Abuse and Power by Carter Page

[Res Ipsa]

One question I have is if there is a clear 2-party judicial system where Republicans are treated harshly and Democrats get off easy, then if you're a criminal, or engaged in really borderline behavior such as vastly underreporting on taxes or funneling money around through foreign accounts, then why not just be Democrat rather than Republican? If it's as Ajax said, that nobody cared about all the illegal stuff involving millions of dollars until the person got close to Trump, then why get close to Trump? Why not be friends with Pelosi and hubby instead, since that's the easy way to get away with the crimes?

Carter Page would say that he never was involved in borderline behavior. Paul Manafort would tell you that he didn't know Rick Gates was committing bank fraud in his name. But I'm sure a lot of wealthy people who engage in shady accounting practices do just choose to be Democrat.

And so yes, right now, Trump is public enemy #1, he should be the biggest target in known history for investigation, and anyone promoting their own criminal agendas by getting into business with him should be targeted more harshly than if they are acting alone.

Would you include Carter Page as one promoting his own criminal agenda by choosing to support the Trump campaign? But in case I don't hear from you again for a while, I do thank you for your post and helping me to understand your point of view and ethics a lot better.

What? People make self serving statements in order to sell books? Will Ajax give the same level of credulity to what Hunter Biden says about himself or his conduct? Or give the same level of credulity to Joe Biden as he does to Donald Trump?

[Doctor CamNC4Me]

Or is it possible the system was antagonistic to those individuals for just causes?

All right I'm trying to collect my thoughts. I'm not running away and I'm trying very hard not to be confrontational. I'm just trying to understand your view. I guess I'm coming from the old freedom of speech, constitutional rights, and the idea that the justice and the actions of the justice department should be applied independent of political affiliation. Are you telling me you believe the opposite? Are you telling me that there should be a two tiered justice system, one for populist nationalistic candidates and one for establishment globalist candidates. I guess this is tough as well since Carter Page as an academic sought peace and commerce with Russia which he believed was in the interest of both countries. And he sought to understand and help other Americans understand the Russian perspective. He totally disagreed with Ted Cruz or even Mitt Romney on Russian foreign policy. And I do think he influenced Trump to muse, "Wouldn't it be great for both countries if Russia and the US got along and worked together."

Maybe if we could just try to stick to the excerpt you copied and that I reread. Is there anything Page said there that you believe to be a lie or even embellishment? Or are you just saying, he supported a nationalistic America first and economic nationalist campaign so of course justice was applied differently.

And I apologize for my ignorance on this. But could you give me a specific definition of what exactly Russian collusion is and maybe answer some of the questions I laid out on it in my previous post.

There's a ton of examples. One is that Mitch McConnell is married to a Chinese heir of a big corporate Chinese company and right now stands to inherit a lot of money from that side of his family. If he makes a law that favors this Chinese business is that treason against American business interests or Chinese collusion?

Would you please read Honor’s entire post for comprehension before responding to it? This skimming down and picking out a sentence at the end of a post thing you do leads to you responding in nonsensical ways because you don’t even have the context right. “F”. He makes a good faith effort and a quality post, and you just skim it and then respond to something you made up in your nugget. Disrespectful.

- Doc

[Res Ipsa]

All right I'm trying to collect my thoughts. I'm not running away and I'm trying very hard not to be confrontational. I'm just trying to understand your view. I guess I'm coming from the old freedom of speech, constitutional rights, and the idea that the justice and the actions of the justice department should be applied independent of political affiliation. Are you telling me you believe the opposite? Are you telling me that there should be a two tiered justice system, one for populist nationalistic candidates and one for establishment globalist candidates. I guess this is tough as well since Carter Page as an academic sought peace and commerce with Russia which he believed was in the interest of both countries. And he sought to understand and help other Americans understand the Russian perspective. He totally disagreed with Ted Cruz or even Mitt Romney on Russian foreign policy. And I do think he influenced Trump to muse, "Wouldn't it be great for both countries if Russia and the US got along and worked together."

Maybe if we could just try to stick to the excerpt you copied and that I reread. Is there anything Page said there that you believe to be a lie or even embellishment? Or are you just saying, he supported a nationalistic America first and economic nationalist campaign so of course justice was applied differently.

And I apologize for my ignorance on this. But could you give me a specific definition of what exactly Russian collusion is and maybe answer some of the questions I laid out on it in my previous post.

There's a ton of examples. One is that Mitch McConnell is married to a Chinese heir of a big corporate Chinese company and right now stands to inherit a lot of money from that side of his family. If he makes a law that favors this Chinese business is that treason against American business interests or Chinese collusion?

Would you please read Honor’s entire post for comprehension before responding to it? This skimming down and picking out a sentence at the end of a post thing you do leads to you responding in nonsensical ways because you don’t even have the context right. “F”. He makes a good faith effort and a quality post, and you just skim it and then respond to something you made up in your nugget. Disrespectful.

- Doc

I’ve got to second that. Ajax, there is no way that you could have read and understood Honor’s post and then claimed that he was proposing a two-tiered Justice system. If you actually want to carry on a substantive dialogue, you’ve got to put aside your deep-seated personal grievances and focus on an issue. Nobody is interested in playing squirrel.

[Gadianton]

I think I misunderstood you, Ajax. I thought your complaint was that the justice system prosecuted crimes in a way discriminatory toward Republicans; similar to how liberals say blacks are disproportionately targeted by the police.

Your response suggests that no high-ranking republicans have ever committed a crime --- it's not that the justice system goes harder on them, it entirely fabricates crimes that it knows Republican leaders haven't committed in order to terrorize, while at the same time allowing Democrats to commit as much crime as they desire and look the other way. I'm sure honerentheos will be rewarded greatly by reading that book and discussing it with you.

[Res Ipsa]

I think I misunderstood you, Ajax. I thought your complaint was that the justice system prosecuted crimes in a way discriminatory toward Republicans; similar to how liberals say blacks are disproportionately targeted by the police.

Your response suggests that no high-ranking republicans have ever committed a crime --- it's not that the justice system goes harder on them, it entirely fabricates crimes that it knows Republican leaders haven't committed in order to terrorize, while at the same time allowing Democrats to commit as much crime as they desire and look the other way. I'm sure honerentheos will be rewarded greatly by reading that book and discussing it with you.

He doesn’t go quite that far — he at least questions Mitch McConnell’s wife’s family business connections. Although I don’t think he’s mentioned that promised factory in Kentucky that was never built.

But your description is close…

[ajax18]

Ok, I'm just going to have to type this out as Carter dictates it. This part is phenomenal. It explains why Carter chose to go pro se

Just like most people who think through the economics of a do it yourself home improvement project the calculus of personally hiring a big team of lawyers didn't seem to add up. Contributing millions of dollars toward and insider law firm didn't seem very attractive either, especially when I knew that I was falsely accused and had done nothing wrong in the first place. I had already learned the hard way that if lawyers dared to speak the complete truth about how corrupt the entire system had become, it would denigrate their whole clubby profession. As a branding exercise and after investing countless dollars in many years of legal training all legal practitioners could risk losing their profession if the word got out. Plus the swamp lawyers in Washington D.C. had the most to lose by uncovering the dirty game that was at play. When so many of the fundamental rules of the game are built upon deception is it worth jeopardizing a job that pays up to $1000/hr. or even more in the private sector to break this professional code of silence? Would it be worth clashing with another lawyer at DOJ if in the future he worked at a friendly lawfirm where you might work together and be reunited as friendly partners. For most, the answer is a resounding, No! In adversarial system of justice, the practitioners are trained to directly focus their attention on the precise target in their crosshairs. Targeting the entire tainted system by fully exposing the corrupt inner workings of this monolithic enterprise would be a bridge to far and would involve undue risks to the professional ambitions of the lawyers I hired on my cases. I worried that some would bill me for millions of dollars while mailing in my cases so as to maintain credibility in their elite law professional circles. Given all that I had learned about the manipulation of the law, I knew that I couldn't trust most of them. The shady scheme that I had come to learn about the hard way seemed like a challenge that only an outsider effectively a legal vigilante might take on. The fact that many of our laws had already become empty shells was perfectly clear to me in April 2017. Until then, I had clung to the hope that this legal hell was the product of some grave misunderstanding rather than an essentially corrupt system. Nobody could now question the illegality of the FBI secretly surveilling myself and members of the Trump campaign team via FISA warrants. They illegally leaked the existence of these applications to smear me and by implication the Trump administration. As the months went on, it grew increasingly clear to me long before others could see it that fundamental legal frameworks had been broken by the intelligence community in certain by certain political actors. Some members of congress were beginning to at least waken up and start making calls for more information. The fact that lawmakers were beginning to take initial action encouraged me to move forward despite the fact that their calls often went unanswered. By April 2017 I had already realized that I would need to undertake the Herculean labor of getting myself out of the legal morass I was in by myself. I quickly got the sense that there were very few lawyers I could trust with my case. They might take my money but would they really fight on my behalf when most of the world stood against me? I had never been trained as a lawyer. I had limited background in the law beside working alongside attorneys in the military and my work in the private sector.

[Gadianton]

Sorry Res, you are correct. I should have said Republicans - the RINOs (anyone not loyal to Donald Trump) like McConnell. Or Michael Cohen.

Ajax probably will not read "Revenge: How Donald Trump weaponized the US Department of Justice against his critics".

[Doctor CamNC4Me]

So, when the Russians said Carter was an idiot, they weren’t wrong? Huh.

- Doc

[ajax18]

Ajax, you might start with learning about campaign finance laws are and why they exist.

So you can't tell me whether or not it's illegal for a foreigner to contribute money to an American political campaign? It's an honest question because I don't know. An even more interesting question to m is why is that such a difficult question that requires me to learn about campaign finance laws and why they exist?

Then it would help if you stop talking about “Russian Collusion.” It’s not a significant legal term — it’s a propaganda term favored by Trump.

So you can't tell me what Russian collusion is either, then? Were Republicans the only ones using the term during Mueller investigation? Are you saying you never heard it on CNN? What did Schumer mean when he proclaimed that Trump colluded with Russia to win the 2020 election?

The relevant legal term is “conspiracy” and it relates to agreements to violate laws.

I'm starting to wonder if any of these words even have any meaning. Conspiracy means to breathe together. What is a conspiracy, and why does that take an 8 volume philosophical treatise to answer? What exactly was the conspiracy between Donald Trump and Russia and how exactly did Russia help Trump win the 2020 election? Was it Russian trolls posting right wing talking points on Twitter? Is your contention that Julian Assange was helped by the Trump administration to release Clinton emails, but Mueller never could quite prove it?

Finally, if you want to see an actual political abuse of a special prosecutor’s office, read up on the investigation of the Clinton campaign and Bill Barr flying around the world in a desperate effort to find some evidence that the Clinton campaign and Ukrainians had somehow hoodwinked the world into believing that Russia was interfering with the 2016 election.

I'm trying to focus on Carter Page. If your point is that George Bush or Bill Barr committed similar abuses of power, your point is well received and I'll take your word for it. GWB is a part of the deep state as far as I'm concerned. But in the interests of time I really would appreciate if you read some of the Carter's book and tell me where you think he's lying in as concise a manner as possible. You're right that I'm a little ball of outrage after reading this book. So tell me exactly why Carter Page's story is just a right wing fabrication out of whole cloth with no basis in fact and how Comey and the Obama justice department were actually acting in a nonpartisan political manner. Or if you think they should have been acting in a partisan manner because it was Trump, that's ok to. I'm just trying to understand your ethical/legal position on this.

[Gadianton]

So, when the Russians said Carter was an idiot, they weren’t wrong? Huh.

- Doc

Well, Ajax picked one hell of a section of text to sell Page's book. What a laugh fest. First of all, Ajax must be mesmerized because Page writes with all the hyperbolic conspiratorial lunacy that Ajax himself does. The swamp is corrupt and he can't trust the lawyers to represent him, the whole system is a sham and there's no chance a lying lawyer would help him blah blah blah. Jesus, Ajax. You can hear Ajax's inner voice as he's transcribing, "wait until the guys at Mormon Discussions hear how Page blasts the swamp!"

let's put it into perspective. We're talking about Page testifying in front of the House or something, right? Not a criminal trial. If Page is ever standing in front of a judge for a crime, he will have a lawyer representing him despite all of his hot air.

It looks like he sued the FBI and Department of Justice for 75 million and case thrown out. Well, he believed in the system enough to file the lawsuit, right? But more to the point, he had a lawyer representing him. After that, it looks like he went back into representing himself in frivolous suits; when he'd lost his best chance. But that one big chance he had, when there was something material on the line, he hired the lawyer. lol.