Remember when it was unpresidential to wear a tan suit and use a selfie stick? Those were the days.

I don't care if you show up wearing a clown costume so long as you are working. The last 8-years showed that presidential is just code word for "smoke and mirrors". This POTUS didn't shop at Men's Wearhouse or have a Hartmarx made... add to the impeach list!

Not my point in the slightest. But carry on.

---

I'll play you in ping pong. 

I don't care if you show up wearing a clown costume so long as you are working. The last 8-years showed that presidential is just code word for "smoke and mirrors". This POTUS didn't shop at Men's Wearhouse or have a Hartmarx made... add to the impeach list!

Not my point in the slightest. But carry on.

Thanks boss! Appreciate the permission.

---

You need to understand how these conversations are recorded. The White House has several layers of communications people that fall under "White House Communications". They range from all branches of the military, intelligence specialists, and a scattering of alphabet agencies. All conversations are recorded for the safety and security of the president, not to spy. While conversations are being held, the "experts" are taking care to decide whether or not to classify those conversations and to what level. The initial system is one that collects notes in a repository until all members involved in the convo have dictated their notes and classification has been assigned. Once classified, all dictations are removed/transfered to the "High-side" classified side. Those conversation that require additional protection is transferred to a Special Access Program system that a select few have access to and require TPI (two-person integrity). All this to say, #1, this wasn't a "top-secret server" which by the way doesn't exist, this was the SAP system. #2, the administration has been doing this for over a year because of the random White House leaks. FYI, all information entered and accessed on the SAP system is logged heavily by not only the IT department but by security officials and cleared users that have a verifiable and read-in need-to-know.

You're not contradicting anything in the redacted whistleblower report.
The author says he understands how the system usually works, and that multiple people protested that this was being handled in an unusual way.  He says that people who knew more about the call than he did argued with each other, some saying that nothing in the call had a national security sensitivity, but they lost the argument for the moment and it was being treated as if it did have national security sensitivity.  We know now that it did not.  Looks like an attempted cover-up to me.

The president is the ultimate determinate of all chains of classification and security clearance.  It is not a subordinate officers business what he does and does not classify or to what degree!  They call it CHIEF EXECUTIVE FOR A REASON.  My gosh!

---

You need to understand how these conversations are recorded. The White House has several layers of communications people that fall under "White House Communications". They range from all branches of the military, intelligence specialists, and a scattering of alphabet agencies. All conversations are recorded for the safety and security of the president, not to spy. While conversations are being held, the "experts" are taking care to decide whether or not to classify those conversations and to what level. The initial system is one that collects notes in a repository until all members involved in the convo have dictated their notes and classification has been assigned. Once classified, all dictations are removed/transfered to the "High-side" classified side. Those conversation that require additional protection is transferred to a Special Access Program system that a select few have access to and require TPI (two-person integrity). All this to say, #1, this wasn't a "top-secret server" which by the way doesn't exist, this was the SAP system. #2, the administration has been doing this for over a year because of the random White House leaks. FYI, all information entered and accessed on the SAP system is logged heavily by not only the IT department but by security officials and cleared users that have a verifiable and read-in need-to-know.

You're not contradicting anything in the redacted whistleblower report.
The author says he understands how the system usually works, and that multiple people protested that this was being handled in an unusual way.  He says that people who knew more about the call than he did argued with each other, some saying that nothing in the call had a national security sensitivity, but they lost the argument for the moment and it was being treated as if it did have national security sensitivity.  We know now that it did not.  Looks like an attempted cover-up to me.

What? What is your point? I'm not sure what part of this individuals third party account you are grasping out. My point absolutely speaks to how this is not and cannot be a cover-up. The President is a classification authority (OCA). This call and other foreign official call classification most times has nothing to do with "national security sensitivity." If a foreign government or the POTUS deems any part of the conversation walks the line, it can be wrapped up and subjected to SAP. This is not the grandiose scheme you believe it to be.

---

You're not contradicting anything in the redacted whistleblower report.
The author says he understands how the system usually works, and that multiple people protested that this was being handled in an unusual way.  He says that people who knew more about the call than he did argued with each other, some saying that nothing in the call had a national security sensitivity, but they lost the argument for the moment and it was being treated as if it did have national security sensitivity.  We know now that it did not.  Looks like an attempted cover-up to me.

What? What is your point? I'm not sure what part of this individuals third party account you are grasping out. My point absolutely speaks to how this is not and cannot be a cover-up. The President is a classification authority (OCA). This call and other foreign official call classification most times has nothing to do with "national security sensitivity." If a foreign government or the POTUS deems any part of the conversation walks the line, it can be wrapped up and subjected to SAP. This is not the grandiose scheme you believe it to be.

These r the people who defended the private server, bleach bit, destroying sim cards with HAMMERS!

---

Its now being alleged that Hunters legal team reached out to the Ukrainian prosecutor to appologize for the "false" story that his predacessor was corrupt and invite him to this country. If true, this will lead us directly to the former vice president of the united states and expose the previous administrarions foreign policy as a giant atm machine.

---

This...this isn't helping things.
https://twitter.com/RudyGiuliani/status/...8004539392

---

I'll play you in ping pong. 

What? What is your point? I'm not sure what part of this individuals third party account you are grasping out. My point absolutely speaks to how this is not and cannot be a cover-up. The President is a classification authority (OCA). This call and other foreign official call classification most times has nothing to do with "national security sensitivity." If a foreign government or the POTUS deems any part of the conversation walks the line, it can be wrapped up and subjected to SAP. This is not the grandiose scheme you believe it to be.

These r the people who defended the private server, bleach bit, destroying sim cards with HAMMERS!

It's pure loony. It is looking more and more like another rogue intel member hit job. Schiff sure has had a lot to say before and after public release. Hmm. If people just used a little common sense and follow how this has played out, you can't help but see this as anything but dirty. There are bad/questionable intel community actors with connections everywhere. For some reason, all roads in nearly every controversy aimed at Trump leads back to the Intel community. As someone with past ties to that community, I find it disheartening. Money can make people do stupid [BLEEP]!

Anyways, Burisma seems to be quite the draw for foreign citizens with zero energy experience...

https://web.archive.org/web/201210111916...isory-team
https://burisma-group.com/eng/director/j...fer-black/

---

This...this isn't helping things.
https://twitter.com/RudyGiuliani/status/...8004539392

If giuliani was solicited by state as a go between then the lasy fig leaf gets pulled away

---

You're not contradicting anything in the redacted whistleblower report.
The author says he understands how the system usually works, and that multiple people protested that this was being handled in an unusual way.  He says that people who knew more about the call than he did argued with each other, some saying that nothing in the call had a national security sensitivity, but they lost the argument for the moment and it was being treated as if it did have national security sensitivity.  We know now that it did not.  Looks like an attempted cover-up to me.

The president is the ultimate determinate of all chains of classification and security clearance.  It is not a subordinate officers business what he does and does not classify or to what degree!  They call it CHIEF EXECUTIVE FOR A REASON.  My gosh!

Everything the president does must comply with the law, and anything he does in his capacity as the chief executive is subject to oversight and discovery by either house of Congress.

---

My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.

You're not contradicting anything in the redacted whistleblower report.
The author says he understands how the system usually works, and that multiple people protested that this was being handled in an unusual way.  He says that people who knew more about the call than he did argued with each other, some saying that nothing in the call had a national security sensitivity, but they lost the argument for the moment and it was being treated as if it did have national security sensitivity.  We know now that it did not.  Looks like an attempted cover-up to me.

What? What is your point? I'm not sure what part of this individuals third party account you are grasping out. My point absolutely speaks to how this is not and cannot be a cover-up. The President is a classification authority (OCA). This call and other foreign official call classification most times has nothing to do with "national security sensitivity." If a foreign government or the POTUS deems any part of the conversation walks the line, it can be wrapped up and subjected to SAP. This is not the grandiose scheme you believe it to be.

Someone with a high level authority put it into a higher level of classification while many of the other people in the room felt that this was not necessary.
You are excusing this because the person with high authority had the power to do this. 
But that's begging the question.
The president has many powers.
But he must not abuse them.
The real question is, is he abusing his powers to undermine our ability to check his behavior in the future?

---

What? What is your point? I'm not sure what part of this individuals third party account you are grasping out. My point absolutely speaks to how this is not and cannot be a cover-up. The President is a classification authority (OCA). This call and other foreign official call classification most times has nothing to do with "national security sensitivity." If a foreign government or the POTUS deems any part of the conversation walks the line, it can be wrapped up and subjected to SAP. This is not the grandiose scheme you believe it to be.

These r the people who defended the private server, bleach bit, destroying sim cards with HAMMERS!

I never defended any of Hillary's evasive and obstructive actions.
I thought some of the other things she's criticized for get blown out of proportion, but keeping a private email server was inexcusable.

---

My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.

What? What is your point? I'm not sure what part of this individuals third party account you are grasping out. My point absolutely speaks to how this is not and cannot be a cover-up. The President is a classification authority (OCA). This call and other foreign official call classification most times has nothing to do with "national security sensitivity." If a foreign government or the POTUS deems any part of the conversation walks the line, it can be wrapped up and subjected to SAP. This is not the grandiose scheme you believe it to be.

Someone with a high level authority put it into a higher level of classification while many of the other people in the room felt that this was not necessary.
You are excusing this because the person with high authority had the power to do this. 
But that's begging the question.
The president has many powers.
But he must not abuse them.
The real question is, is he abusing his powers to undermine our ability to check his behavior in the future?

---

These r the people who defended the private server, bleach bit, destroying sim cards with HAMMERS!

I never defended any of Hillary's evasive and obstructive actions.
I thought some of the other things she's criticized for get blown out of proportion, but keeping a private email server was inexcusable.

You are throwing out an opinion based on hearsay. In any case, no other person besides the Authority needs to approve of the classification. And, it doesn't even have to be a "high" classification. It can simply be marked (U//SBU-NF), meaning sensitive but unclassified not for release. This is the authorities prerogative and recorded as such. You are questioning the proper classification and move to the appropriate system as an argument that doesn't exist. FYI, just because it was secured in a SAP system doesn't mean it isn't viewable by anyone else. It simply means you need a need-to-know (not difficult), have proper clearance, and that you are read-in (briefed on rules of handling that particular documentation), and sign NDA based on NOFORN. This happens hundreds of times a day, every day. FYI, IC has already seen it and cleared it.

---

The president is the ultimate determinate of all chains of classification and security clearance.  It is not a subordinate officers business what he does and does not classify or to what degree!  They call it CHIEF EXECUTIVE FOR A REASON.  My gosh!

Everything the president does must comply with the law, and anything he does in his capacity as the chief executive is subject to oversight and discovery by either house of Congress.

Simply not true. Has he must function in a legal capacity but as Chief Executive is is given certain executive privileges. Any oversight must be in the form of legislative review not because you don't like a person or trying to dig up dirt. To this day, there are still executive conversation and documentation in the National Archive of sitting Presidents that are not releasable.

---

The president is the ultimate determinate of all chains of classification and security clearance.  It is not a subordinate officers business what he does and does not classify or to what degree!  They call it CHIEF EXECUTIVE FOR A REASON.  My gosh!

Everything the president does must comply with the law, and anything he does in his capacity as the chief executive is subject to oversight and discovery by either house of Congress.

Did u seriously write this?  The trascript wasnt destroyed it was PRESERVED at a higher level of classification.  Thats not destruction of evidence or evasion of oversight. 

And subordinate officers in the Intel Community don't have an oversight function on the chief executive no matter what they may or may not feel about a classification designation.

---

Everything the president does must comply with the law, and anything he does in his capacity as the chief executive is subject to oversight and discovery by either house of Congress.

Did u seriously write this?  The trascript wasnt destroyed it was PRESERVED at a higher level of classification.  Thats not destruction of evidence or evasion of oversight. 

And subordinate officers in the Intel Community don't have an oversight function on the chief executive no matter what they may or may not feel about a classification designation.

Sure, but the Intel committees on either house had a right to see it.

---

Everything the president does must comply with the law, and anything he does in his capacity as the chief executive is subject to oversight and discovery by either house of Congress.

Simply not true. Has he must function in a legal capacity but as Chief Executive is is given certain executive privileges. Any oversight must be in the form of legislative review not because you don't like a person or trying to dig up dirt. To this day, there are still executive conversation and documentation in the National Archive of sitting Presidents that are not releasable.

Executive privilege covers some activities, but not political activities.  Executive privilege extends only as far as the third branch, the courts, will allow.  And it's part of the legal framework.  The president must comply with the law, even though it gives him many more privileges and responsibilities than anyone else.

---

Someone with a high level authority put it into a higher level of classification while many of the other people in the room felt that this was not necessary.
You are excusing this because the person with high authority had the power to do this. 
But that's begging the question.
The president has many powers.
But he must not abuse them.
The real question is, is he abusing his powers to undermine our ability to check his behavior in the future?

You are throwing out an opinion based on hearsay. In any case, no other person besides the Authority needs to approve of the classification. And, it doesn't even have to be a "high" classification. It can simply be marked (U//SBU-NF), meaning sensitive but unclassified not for release. This is the authorities prerogative and recorded as such. You are questioning the proper classification and move to the appropriate system as an argument that doesn't exist. FYI, just because it was secured in a SAP system doesn't mean it isn't viewable by anyone else. It simply means you need a need-to-know (not difficult), have proper clearance, and that you are read-in (briefed on rules of handling that particular documentation), and sign NDA based on NOFORN. This happens hundreds of times a day, every day. FYI, IC has already seen it and cleared it.

There was no opinion in my post.  Just a question.  Did the president abuse his power?

---

---

My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.

Did u seriously write this?  The trascript wasnt destroyed it was PRESERVED at a higher level of classification.  Thats not destruction of evidence or evasion of oversight. 

And subordinate officers in the Intel Community don't have an oversight function on the chief executive no matter what they may or may not feel about a classification designation.

Sure, but the Intel committees on either house had a right to see it.

---

Simply not true. Has he must function in a legal capacity but as Chief Executive is is given certain executive privileges. Any oversight must be in the form of legislative review not because you don't like a person or trying to dig up dirt. To this day, there are still executive conversation and documentation in the National Archive of sitting Presidents that are not releasable.

Executive privilege covers some activities, but not political activities.  Executive privilege extends only as far as the third branch, the courts, will allow.  And it's part of the legal framework.  The president must comply with the law, even though it gives him many more privileges and responsibilities than anyone else.

---

You are throwing out an opinion based on hearsay. In any case, no other person besides the Authority needs to approve of the classification. And, it doesn't even have to be a "high" classification. It can simply be marked (U//SBU-NF), meaning sensitive but unclassified not for release. This is the authorities prerogative and recorded as such. You are questioning the proper classification and move to the appropriate system as an argument that doesn't exist. FYI, just because it was secured in a SAP system doesn't mean it isn't viewable by anyone else. It simply means you need a need-to-know (not difficult), have proper clearance, and that you are read-in (briefed on rules of handling that particular documentation), and sign NDA based on NOFORN. This happens hundreds of times a day, every day. FYI, IC has already seen it and cleared it.

There was no opinion in my post.  Just a question.  Did the president abuse his power?

---

No he did not.  

Please cite where the whitehouse defied a court order to turn over the transcript.

---

Did u seriously write this?  The trascript wasnt destroyed it was PRESERVED at a higher level of classification.  Thats not destruction of evidence or evasion of oversight. 

And subordinate officers in the Intel Community don't have an oversight function on the chief executive no matter what they may or may not feel about a classification designation.

Sure, but the Intel committees on either house had a right to see it.

---

Simply not true. Has he must function in a legal capacity but as Chief Executive is is given certain executive privileges. Any oversight must be in the form of legislative review not because you don't like a person or trying to dig up dirt. To this day, there are still executive conversation and documentation in the National Archive of sitting Presidents that are not releasable.

Executive privilege covers some activities, but not political activities.  Executive privilege extends only as far as the third branch, the courts, will allow.  And it's part of the legal framework.  The president must comply with the law, even though it gives him many more privileges and responsibilities than anyone else.

---

You are throwing out an opinion based on hearsay. In any case, no other person besides the Authority needs to approve of the classification. And, it doesn't even have to be a "high" classification. It can simply be marked (U//SBU-NF), meaning sensitive but unclassified not for release. This is the authorities prerogative and recorded as such. You are questioning the proper classification and move to the appropriate system as an argument that doesn't exist. FYI, just because it was secured in a SAP system doesn't mean it isn't viewable by anyone else. It simply means you need a need-to-know (not difficult), have proper clearance, and that you are read-in (briefed on rules of handling that particular documentation), and sign NDA based on NOFORN. This happens hundreds of times a day, every day. FYI, IC has already seen it and cleared it.

There was no opinion in my post.  Just a question.  Did the president abuse his power?

---

No, Office responsibility (not political), and once again no (DOJ, statutory authority, treaties, and Constitution even say as much).

There are actually U.S. Supreme Court decisions related to the matter of temporarily withholding arms, and the International Emergency Economic Powers Act gives the President broad powers. Pretty sure if arms are being sent to a country you'd like to know whether they are going to support a cause or support a historically corrupt government. But, that aid has already been released. Remember, the Obama administration blocked all loans and aid packages to Ukraine for a period due to corruption. So, all anyone (left) is grasping at is poor Joe Biden the political figure, not the alleged criminal citizen. Don't forget coke head Hunter. There is and has been lawbreaking but it isn't Trump, as you'll slowly learn. Just more exposing the other side and then silence until the new impeachment rally cry...rinse and repeat.

Dems want to push to impeach a President for exposing a crime and then try to elect the very guy who committed it! Can't make this up.

---

Shady to say the least and silenced: https://nypost.com/2018/03/15/inside-the...dens-kids/

---

Did u seriously write this?  The trascript wasnt destroyed it was PRESERVED at a higher level of classification.  Thats not destruction of evidence or evasion of oversight. 

And subordinate officers in the Intel Community don't have an oversight function on the chief executive no matter what they may or may not feel about a classification designation.

Sure, but the Intel committees on either house had a right to see it.

---

Simply not true. Has he must function in a legal capacity but as Chief Executive is is given certain executive privileges. Any oversight must be in the form of legislative review not because you don't like a person or trying to dig up dirt. To this day, there are still executive conversation and documentation in the National Archive of sitting Presidents that are not releasable.

Executive privilege covers some activities, but not political activities.  Executive privilege extends only as far as the third branch, the courts, will allow.  And it's part of the legal framework.  The president must comply with the law, even though it gives him many more privileges and responsibilities than anyone else.

---

You are throwing out an opinion based on hearsay. In any case, no other person besides the Authority needs to approve of the classification. And, it doesn't even have to be a "high" classification. It can simply be marked (U//SBU-NF), meaning sensitive but unclassified not for release. This is the authorities prerogative and recorded as such. You are questioning the proper classification and move to the appropriate system as an argument that doesn't exist. FYI, just because it was secured in a SAP system doesn't mean it isn't viewable by anyone else. It simply means you need a need-to-know (not difficult), have proper clearance, and that you are read-in (briefed on rules of handling that particular documentation), and sign NDA based on NOFORN. This happens hundreds of times a day, every day. FYI, IC has already seen it and cleared it.

There was no opinion in my post.  Just a question.  Did the president abuse his power?

---

We haven't seen the direct evidence yet, but Biden will most certainly have acted with Obama's approval. I'm sure the media is champing at the bit to identify all the dirty dealings that connect the Obama White House and Clinton campaign to these activities, right?

---

“An empty vessel makes the loudest sound, so they that have the least wit are the greatest babblers.”. - Plato

Doh! It's getting deep now. https://www.scribd.com/document/42761617...ranslation

(Per news source) The memos raise troubling questions:

1.) If the Ukraine prosecutor’s firing involved only his alleged corruption and ineptitude, why did Burisma’s American legal team refer to those allegations as “false information?”

2.) If the firing had nothing to do with the Burisma case, as Biden has adamantly claimed, why would Burisma’s American lawyers contact the replacement prosecutor within hours of the termination and urgently seek a meeting in Ukraine to discuss the case?

Ukrainian prosecutors say they have tried to get this information to the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) since the summer of 2018, fearing it might be evidence of possible violations of U.S. ethics laws. First, they hired a former federal prosecutor to bring the information to the U.S. attorney in New York, who, they say, showed no interest. Then, the Ukrainians reached out to President Trump’s personal lawyer, Rudy Giuliani.

Ukraine’s new president, Volodymyr Zelensky, told Trump in July that he plans to launch his own wide-ranging investigation into what happened with the Bidens and Burisma.

---