'Absurd' To Call Oath Keepers Insurrectionists Or A National Security Threat, Former FBI Agent...

Does influences in American elections by foreign governments merit any review? Hum?

 

These are all innuendoes against Trump 'cause they hate Trump's non-authoritarian politics.

 

Does influences in American elections........

 

Well, you seem to think an alleged (and unproven) foreign influence in the 2016 election deserved an investigation into the Trump campaign.

 

Trump is so not a non-authoritarian.

 

I do? Where have I stated such a thing?

 

You need to ponder that a little more. I'll give you a pass on grammar.

 

You don't applaud the Trump campaign investigation?

 

I'm confused. What does your post mean?

 

TFM asked for evidence of "where did I state such a thing" I took a screen shot of a post where he said such thing. Original thread is here:

http://politicalforum.com/index.php...ed-fbi-to-dispute-trump-russia-report.497668/

 

Politicians believe in compromise. Indeed, they are professional compromisers, but I understand that for an effective government to operate compromise is necessary.

What cannot be compromised are legal principles expressed in the US Constitution. Sadly, over decades the politicians have compromised and violated those legal principles. See the USA Patriot Act, an illegitimate POS brought by bipartisan majorities of politicians.

Patriots do not compromise those legal principles. They fight those who do.

 

Or any at all. .

Mark Twain once said that his political opponent used to hire children to run after him in the street shouting "Daddy, Daddy".. Seems politics hasn't changed that much after all though we use laptops now.

 

Isn't John Guandolo a disgraced ex FBI agent who is more of a conspiracist against any Muslim than what the real threats are? Just sayin

https://news.bloomberglaw.com/litig...s-self-defense-appeal-over-fight-with-sheriff

From a law enforcement perspective, I can assure you there are two types of "Oath Keepers" and other anti-government militia groups. The first is the Stewart Rhodes group. These guys will use and abuse the law to instill their own version of "Democracy" and America. In their view, anyone different from them, and I do mean anyone different from them, is not invited or should live in the United States. We have seen this in their recent trial. Privately in what they said is extremely disturbing. If given the opportunity, they are willing to take out law enforcement and any other government official who does not see their "way." They are no different than the "sovereign citizens" movement which can be very dangerous to law enforcement, as was the case in Pennsylvania of a routine traffic stop where a law enforcement officer was killed unnecessarily. The second group is the ones who fall in line with the public rhetoric through fear and misinformation that the Oath Keepers make publicly about what they think the US Constitution means and does not mean. But once they get into something like January 6th, you will have these members turn on Stewart Rhodes and others in a heartbeat, and did exactly just that. Once they realize that the oath keepers, the 3 percenters, and other similar groups are out to get the law enforcement and any other person who gets in their way, they will depart their company. Bear in mind, Oath Keepers and these groups think people like Dylan Roof are heroes to their cause, not criminals who were convicted or pled guilty to homicide or other crimes.

I would not put too much stock into the claim that there are over 300 individuals who are "members" of the group. Self-identifying can be used to say one thing or someone who is something else. Simply being an employee or former employee of DHS does not say anything much. Keep in mind, like any large organization, you have people who are adjudicators or ICE agents, or even Customer Service representatives. They can be contracted out through DHS or work directly as employees of the US government. And the number of current employees in DHS is around 240,000 employees. Just saying here.

Personally, I think you are infatuated with the myth of Oath Keepers, not the reality. As for BLM, they are generally a social justice group who want to change law enforcement in how they handle certain situations. But like most social groups, they are not the dangerous kind unless groupthink gets involved and a few agitators start destroying public property. But are you are interested in is guilty by association because they are different? No more, no less.

Below is a link that examines the extremism in oath keepers. After the debacle of January 6th, I think most people will be very wary now in joining the group.

https://www.csis.org/blogs/examining-extremism/examining-extremism-oath-keepers

 

No it was not. That is the GOP's misinformation because they can't handle the truth of what really happened. It is wny those loopholes are going to be closed now in the $1.7 Trillion omnibus budget that has passed the senate and will pass the house.

 

You realize The Constitution is potentially one long legal compromise? For example, women can't have the vote then women can have the vote via an amendment? For example, that there will be no other incursions of federal power then along comes the 14-16 amendments to The Constitution? You realize amendments are compromises, er, changes to The Constitution?

 

Does Influences….

 

You need to finish your thought if you want me to reply.

 

The FBI expelling a president and installing a fraud is the biggest scandal in US history.

How Will GOP Stop a Repeat of Biden Laptop Scandal?



'“BIDEN SECRET E-MAILS, Revealed: Ukrainian exec thanked Hunter Biden for ‘opportunity to meet’ veep dad.” I was awake and watched the story, detailing an alleged meeting betweenke one of Hunter Biden’s fellow Burisma board members and then-VP Joe Biden, publish online at 5 a.m., as the print paper — the longest-running in the country, founded by Alexander Hamilton — hit newsstands across New York and doorsteps across America. By 7:30 a.m., the link shot across Twitter, posted by Jake Sherman, Maggie Haberman… and then, as if someone had hit a kill switch, it was gone. The New York Post Twitter handle, gone. Anyone who tried to share the link was banned, the link was disabled, it was just… vaporized. On October 15, 2020, the cover of the Post read: “CENSORED.”'

In a well orchestrated coordinated disinformation campaign to fix the election for Joe Biden, the story was promptly buried as "Russian Disinformation."

'On October 19, 2020, Politico published a story by Natasha Bertrand headlined, “Hunter Biden story is Russian disinfo, dozens of former intel officials say.” '

What will the GOP do to ensure that the FBI/IC/DNC/Fake News Media do not fix another presidential election?

There are always options in our Liberal Constitutional Democracy when 38 State Legislatures are in agreement they can do virtually whatever is necessary to bring the out of control Federal Government back under the legitimate control of We The People, and they can do without the input of Congress, the President, The Courts, or even the State Governors. They are the closest to We The People, and when push comes to shove, in coordination, they are the most powerful force in our Constitutional Liberal Democracy, but, the GOP House can get to work on this in less than two weeks.

Here's the bottom line. In the end, We The People WILL Prevail.

 

Yes, you're right. I knew all that, thanks. After all the document IS a political document, and politics require compromise.

But compromise of PRINCIPLES is not allowed. The Supreme Law of The Land is how it's described in Article VI.

Compromise on details regarding spending or other such things is natural. Compromise of legal principles is not allowed in a country that considers itself to be living under the rule of law.

 

The Constitution wasn't really written for or by authoritarians like you.

 

Rarely you post something new, something I didn't know previously. This is not one of those times.

 

You don't know you're authoritarian or you don't know that The Constitution wasn't written by and for authoritarians?

 

Like "lack of Candor?

 

Probably too much candor....