Judge Denies Trump's Mistrial Request Over Stormy Daniels Testimony

[Yellowtail]

1 hour ago, Walker88 said:

Cute.

 

Yes, low pay.

 

Geez, if I had known I could have gotten in with a degree in gender studies, I could have saved all those undergrad hours in the labs! In the year I EOD'd the agency accepted ~40 of 25,000+ applicants for case officer. It was more selective than Harvard. In an earlier year, Bill Barr tried and failed, because he didn't reach the required IQ level to be a case officer. The agency gave him an analysts job instead. He's still miffed. Tucker Carlson didn't even get passed the first round of testing. It used to be almost solely summa cum laude from Ivies, but they have diversified a bit since I joined.

 

Were you summa cum laude from an Ivy, too? (Just kidding. I can guess.)

No, I was a grade school dropout. 

 

Requirements: "Bachelor’s degree from an accredited institution (applicants within one year of earning a four-year degree will be considered); there is no preferred major or program of study (degrees from foreign academic institutions are accepted, but you are responsible for obtaining and providing CIA with a credential evaluation from an accredited firm confirming that the foreign degree is the equivalent of a BA/BS and/or MA/MS degree conferred by a U.S. college or university)
At least a 3.0 GPA on a 4-point scale is preferred"

 

cia.gov/careers/jobs/case-officer/

[Yellowtail]

1 hour ago, Danderman123 said:

Are you really unaware of the many Christian pastors and other staff caught molesting children? It's off-topic, but I am surprised you don't know about it 

So as usual, you do not have any sources, I thought not. 

[Yellowtail]

1 hour ago, Walker88 said:

 

I don't know if you just feel woefully inadequate, or if you really have no clue what agency case officers do? I suspect it's a bit of both.

 

The agency is Executive Branch and theoretically non-mil, although we go through weapons and other mil-type training, such as parachuting and survival training, as part of the overall Farm experience. That training comes in handy in certain parts of the world (especially offensive driving). We tend to be solo in all our ops, with next to no support...just our wits. And no, I'm not wildly brave; I just sucked it up and did it. If you had ever been in harm's way, you would understand, but you never were, so cannot understand.

 

There is kind of a brotherhood in the ops world. Guys like former Rep Will Hurd know. A guy who is now a regular face on YouTube (Andrew Bustamante) knows (though I disagree with some of what he says). You, on the other hand, will never know.

 

We---I think the vast majority of former and current case officers---see the threat to everything the US stands for in trump. We took an oath to the Constitution; he wants to change it. We support democracy, because we have seen what lack of it does to the innocent in countries where dictators or strongmen rule. trump obviously hates democracy, since he spent so much time and effort trying to subvert the people's will.

 

"I think the vast majority of former and current case officers---see the threat to everything the US stands for in trump..." 

 

You mean you guys are going to have to start doing something? Seems everything we hear from the CIA is wrong. 

 

I guess that Hunter laptop Russian disinformation OP worked out though, you got a leftist elected, yeah? 

 

Figures you live on the public teat and seem to have so much contempt for the people that pay you. 

 

[Yellowtail]

It amazes me how many people believe that by claiming they are smarter someone else, they think they are making a compelling argument.

 

University degrees only impress stupid people and kids. 

 

 

[Yellowtail]

Get 'em while you can, the price will skyrocket once Trump is convicted...

[GroveHillWanderer]

On 5/10/2024 at 9:37 AM, jerrymahoney said:

no

In what way, no? That is exactly what the prosecution is alleging. 

 

Quote

Prosecutors have alleged the crimes were committed in tandem with a second crime – to illegally influence the 2016 presidential election – which elevates what would typically be misdemeanour violations to more serious felonies.

 

Trump’s defence makes opening statement in ‘hush money’ trial

[jerrymahoney]

e

33 minutes ago, GroveHillWanderer said:

In what way, no? That is exactly what the prosecution is alleging. 

 

 

Trump’s defence makes opening statement in ‘hush money’ trial

It is 2 separate statutes: One is the charge 34 times in the indictment and the other is the "another crime" election charge. The election charge says "by unlawful means" and the Prosecution has never said what is unlawful means. And it seems since enacted in 1976 there is no case or established precedent as to what is "unlawful" in the context of that statute.

 

Some experts have written, regardless of the evidence presented by either side, this whole case will depend just how the Judge decides to explain this convoluted series of charges to the Jury.

 

In 2013, Antonin Scalia made a remarkable admission at oral argument in the Supreme Court when he said, "this campaign finance law [the Federal Election Campaign Act] is so intricate that I can't figure it out."

 

NY State law in this instance is turning out much the same as a big liberal think tank ended their analysis of this Trump case by asking:

 

Clear as mud?

 

Edited May 11 by jerrymahoney

[Danderman123]

1 hour ago, Yellowtail said:

So as usual, you do not have any sources, I thought not. 

I am looking at some now.

 

But I won't pollute this topic with a bunch of off-topic content.

[Yellowtail]

12 minutes ago, Danderman123 said:

I am looking at some now.

 

But I won't pollute this topic with a bunch of off-topic content.

You have plenty of tissue? 

[Hawaiian]

4 hours ago, Walker88 said:

People who worked for the CIA as case officers are something trumpers will never be able to understand: Patriots. It's why we take exception to a self-serving POS who tries to overthrow 240 years of American democracy, because he's a whiny little child, and who steals classified documents that jeopardize both national security and the brave foreign clandestine assets who put their own lives and the lives of their families on the line when they cooperate with us in the field.

 

You couldn't possibly understand. 

 

 

What I don't understand is why you have to keep on boasting about your illustrious, dedicated service.  What you fail to mention are the monumental missteps made by the agency, let alone the traitors in the ranks.

[Yellowtail]

26 minutes ago, Hawaiian said:

What I don't understand is why you have to keep on boasting about your illustrious, dedicated service.  What you fail to mention are the monumental missteps made by the agency, let alone the traitors in the ranks.

He was a pencil pusher on the public-teat for life, bragging is all he has to make himself feel better about his lot in life. 

[Walker88]

2 hours ago, G_Money said:

Facts!  Nothing proven yet.  Just what you follow on liberal media.

 

It’s all becoming clear now on the forum.  You’re “that kid” that got his a__ whipped on the school playground running his mouth one too many times.  By the Short Guy.

 

Insecure guys with short d___s always feel the need to brag and over state their qualifications.  I can pick them out better than a CIA clerk.

 

With your SELF DESCRIBED qualifications and intelligence you no doubt had to on the fast track to Director of the CIA.  What we used to call a SHOE IN.

 

You never did state your reasons for dismissal.  How could they have dismissed a man of your ability?

 

Was the decision for the CIA difficult or as I suspect, A SLAM DUNK.

 

 

I'll spell it out for you, Shorty. I was not dismissed. That's your fantasy or your need, because you need to believe something negative. Makes you feel.....taller.

 

Will Hurd left to be a Congressman. Jason Matthews left to write books (He wrote excellent intel reports, by the way, and his Red Sparrow is a quite accurate portrayal of denied ops). Greg Vogle went to work for Gen McCrystal. A number of us left to go to Wall Street.

 

Every case officer with whom I worked was a top student. Yes, most were from the Ivies, as that just seems to be a long tradition since Wild Bill Donovan and the OSS. That's what got them and me selected. I worked among equals. I've never been part of any organization or company with a greater percent of extreme intellect as in the agency, and intellect encompasses a wide range of disciplines. It still operates by the Pareto Principle as every organization does, but everyone has the skill. Some just use it better or more effectively.

 

Agency case officers are the polar opposite of mil types. COs are free thinking, resourceful, self-starters, fairly anti-authority, natural risk takers, mostly cynical, and always looking for a greater challenge. Mil types, when told to jump, say "How high?" Case officers, if told to jump, ask, "What for?" The mil takes individual thought away (which is why more junior mil types are trumpers, as he tells them what to think), the agency actively encourages both individual thought and differing opinions. The mil demands group think; the agency almost forbids group think. Mil types (not you, but actual fighting men) will storm a beach because they were told to do so. Agency guys will go alone to ferret out a terror cell because it's a challenge and a test.  Both types of people are needed in defense, and both entities select people according to their particular requirements. Good soldiers wouldn't (and don't) make good spooks; good spooks would make terrible soldiers. Spooks are more loners.

 

As I noted earlier, despite all of our idiosyncrasies, we all kept the mission first. Most of us have seen, even lived in, non-democracies, and we know firsthand the dangers someone like trump represents. The system and institutions barely held in his first term; in any second term he won't have any Cohn or Mattis or Milley or Haspel or Wray or Kelly, nor will he take a chance on someone like Barr, who failed when absolute fealty was demanded of him after trump's defeat. Same with Pence, who---when push came to shove---obeyed his oath. The next person will not. trump will only select groveling sycophantic boot lickers.

 

Sadly, the institutions have begun to fail more regularly in the last 4 years. The SC is stuffed with clowns who clearly have a deep distaste for the US Constitution. The Republican Party is made up of either cult members or cowards. The Dems have a weak bench. Good people are shunning public service, dregs and Performance Artists have found a calling, much to the detriment of legislation. They run the House, at least until January.

 

Go back 20 years and ask this: If a sitting President refused to accept the results of an election, and engaged in all levels of fraud to try to prevent the peaceful transfer of power, plus commit other felonies (stealing documents and lying about it), would he be able to avoid accountability for 4 years, and face only a porn star hush money fraudulent payoff trial?

 

THAT is how far the US has fallen. Rational people see it. Cult members are incapable of seeing it.

 

 

[stevenl]

32 minutes ago, Hawaiian said:

What I don't understand is why you have to keep on boasting about your illustrious, dedicated service.  What you fail to mention are the monumental missteps made by the agency, let alone the traitors in the ranks.

 

4 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

He was a pencil pusher on the public-teat for life, bragging is all he has to make himself feel better about his lot in life. 

I don't understand these kind of posts. You may disagree with the poster, but why the ad hominem attacks in stead of refuting his reasoning.

[Yellowtail]

4 minutes ago, stevenl said:

 

I don't understand these kind of posts. You may disagree with the poster, but why the ad hominem attacks in stead of refuting his reasoning.

Because he does not use reason. He typically brags about how smart he sees himself, while calling everyone that disagrees with him stupid. How does one reason with that? 

[Walker88]

45 minutes ago, Hawaiian said:

What I don't understand is why you have to keep on boasting about your illustrious, dedicated service.  What you fail to mention are the monumental missteps made by the agency, let alone the traitors in the ranks.

Ah, I see you, too, have no clue what the agency does, probably gaining your 'knowledge' from Hollywood B-Fare.

 

The agency is part of the Executive Branch. It gets tasked by the President to perform some tasks, while also regularly collecting and analyzing intelligence. If a President or Congressperson asks for some intel, the agency goes out looking for it. Some Presidents value what it produces, others (like trump) only want to be told what they already believe and want to hear.

 

Covert action is ALWAYS at the request of the President. Generally, the agency is asked for options, and provides those to the Oval Office. The President then decides and issues a Finding, under which the agency will undertake the operation. There are no "rogue" operations. If a major covert action is undertaken, it is because the President has requested and approved it.

 

The agency also tends to protect the President's public image. For example, the agency did not believe Saddam still had WMD, but Cheney was hellbent on an invasion. He got Tenet to go along, even though at the analytical level WMD was not believed to exist. The Neocons overruled. The disaster followed.

 

The same thing happened in Afghanistan after 9-11. The agency argued the US should take out the al Qaeda bases, but not bother to try to bring the country into the 21st Century, arguing it would be a forever war. Bush didn't want to hear that and he set the stage for the wasted next two decades.

 

The agency does not get everything right, but more often than not, it does. It also kind of encourages two polar opposite views...that it is nearly omnipotent and that it is quite incompetent. Both have value. The nature of intelligence work relegates the reality to somewhere between those two extremes.

 

Mods: I appreciate this is off topic, but there is so much misinformation and misunderstanding that---since those folks have posted comments---I am addressing them.

Edited May 11 by Walker88

[johng]

22 minutes ago, Walker88 said:

THAT is how far the US has fallen. Rational people see it. Cult members are incapable of seeing it.

You are the cult member incapable of seeing it !

[G_Money]

53 minutes ago, Walker88 said:

I'll spell it out for you, Shorty. I was not dismissed. That's your fantasy or your need, because you need to believe something negative. Makes you feel.....taller.

 

Will Hurd left to be a Congressman. Jason Matthews left to write books (He wrote excellent intel reports, by the way, and his Red Sparrow is a quite accurate portrayal of denied ops). Greg Vogle went to work for Gen McCrystal. A number of us left to go to Wall Street.

 

Every case officer with whom I worked was a top student. Yes, most were from the Ivies, as that just seems to be a long tradition since Wild Bill Donovan and the OSS. That's what got them and me selected. I worked among equals. I've never been part of any organization or company with a greater percent of extreme intellect as in the agency, and intellect encompasses a wide range of disciplines. It still operates by the Pareto Principle as every organization does, but everyone has the skill. Some just use it better or more effectively.

 

Agency case officers are the polar opposite of mil types. COs are free thinking, resourceful, self-starters, fairly anti-authority, natural risk takers, mostly cynical, and always looking for a greater challenge. Mil types, when told to jump, say "How high?" Case officers, if told to jump, ask, "What for?" The mil takes individual thought away (which is why more junior mil types are trumpers, as he tells them what to think), the agency actively encourages both individual thought and differing opinions. The mil demands group think; the agency almost forbids group think. Mil types (not you, but actual fighting men) will storm a beach because they were told to do so. Agency guys will go alone to ferret out a terror cell because it's a challenge and a test.  Both types of people are needed in defense, and both entities select people according to their particular requirements. Good soldiers wouldn't (and don't) make good spooks; good spooks would make terrible soldiers. Spooks are more loners.

 

As I noted earlier, despite all of our idiosyncrasies, we all kept the mission first. Most of us have seen, even lived in, non-democracies, and we know firsthand the dangers someone like trump represents. The system and institutions barely held in his first term; in any second term he won't have any Cohn or Mattis or Milley or Haspel or Wray or Kelly, nor will he take a chance on someone like Barr, who failed when absolute fealty was demanded of him after trump's defeat. Same with Pence, who---when push came to shove---obeyed his oath. The next person will not. trump will only select groveling sycophantic boot lickers.

 

Sadly, the institutions have begun to fail more regularly in the last 4 years. The SC is stuffed with clowns who clearly have a deep distaste for the US Constitution. The Republican Party is made up of either cult members or cowards. The Dems have a weak bench. Good people are shunning public service, dregs and Performance Artists have found a calling, much to the detriment of legislation. They run the House, at least until January.

 

Go back 20 years and ask this: If a sitting President refused to accept the results of an election, and engaged in all levels of fraud to try to prevent the peaceful transfer of power, plus commit other felonies (stealing documents and lying about it), would he be able to avoid accountability for 4 years, and face only a porn star hush money fraudulent payoff trial?

 

THAT is how far the US has fallen. Rational people see it. Cult members are incapable of seeing it.

 

 

Jesus Christ!

 

All that !  And you can’t answer my original question of why you were dismissed!

As much as you love talking about yourself I’m quite surprised you haven’t told us, YET!

 

 I’m doing my job well!

 

Thank you for exposing yourself to who you truly are.

Edited May 11 by G_Money

[Chomper Higgot]

1 hour ago, Hawaiian said:

What I don't understand is why you have to keep on boasting about your illustrious, dedicated service.  What you fail to mention are the monumental missteps made by the agency, let alone the traitors in the ranks.

‘Traitors’

 

That’s a remarkable accusation.

 

Let’s see your evidence to back it up,

 

[G_Money]

42 minutes ago, Walker88 said:

Ah, I see you, too, have no clue what the agency does, probably gaining your 'knowledge' from Hollywood B-Fare.

 

The agency is part of the Executive Branch. It gets tasked by the President to perform some tasks, while also regularly collecting and analyzing intelligence. If a President or Congressperson asks for some intel, the agency goes out looking for it. Some Presidents value what it produces, others (like trump) only want to be told what they already believe and want to hear.

 

Covert action is ALWAYS at the request of the President. Generally, the agency is asked for options, and provides those to the Oval Office. The President then decides and issues a Finding, under which the agency will undertake the operation. There are no "rogue" operations. If a major covert action is undertaken, it is because the President has requested and approved it.

 

The agency also tends to protect the President's public image. For example, the agency did not believe Saddam still had WMD, but Cheney was hellbent on an invasion. He got Tenet to go along, even though at the analytical level WMD was not believed to exist. The Neocons overruled. The disaster followed.

 

The same thing happened in Afghanistan after 9-11. The agency argued the US should take out the al Qaeda bases, but not bother to try to bring the country into the 21st Century, arguing it would be a forever war. Bush didn't want to hear that and he set the stage for the wasted next two decades.

 

The agency does not get everything right, but more often than not, it does. It also kind of encourages two polar opposite views...that it is nearly omnipotent and that it is quite incompetent. Both have value. The nature of intelligence work relegates the reality to somewhere between those two extremes.

 

Mods: I appreciate this is off topic, but there is so much misinformation and misunderstanding that---since those folks have posted comments---I am addressing them.

“Mods: I appreciate this is off topic, but there is so much misinformation and misunderstanding that---since those folks have posted comments---I am addressing them.”

 

Your nose knows instinctively where to go.  Which explains you getting your a__ whipped on the school yard.

[Roo Island]

7 minutes ago, G_Money said:

“Mods: I appreciate this is off topic, but there is so much misinformation and misunderstanding that---since those folks have posted comments---I am addressing them.”

 

Your nose knows instinctively where to go.  Which explains you getting your a__ whipped on the school yard.

Welcome back...

[Roo Island]

45 minutes ago, johng said:

You are the cult member incapable of seeing it !

He sees things clearly....

[GroveHillWanderer]

2 hours ago, jerrymahoney said:

lt is 2 separate statutes: One is the charge 34 times in the indictment and the other is the "another crime" election charge. The election charge says "by unlawful means" and the Prosecution has never said what is unlawful means. And it seems since enacted in 1976 there is no case or established precedent as to what is "unlawful" in the context of that statute.

 

Some experts have written, regardless of the evidence presented by either side, this whole case will depend just how the Judge decides to explain this convoluted series of charges to the Jury.

 

In 2013, Antonin Scalia made a remarkable admission at oral argument in the Supreme Court when he said, "this campaign finance law [the Federal Election Campaign Act] is so intricate that I can't figure it out."

 

NY State law in this instance is turning out much the same as a big liberal think tank ended their analysis of this Trump case by asking:

 

Clear as mud?

 

You were objecting to the following statement: 

 

"The felony comes when fraudulent accounting is used to conceal a crime."

 

Whether you agree with the way the statutes are being interpreted and whether you think the second, underlying crime being charged is justifiable, or will be upheld by the jury, it doesn't alter the fact that the statement is true.

Edited May 11 by GroveHillWanderer

[jerrymahoney]

40 minutes ago, GroveHillWanderer said:

You were objecting to the following statement: 

 

"The felony comes when fraudulent accounting is used to conceal a crime."

Actually this started when I said "denied" to the statement:

 

"these things cannot be denied. NY State law says that using fraudulent accounting for the purpose of influencing an election is a felony."

 

And both the above and the post you quote leave out the word 'intent' which is in the actual stattute. And "intent" can mean that the defendant had to know what he was doing otr intending todowas illegal.

 

 

Edited May 11 by jerrymahoney

[G_Money]

55 minutes ago, Roo Island said:

Welcome back...

Same to you!  How was your “holiday”?

[G_Money]

2 hours ago, Hawaiian said:

What I don't understand is why you have to keep on boasting about your illustrious, dedicated service.  What you fail to mention are the monumental missteps made by the agency, let alone the traitors in the ranks.

He can’t help it.  So enthusiastically to brag about his education in which supposedly got him hired.  40 out of 240.

 

However, completely silent about his termination.

 

As much as he LOVES talking about himself, some issues are completely SILENT.

[G_Money]

3 hours ago, Danderman123 said:

I am looking at some now.

 

But I won't pollute this topic with a bunch of off-topic content.

Mighty white of you,

 

Don’t you agree.?

 

If not, why?

[G_Money]

1 hour ago, Roo Island said:

He sees things clearly....

Clear as mud!

[G_Money]

7 hours ago, Walker88 said:

People who worked for the CIA as case officers are something trumpers will never be able to understand: Patriots. It's why we take exception to a self-serving POS who tries to overthrow 240 years of American democracy, because he's a whiny little child, and who steals classified documents that jeopardize both national security and the brave foreign clandestine assets who put their own lives and the lives of their families on the line when they cooperate with us in the field.

 

You couldn't possibly understand. 

 

 

A clerk/typist opinion while legally allowed to speak about real men, really shouldn’t.

 

It doesn’t make you look good.

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

Gotta love this Trump-Fox News craziness reported in USA Today:

Fox News calls Trump a ‘sex god,’ RFK Jr. has a brain worm and I want off this planet

...

Daniels’ descriptions of her alleged brief — ugh — affair with the man who’s now the Republican Party’s presumptive presidential nominee prompted Fox News host and apparent misogynist Greg Gutfeld to suggest it all demonstrated Trump’s sexual prowess: “Truly, he screwed the brains out of her—that makes him a sex god.”

 

I don’t know exactly what’s wrong with Mr. Gutfeld or how sewage entered his soul, but I do know that repulsive statement caused thousands of Americans to lose their lunch.

 

It made me want to pilot a rocket ship into the sun, as it’s clear humanity’s time is up.

 

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/opinion/fox-news-calls-trump-a-sex-god-rfk-jr-has-a-brain-worm-and-i-want-off-this-planet/ar-BB1maJDB

 

 

Greg Gutfeld Makes Truly Vile Comments About 'Sex God' Trump And Stormy Daniels

 

https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/greg-gutfeld-makes-truly-vile-120736638.html

 

And more reported here:

 

https://www.mediaite.com/tv/gutfeld-on-trump-and-stormy-daniels-he-screwed-the-brains-out-of-her-that-makes-him-a-sex-god/

 

 

 

Edited May 11 by TallGuyJohninBKK

[Hawaiian]

2 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

‘Traitors’

 

That’s a remarkable accusation.

 

Let’s see your evidence to back it up,

 

Guess you never heard of Aldrich Ames.  Then there's Edward Lee Howard, David Henry Barnett and others.