I’ve always been a bit puzzled at why Doug Macgregor has consistently pooh-poohed the integrity of our current CIA Director—whose name he consistently gets wrong.
You wrote “He has several times stated that under Radford, er, Ratcliffe, it will simply be business as usual at the CIA. I get that a liberal like Chas Freeman would call him a political hack, but why Mac?”
I apologize for not understanding, but I am unable to see that you answered your question. Perhaps you meant it to be a thought exercise for your readers?
Ratcliffe releasing this information is not "business as usual"--not in the sense of covering up for Deep State misdeeds that Mac was attributing to Ratcliffe. Freeman dislikes Ratcliffe because Ratcliffe is overall conservative and has been supportive to Trump. Trump obviously believes he can count on Ratcliffe to help drain the swamp at the CIA, and Ratcliffe's real credentials separate him from clowns like Hegseth. I remain at a loss to understand why Mac has chosen to target Ratcliffe repeatedly with derisive comments.
Could it be he is pissed about being on the sidelines with no role in this administration? A guy like Mac is interesting and he has good insights, but he likely also possess a huge ego and when guys like that are snubbed they lash out. Look at Bolton or Christy the fat buffoon who was former guv of NJ. These guys are all the same. Their ego's and sense of entitlement knows no bounds. IMHO.
I believe the statute of limitations will have run. The general statute is that once a cognizable charge has been established the government has 5 years to prosecute, and after that no prosecution can be brought (I'm not using the technical language). In some cases there are exceptions or the statute of limitations doesn't apply (murder). I'm not aware of any special provisions in this case of espionage. 5 years is up.
Yes. But that wouldn't apply in the case of Hillary's espionage--the homebrew server case. That's over and done with.
What I was thinking of was a situation in which some of the people who were involved in, say, the Russia Hoax, were involved in additional criminal acts that constituted a continuing criminal conspiracy--say, it all had to do with depriving Trump of his constitutional rights in various ways--then the SOL for the whole conspiracy would not begin to run until the government came up with its chargeable case. Then they could be prosecuted for all the acts from beginning to end.
So you would argue that acts involving the Russia Hoax, the Fake Impeachments, the later lawfare hoax cases re the Mar a Lago raid--all those were simply acts in furtherance of a larger overall conspiracy defined by a common goal: to deprive Trump of his constitutional rights. A civil rights case. I think--off the top of my head--that one person who could fit the bill in that regard might be Mary McCord. I believe she's been heavily involved in every step of that. I'm sure there are others, mostly lawyers.
I'd say everyone from Brennan to Pompeo, Haspel, and Burns are all Deep Staters unable to bring integrity of the office to the forefront. Also, those as Directors of National Intelligence stayed quiet on both parties account. Shameful. Barry thought HRC had it in the bag. Or didn't want to be the bag man. Probably why Michelle's mad at him now.
The public persona of BHO was as phony as a 3.00 bill and the stench from the corruption in his administration continues to linger in the air over DC. Hillary escapes any penalty for what would have doomed anyone else and the country gets stuck with a miserable and incompetent wretch as POTUS and an election is stolen in broad daylight and all the key players walked away untouched and unrepentant. Don’t know about anybody else, but I’m mad as hell and want to see the insouciant smirk wiped off of their collective faces once and for all.
Concur,, I had a TS SCI. If I had done just a modicum of what Hillary did, I would have been in Ft Leavenworth breaking rocks. Is there a statute of limitations on this type of crime? If not, they need to bring her back to the dock.
In retrospect, getting Comey to take the fire for not prosecuting Clinton also led to Comey reopening the investigation when Wiener's laptop finally surfaced publically in October 2016. Having been "forced" to take the fire in July, Comey wasn't going to run out the clock on Wiener laptop, too. I don't know that the reopening the case late hurt Clinton enough to cost her the election, but she clearly thinks so.
It looks like Hillary stayed out of prison. But is there anyone who would trade places with her? She has fame and fortune and feminism. But does she have anything of value?
Some real estate and a huge bankroll, that buys a lot things to help her wallow in her shallow and unfulfilled life and self pity. Her progressive gal pals and lovers likely keep her feeling self righteous which is about all she has left. I wonder who returns her calls these days?
You wrote “He has several times stated that under Radford, er, Ratcliffe, it will simply be business as usual at the CIA. I get that a liberal like Chas Freeman would call him a political hack, but why Mac?”
I apologize for not understanding, but I am unable to see that you answered your question. Perhaps you meant it to be a thought exercise for your readers?
Ratcliffe releasing this information is not "business as usual"--not in the sense of covering up for Deep State misdeeds that Mac was attributing to Ratcliffe. Freeman dislikes Ratcliffe because Ratcliffe is overall conservative and has been supportive to Trump. Trump obviously believes he can count on Ratcliffe to help drain the swamp at the CIA, and Ratcliffe's real credentials separate him from clowns like Hegseth. I remain at a loss to understand why Mac has chosen to target Ratcliffe repeatedly with derisive comments.
Thank you.
Could it be he is pissed about being on the sidelines with no role in this administration? A guy like Mac is interesting and he has good insights, but he likely also possess a huge ego and when guys like that are snubbed they lash out. Look at Bolton or Christy the fat buffoon who was former guv of NJ. These guys are all the same. Their ego's and sense of entitlement knows no bounds. IMHO.
So, is there a chance then, that a Prosecution is approved by this Government?
I mean, the report is still there, just mothballed?
I believe the statute of limitations will have run. The general statute is that once a cognizable charge has been established the government has 5 years to prosecute, and after that no prosecution can be brought (I'm not using the technical language). In some cases there are exceptions or the statute of limitations doesn't apply (murder). I'm not aware of any special provisions in this case of espionage. 5 years is up.
Yes. But that wouldn't apply in the case of Hillary's espionage--the homebrew server case. That's over and done with.
What I was thinking of was a situation in which some of the people who were involved in, say, the Russia Hoax, were involved in additional criminal acts that constituted a continuing criminal conspiracy--say, it all had to do with depriving Trump of his constitutional rights in various ways--then the SOL for the whole conspiracy would not begin to run until the government came up with its chargeable case. Then they could be prosecuted for all the acts from beginning to end.
So you would argue that acts involving the Russia Hoax, the Fake Impeachments, the later lawfare hoax cases re the Mar a Lago raid--all those were simply acts in furtherance of a larger overall conspiracy defined by a common goal: to deprive Trump of his constitutional rights. A civil rights case. I think--off the top of my head--that one person who could fit the bill in that regard might be Mary McCord. I believe she's been heavily involved in every step of that. I'm sure there are others, mostly lawyers.
I'd say everyone from Brennan to Pompeo, Haspel, and Burns are all Deep Staters unable to bring integrity of the office to the forefront. Also, those as Directors of National Intelligence stayed quiet on both parties account. Shameful. Barry thought HRC had it in the bag. Or didn't want to be the bag man. Probably why Michelle's mad at him now.
The public persona of BHO was as phony as a 3.00 bill and the stench from the corruption in his administration continues to linger in the air over DC. Hillary escapes any penalty for what would have doomed anyone else and the country gets stuck with a miserable and incompetent wretch as POTUS and an election is stolen in broad daylight and all the key players walked away untouched and unrepentant. Don’t know about anybody else, but I’m mad as hell and want to see the insouciant smirk wiped off of their collective faces once and for all.
Concur,, I had a TS SCI. If I had done just a modicum of what Hillary did, I would have been in Ft Leavenworth breaking rocks. Is there a statute of limitations on this type of crime? If not, they need to bring her back to the dock.
None is specified, so the standard 5 years would apply.
In retrospect, getting Comey to take the fire for not prosecuting Clinton also led to Comey reopening the investigation when Wiener's laptop finally surfaced publically in October 2016. Having been "forced" to take the fire in July, Comey wasn't going to run out the clock on Wiener laptop, too. I don't know that the reopening the case late hurt Clinton enough to cost her the election, but she clearly thinks so.
Well, you know she's not the "person" to accept any blame herself.
It looks like Hillary stayed out of prison. But is there anyone who would trade places with her? She has fame and fortune and feminism. But does she have anything of value?
Some real estate and a huge bankroll, that buys a lot things to help her wallow in her shallow and unfulfilled life and self pity. Her progressive gal pals and lovers likely keep her feeling self righteous which is about all she has left. I wonder who returns her calls these days?
Sic Transit Gloria Mundi, Hillary, and you can take the “gloria” out.