 

 

* The deal gifted the Mullahs another $100b+ by lifting the sanctions (which as we've seen, did NOT trickle down to the people, hence the protests now)

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/feb/3/iran-claims-100-billion-windfall-from-sanctions-re/

 

 

Those are just a few examples of how shockingly bad this deal was. And how badly 44 wanted to push it through. S. 110 of Article III of the Constitution & 18 U.S. Code 2381 are quite clear:

 

"Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere is guilty of treason."

 

Does this fit the bill? Let's see:

 

Did 44 owe an allegiance to the US? Yes. 

Are Iran and Hezbollah enemies of the US? Yes.

Did 44 adhere to them? Yes. 

Did he give them aid and comfort? Yes - even worse he actively sought to make them stronger. 

 

Will Trump actually try to charge 44 with this? Remember, Trump despises Obama. It really sounds personal with him: 

http://www.businessinsider.com/donald-trump-obama-isis-2016-6

 

Does that mean he'll actually try to indict a former POTUS for treason? I'm not sure. But the DOJ investigating this sure doesn't seem like a good sign for 44. 

All this can be turned around to say Iran not getting a nuclear bomb is a good thing 

[DC Tom]

1 hour ago, Tiberius said:

No, you are the troll 

 

TTown, this is what we're talking about.  His posts are usually nothing more than variations of the "I'm rubber, you're glue" defense, along with gross misunderstandings of the word "obfuscation" (e.g. "obfuscation with facts and details," which was a classic.)

[Tiberius]

1 minute ago, DC Tom said:

 

TTown, this is what we're talking about.  His posts are usually nothing more than variations of the "I'm rubber, you're glue" defense, along with gross misunderstandings of the word "obfuscation" (e.g. "obfuscation with facts and details," which was a classic.)

And what is this post? ^^^^ 

 

Just pure garbage and then you cry when someone replies. You guys are running scared, that's why the insults, the fake news, the fake scandals and the increased ignorance. Not to mention new posters that pop up and attack as if they have been here before. 

[TakeYouToTasker]

54 minutes ago, DC Tom said:

 

TTown, this is what we're talking about.  His posts are usually nothing more than variations of the "I'm rubber, you're glue" defense, along with gross misunderstandings of the word "obfuscation" (e.g. "obfuscation with facts and details," which was a classic.)

I'll just add that the day he discovered the word "pettifog" was a sad day for the English language as well.

[3rdnlng]

53 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

And what is this post? ^^^^ 

 

Just pure garbage and then you cry when someone replies. You guys are running scared, that's why the insults, the fake news, the fake scandals and the increased ignorance. Not to mention new posters that pop up and attack as if they have been here before. 

Your ignorance is apparent even to newcomers.