Flynn in major trouble for speaking to Russia about sanctions

[DMC]

Of course the facts you omitted are material and they were the basis for the government moving to dismiss.

Explain how a crime can be committed during an interview for an investigation that was no longer justifiably predicated.

Jocelyn Ballantine was never removed and actually signed the petition supporting the case be dropped.

Do you omit all of this stuff purposely?

As long as you've been posting here you seriously have to ask that question as bipolar as this form is?

[DMC]

what illegal decision? are you referring to Flynn's decision to lie to investigators?

talk to text... meant "a legal"

[spurraider21]

talk to text... meant "a legal"
oh. i think its clear the legal decision by the appellate court is absolutely counter to "my narrative." but that had less to do with the merits and facts of the flynn case, and more of a procedural question. i didnt think a writ was warranted because the judge had not even made a ruling yet and nothing would prevent the parties from appealing an eventual, hypothetically adverse, ruling.

so i mean, i disagree with the court's conclusion there, but its not really related to the facts i was discussing

[DMC]

oh. i think its clear the legal decision by the appellate court is absolutely counter to "my narrative." but that had less to do with the merits and facts of the flynn case, and more of a procedural question. i didnt think a writ was warranted because the judge had not even made a ruling yet and nothing would prevent the parties from appealing an eventual, hypothetically adverse, ruling.

so i mean, i disagree with the court's conclusion there, but its not really related to the facts i was discussing

Perhaps but the judge was playing politics by dragging the case out further than the Department of Justice wanted to. There's absolutely no reason for the judge to do that other than political activism. Maybe he had a legal right to do it but doing it capriciously like that most likely raised some eyebrows at a higher level.

They should become lawmakers if they want to change the law. Even if what he did was within the confines of the law he still has some discretion and I think it's pretty obvious what was happening. It's also interesting how the opinions on this issue seem cleanly divided down the red and blue Isles. If that's not political I don't know what is.

[spurraider21]

Perhaps but the judge was playing politics by dragging the case out further than the Department of Justice wanted to. There's absolutely no reason for the judge to do that other than political activism. Maybe he had a legal right to do it but doing it capriciously like that most likely raised some eyebrows at a higher level.

They should become lawmakers if they want to change the law. Even if what he did was within the confines of the law he still has some discretion and I think it's pretty obvious what was happening. It's also interesting how the opinions on this issue seem cleanly divided down the red and blue Isles. If that's not political I don't know what is.
that may all be true, but every appellate court ruling sets mandatory precedent... so if it is understood that the judge had an actual legal right to do it, its improper to shut it down just because they think politics are in play.

there was no guarantee that the judge was going to deny the motion, and if he did, i'd have no issue with them appealing it, and based on today's ruling, there's a fairly certain chance they would have won on appeal if it came to it. it just seems really wonky procedurally to rule this way on the writ because it requires a showing of irreparable harm, and the court found that it wasn't even Flynn with the irreparable harm, but the government, because evidently having them discuss their decision making to drop the charges is irreparable harm

[DMC]

that may all be true, but every appellate court ruling sets mandatory precedent... so if it is understood that the judge had an actual legal right to do it, its improper to shut it down just because they think politics are in play.

But did they have a legal right to shut it down?


there was no guarantee that the judge was going to deny the motion, and if he did, i'd have no issue with them appealing it, and based on today's ruling, there's a fairly certain chance they would have won on appeal if it came to it. it just seems really wonky procedurally to rule this way on the writ because it requires a showing of irreparable harm, and the court found that it wasn't even Flynn with the irreparable harm, but the government, because evidently having them discuss their decision making to drop the charges is irreparable harm
Perhaps because separation of powers. It's their charges, they filed them, they should be able to drop them.

[spurraider21]

But did they have a legal right to shut it down?
does the appellate court have the legal authority to order the district court to dismiss a case? yes if a writ of mandate is granted


Perhaps because separation of powers. It's their charges, they filed them, they should be able to drop them.
this is generally true, and even sullivan's brief acknowledged that there is a presumption of normalcy when it comes to the government's decision making that would have to be overcome to justify a denial of the motion to dismiss. its particularly noteworthy that at the time of this ruling, sullivan had not denied the motion

but the statue for dismissal sought by the prosecution still requires leave of court (aka permission) and isn't inherently automatic. the appellate court didnt very clearly define what they thought the boundaries of that were, but they found that the facts of this case did not fall under it. they appeared to somewhat limit the leave of court requirement to situations where there is prosecutorial abuse and the defendant is not in favor of the dismissal (ie they are concerned the case is going to be dismissed and refiled just to fuck with him). and thats a reasonable policy position, i just dont know that there was any specific authority, either case law or statute, that had previously expressed such limitation

[TSA]

As long as you've been posting here you seriously have to ask that question as bipolar as this form is?

Yes, and only to watch him avoid addressing it like he's doing now.

[TSA]

It's really not complicated, the DOJ always had access to the same evidence and concluded it was material not 6 months ago. This evidence might be 'new' to the judge and/or defense, but it wasn't to the DOJ.

There was clearly a convenient change of opinion/hearth at the DOJ here, nothing else. It's undeniably weird considering this case was already won.

The DOJ claims the evidence was newly discovered right here in the link you provided :lol

"In its motion, the government explains that in light of newly discovered evidence of misconduct by the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the prosecution can no longer prove beyond a reasonable doubt that any false statements made by Flynn were material to a legitimate investigation—an element the government contends is necessary under Section 1001. See United States v. Gaudin, 515 U.S. 506, 509 (1995)."

https://www.politico.com/f/?id=00000172-e6bc-dfa8-abfb-efff27b20001

[boutons_deux]

Giuliani No Longer Worst Lawyer in Country

https://media.newyorker.com/photos/5ef4e1b6e4c2fbaa9b04d59e/master/w_2560%2Cc_limit/Boro-BillBarr.jpg

WASHINGTON —In an unexpected turn of events for the former New York mayor, a poll of legal experts has determined that Rudolph Giuliani is no longer the worst lawyer in America.

Giuliani’s dethronement from the worst-lawyer championship was all the more shocking because

his claim to that title had remained unchallenged for so long.

“Giuliani had faced worthy competition from the likes of Michael D. Cohen and Michael Avenatti and dispatched them with ease,” Logsdon said.

“But this new challenger left Rudy in the dust.”

The new titleholder as the nation’s worst lawyer, who won in a nearly unanimous vote, is so egregious that he may cause some legal experts to reassess Giuliani’s career as an attorney.

“Compared to our country’s new worst lawyer,

Rudy demonstrated the utmost respect for the Constitution and the rule of law,”

Giuliani took the news of his ouster philosophically.

“I had a good run,” he said.

https://www.newyorker.com/humor/borowitz-report/giuliani-no-longer-worst-lawyer-in-country (https://www.newyorker.com/humor/borowitz-report/giuliani-no-longer-worst-lawyer-in-country)

[ElNono]

The DOJ claims the evidence was newly discovered right here in the link you provided :lol

"In its motion, the government explains that in light of newly discovered evidence of misconduct by the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the prosecution can no longer prove beyond a reasonable doubt that any false statements made by Flynn were material to a legitimate investigation—an element the government contends is necessary under Section 1001. See United States v. Gaudin, 515 U.S. 506, 509 (1995)."

https://www.politico.com/f/?id=00000172-e6bc-dfa8-abfb-efff27b20001

It certainly didn't seem to be new to the DOJ, to the point that the DOJ's own prosecutor had to convince the court previously that the investigation was material (something the Flynn defense had challenged), and I believe as recently as last January of this year, the court concluded that the prosecution was correct in it's assesment. It only became an issue once Barr enlisted a third party to second-guess his own lead prosecutor in the case. There is a problem with the government itself making the claim because they're the one suspect, which is what the Judge had an issue with (and thus the request for an amicus). That case went on for years, only for the DOJ to suddenly turn around and shit on their own prosecutors, which is extremely rare, especially at this juncture. Again, the case was already won, we were on the sentencing phase here. Flynn certainly had a chance to re-try the case on appeals, including removing his guilty plea, challenging any Brady materials, etc.

I also still don't know what happened with the lying to the DOJ re:Turkey charges. I believe (I could be wrong) they were included in his plea deal, and had nothing to do with the FBI investigation, at least that's what the Sullivan filing implied. I suppose the DOJ felt they suddenly couldn't prove that either?

Like I said a few pages back, you never know how the district court will rule, but I also find it interesting they thought there would be harm to the executive in this case. I would've thought they would rule for harm to Flynn in having to continue the defend himself, but without an actual ruling on the motion from the lower court, I don't believe there's a precedent for granting the writ in those circumstances (IIRC, the dissenting judge said the same), and the precedent that sets.

Ultimately, my concern isn't with this case particularly. I felt that Flynn was going to be pardoned regardless, and for all the claims of "FBI corruption", nobody from the FBI was actually indicted of such behavior, so that's a very flimsy claim by itself.

My concern is the precedent this sets when a corrupt DOJ official (regardless of the party) moves to dismiss a case they already won based on flimsy excuses. But I suppose, as sr21, that might not be the role of the judiciary, and should be the role of impeachment proceedings instead.

[spurraider21]

yeah, i'm not certain that sullivan would have been in the right to deny the motion to dismiss. it's somewhat alarming to me that the notion of the government having to explain its decision is tantamount to "irreparable harm" and the general precedent that you can "appeal" from a ruling that hasnt even been made

[ElNono]

The other problem I see too, is that now Rule 48(a) is not any more clear than it was. I would argue that it's even more difficult to interpret. I get the feeling that, at some point, the SCOTUS will need to get involved in clarifying that (not particularly for this case).

[DMC]

does the appellate court have the legal authority to order the district court to dismiss a case? yes if a writ of mandate is granted

That's the defense you used for Sullivan - that it was within his legal authority. Proper or improper is up to opinion.



this is generally true, and even sullivan's brief acknowledged that there is a presumption of normalcy when it comes to the government's decision making that would have to be overcome to justify a denial of the motion to dismiss. its particularly noteworthy that at the time of this ruling, sullivan had not denied the motion

but the statue for dismissal sought by the prosecution still requires leave of court (aka permission) and isn't inherently automatic. the appellate court didnt very clearly define what they thought the boundaries of that were, but they found that the facts of this case did not fall under it. they appeared to somewhat limit the leave of court requirement to situations where there is prosecutorial abuse and the defendant is not in favor of the dismissal (ie they are concerned the case is going to be dismissed and refiled just to fuck with him). and thats a reasonable policy position, i just dont know that there was any specific authority, either case law or statute, that had previously expressed such limitation

Sullivan hadn't denied the motion, he was dragging it out for theater and yes to not only fuck with Flynn, but to fuck with the DOJ, with Barr and mostly with Trump.

[DMC]

yeah, i'm not certain that sullivan would have been in the right to deny the motion to dismiss. it's somewhat alarming to me that the notion of the government having to explain its decision is tantamount to "irreparable harm" and the general precedent that you can "appeal" from a ruling that hasnt even been made

Any time there's a high profile case, there seems to be a big risk that a judge will try to show his ass. We've seen it many times.

[DMC]

It certainly didn't seem to be new to the DOJ, to the point that the DOJ's own prosecutor had to convince the court previously that the investigation was material (something the Flynn defense had challenged), and I believe as recently as last January of this year, the court concluded that the prosecution was correct in it's assesment. It only became an issue once Barr enlisted a third party to second-guess his own lead prosecutor in the case. There is a problem with the government itself making the claim because they're the one suspect, which is what the Judge had an issue with (and thus the request for an amicus). That case went on for years, only for the DOJ to suddenly turn around and shit on their own prosecutors, which is extremely rare, especially at this juncture. Again, the case was already won, we were on the sentencing phase here. Flynn certainly had a chance to re-try the case on appeals, including removing his guilty plea, challenging any Brady materials, etc.

I also still don't know what happened with the lying to the DOJ re:Turkey charges. I believe (I could be wrong) they were included in his plea deal, and had nothing to do with the FBI investigation, at least that's what the Sullivan filing implied. I suppose the DOJ felt they suddenly couldn't prove that either?

Like I said a few pages back, you never know how the district court will rule, but I also find it interesting they thought there would be harm to the executive in this case. I would've thought they would rule for harm to Flynn in having to continue the defend himself, but without an actual ruling on the motion from the lower court, I don't believe there's a precedent for granting the writ in those circumstances (IIRC, the dissenting judge said the same), and the precedent that sets.

Ultimately, my concern isn't with this case particularly. I felt that Flynn was going to be pardoned regardless, and for all the claims of "FBI corruption", nobody from the FBI was actually indicted of such behavior, so that's a very flimsy claim by itself.

My concern is the precedent this sets when a corrupt DOJ official (regardless of the party) moves to dismiss a case they already won based on flimsy excuses. But I suppose, as sr21, that might not be the role of the judiciary, and should be the role of impeachment proceedings instead.

You rarely, if ever, see people at that level go to prison for anything. There are too many powerful people tied to him who he has dirt on.

[ElNono]

Sullivan hadn't denied the motion, he was dragging it out for theater and yes to not only fuck with Flynn, but to fuck with the DOJ, with Barr and mostly with Trump.

It should be noted that Sullivan was actually skeptical from the get go about the charges against Flynn... he also ruled in favor of Trump on a separate case in Feb 2020... so the notion he disliked Trump doesn't really jive with his actions.

[ElNono]

You rarely, if ever, see people at that level go to prison for anything. There are too many powerful people tied to him who he has dirt on.

Even if I largely agree with that sentiment, setting a legal precedent for corruption to escape unscathed by the judiciary is certainly never good news.

I mean, I get that guys like TSA or Chris only care because it's their administration that got away with it, but I'm 100% sure they'll flip their tune as soon as it's team blue doing it.

That's the kind of shortsightedness that's really stupid, IMO, but that's what you get in partisan politics.

[DMC]

Even if I largely agree with that sentiment, setting a legal precedent for corruption to escape unscathed by the judiciary is certainly never good news.

:lol Anyone who was surprised at that must reset their life experience daily.


I mean, I get that guys like TSA or Chris only care because it's their administration that got away with it, but I'm 100% sure they'll flip their tune as soon as it's team blue doing it.

"In a highly unusual public statement Tuesday morning, FBI director James Comey said Hillary Clinton and her aides may have violated the law in using a private email server when she was Secretary of State, but that their actions didn’t warrant criminal charges. In its year-long investigation of how government secrets got onto the server, Comey said, the FBI found “evidence of potential violations of the statutes regarding the handling of classified information,” but he said, “we are expressing to [the] Justice [department] our view that no charges are appropriate in this case.” " -Time magazine

Why do you act like this is a new thing?

That's the kind of shortsightedness that's really stupid, IMO, but that's what you get in partisan politics.
Sides take turns being offended over it, then accepting it, then offended again. Every iteration the rules get bent or broken, every iteration half the country is fine with it.

[ElNono]

:lol Anyone who was surprised at that must reset their life experience daily.

"In a highly unusual public statement Tuesday morning, FBI director James Comey said Hillary Clinton and her aides may have violated the law in using a private email server when she was Secretary of State, but that their actions didn’t warrant criminal charges. In its year-long investigation of how government secrets got onto the server, Comey said, the FBI found “evidence of potential violations of the statutes regarding the handling of classified information,” but he said, “we are expressing to [the] Justice [department] our view that no charges are appropriate in this case.” " -Time magazine

Why do you act like this is a new thing?
Sides take turns being offended over it, then accepting it, then offended again. Every iteration the rules get bent or broken, every iteration half the country is fine with it.

Neither the FBI, nor the DOJ are precedent-setting courts of law, which is why this is different from what you quoted. Considering stare decisis is an overly important part of judicial decisions, precedents like these are very difficult to undo (except for a law passing or the SCOTUS clarifying).

[DMC]

Neither the FBI, nor the DOJ are precedent-setting courts of law, which is why this is different from what you quoted. Considering stare decisis is an overly important part of judicial decisions, precedents like these are very difficult to undo (except for a law passing or the SCOTUS clarifying).

It's just another branch doing what it can to further their political agendas. The DOJ and the FBI are not supposed to be trick fucking the law to excuse the wealthy and elite, but they do. The judicial system isn't on a pedestal, there have been activist judges for a long time.

https://law.vanderbilt.edu/news/a-summary-of-why-we-need-more-judicial-activism/

Either the judiciary only interprets the law or they seek to create the world they personally envision. Sounds bifurcated but you cannot do both at the same time. You cannot seek to create your vision through interpretation of the law that is based on precedence. It would have to be based on your vision. Activist judges have political viewpoints and they more and more try to legislate from the bench. More and more I see scenarios where "I can do this, so I should do this" comes into play, in all branches.

[Spurtacular]

It should be noted that Sullivan was actually skeptical from the get go about the charges against Flynn... he also ruled in favor of Trump on a separate case in Feb 2020... so the notion he disliked Trump doesn't really jive with his actions.

:cry He (supposedly) gave Trump a favorable ruling; he can't be against him. :cry

Dude, not accepting a prosecutor's decision to drop charges is unheard of.
Then again, lawyers being beholden to client cofidentiality suddenly wasn't a thing with Cohen.
Deep State just making up new rules as they go.

[DMC]

It should be noted that Sullivan was actually skeptical from the get go about the charges against Flynn... he also ruled in favor of Trump on a separate case in Feb 2020... so the notion he disliked Trump doesn't really jive with his actions.

Non sequitur. He can rule in someone's favor and still dislike them but I never said he disliked either of these people. I said he wanted to fuck with them, to create a rain delay.

[ElNono]

It's just another branch doing what it can to further their political agendas. The DOJ and the FBI are not supposed to be trick fucking the law to excuse the wealthy and elite, but they do. The judicial system isn't on a pedestal, there have been activist judges for a long time.

https://law.vanderbilt.edu/news/a-summary-of-why-we-need-more-judicial-activism/

Either the judiciary only interprets the law or they seek to create the world they personally envision. Sounds bifurcated but you cannot do both at the same time. You cannot seek to create your vision through interpretation of the law that is based on precedence. It would have to be based on your vision. Activist judges have political viewpoints and they more and more try to legislate from the bench. More and more I see scenarios where "I can do this, so I should do this" comes into play, in all branches.

Judicial activism is both generally rare and short lived, mostly due precisely to things like stare decisis. I can see how in States where judges are appointed through elections there's more politicization than states where they aren't, but that's neither here or there.

To levy a criticism that Judge Sullivan was doing anything but interpret the law you would have to point to something that was illegal in his procedure, but you haven't. Not even the writ order from the circuit court makes that allegation.

And obviously, you have Congress not always being completely clear on legislation and lawyers trying to interpret the laws in different ways, and so there are disagreements all the time between instances, which is why it's good the justice system has a multi-tiered appeal system.

[ElNono]

:cry He (supposedly) gave Trump a favorable ruling; he can't be against him. :cry

That's the allegation DMC made. I was merely pointing out that if the Judge wanted to be anti-trump, he had plenty of opportunities to be, but did not.



Dude, not accepting a prosecutor's decision to drop charges is unheard of.
Then again, lawyers being beholden to client cofidentiality suddenly wasn't a thing with Cohen.
Deep State just making up new rules as they go.

It's not unheard of, there's actually case law, which was listed in all the motions to the circuit court you didn't read. Your ignorance is not an excuse.

[ElNono]

Non sequitur. He can rule in someone's favor and still dislike them but I never said he disliked either of these people. I said he wanted to fuck with them, to create a rain delay.

What's a rain delay in judicial terms? He knew the government would ultimately appeal the decision if he ruled to deny the motion, so the steps here were fairly clear.

[angrydude]

That's the allegation DMC made. I was merely pointing out that if the Judge wanted to be anti-trump, he had plenty of opportunities to be, but did not.



It's not unheard of, there's actually case law, which was listed in all the motions to the circuit court you didn't read. Your ignorance is not an excuse.

There's also precedent for prosecutors who withhold exculpatory evidence to be disbarred, but I don't see you championing for that to happen here.

[ElNono]

There's also precedent for prosecutors who withhold exculpatory evidence to be disbarred, but I don't see you championing for that to happen here.

Why would I? The DOJ itself didn't even fire the prosecutor in this case, much less seeking any legal remedies. That's precisely what's really weird with this move.

[Spurtacular]

It's not unheard of, there's actually case law, which was listed in all the motions to the circuit court you didn't read. Your ignorance is not an excuse.

It was ass clownery either way.

Let's not do it cos :cry someone give me reasons :cry

:lol

[ElNono]

It was ass clownery either way.

Let's not do it cos :cry someone give me reasons :cry

:lol

So you really didn't read it, and still made the claim. No amount of emoticons is going to deflect from that fact.

[Spurtacular]

So you really didn't read it, and still made the claim. No amount of emoticons is going to deflect from that fact.

I haven't read anything new today. This is an old story. Judge was a total douche bag. FBI were douche bags. That's who you're sperm shielding for.

[ChumpDumper]

I haven't read anything:tu

[Spurtacular]

Cherp with more nothing w's.

[TSA]

It certainly didn't seem to be new to the DOJ, to the point that the DOJ's own prosecutor had to convince the court previously that the investigation was material (something the Flynn defense had challenged), and I believe as recently as last January of this year, the court concluded that the prosecution was correct in it's assesment. It only became an issue once Barr enlisted a third party to second-guess his own lead prosecutor in the case. There is a problem with the government itself making the claim because they're the one suspect, which is what the Judge had an issue with (and thus the request for an amicus). That case went on for years, only for the DOJ to suddenly turn around and shit on their own prosecutors, which is extremely rare, especially at this juncture. Again, the case was already won, we were on the sentencing phase here. Flynn certainly had a chance to re-try the case on appeals, including removing his guilty plea, challenging any Brady materials, etc.

I also still don't know what happened with the lying to the DOJ re:Turkey charges. I believe (I could be wrong) they were included in his plea deal, and had nothing to do with the FBI investigation, at least that's what the Sullivan filing implied. I suppose the DOJ felt they suddenly couldn't prove that either?

Like I said a few pages back, you never know how the district court will rule, but I also find it interesting they thought there would be harm to the executive in this case. I would've thought they would rule for harm to Flynn in having to continue the defend himself, but without an actual ruling on the motion from the lower court, I don't believe there's a precedent for granting the writ in those circumstances (IIRC, the dissenting judge said the same), and the precedent that sets.

Ultimately, my concern isn't with this case particularly. I felt that Flynn was going to be pardoned regardless, and for all the claims of "FBI corruption", nobody from the FBI was actually indicted of such behavior, so that's a very flimsy claim by itself.

My concern is the precedent this sets when a corrupt DOJ official (regardless of the party) moves to dismiss a case they already won based on flimsy excuses. But I suppose, as sr21, that might not be the role of the judiciary, and should be the role of impeachment proceedings instead.

It was new evidence uncovered by Jensen. The lead prosecutor was sitting on and hiding evidence from Flynn and the court. Not sure why this is so hard for you to grasp.

[ElNono]

It was new evidence uncovered by Jensen. The lead prosecutor was sitting on and hiding evidence from Flynn and the court. Not sure why this is so hard for you to grasp.

Which is exactly what I said, after all, the lead prosecutor was working for the DOJ, was he not? And Jensen was the third party hired by Barr specifically to undermine that same lead prosecutor (who won the case, BTW).

Was this lead prosecutor fired? reprimanded? Oh wait, no, 9 days ago the DOJ sent a court filing defending him (https://www.politico.com/news/2020/06/17/michael-flynn-prosecutors-justice-department-326240) and unequivocally stating there was no wrongdoing.

[TSA]

Which is exactly what I said, after all, the lead prosecutor was working for the DOJ, was he not? And Jensen was the third party hired by Barr specifically to undermine that same lead prosecutor (who won the case, BTW).

Was this lead prosecutor fired? reprimanded? Oh wait, no, 9 days ago the DOJ sent a court filing defending him (https://www.politico.com/news/2020/06/17/michael-flynn-prosecutors-justice-department-326240) and unequivocally stating there was no wrongdoing.No, it's not exactly what you said.


It's really not complicated, the DOJ always had access to the same evidence and concluded it was material not 6 months ago. This evidence might be 'new' to the judge and/or defense, but it wasn't to the DOJ.

There was clearly a convenient change of opinion/hearth at the DOJ here, nothing else. It's undeniably weird considering this case was already won.

And no, they didn't unequivocally state there was no wrong doing.

"While the Justice Department submission indicates that the Flynn legal team’s numerous accusations of misconduct against Van Grack and other prosecutors are unwarranted, the filing gives no similar pass to the FBI. Indeed, the government’s brief is replete with suggestions of impropriety on the part of various senior FBI officials and agents." https://www.politico.com/news/2020/06/17/michael-flynn-prosecutors-justice-department-326240

[ElNono]

No, it's not exactly what you said.

Yes it is. I said this evidence was apparently not new to the DOJ. You just said the DOJ prosecutor was sitting on it. So yeah, it's exactly what I said.


And no, they didn't unequivocally state there was no wrong doing.

"While the Justice Department submission indicates that the Flynn legal team’s numerous accusations of misconduct against Van Grack and other prosecutors are unwarranted, the filing gives no similar pass to the FBI. Indeed, the government’s brief is replete with suggestions of impropriety on the part of various senior FBI officials and agents." https://www.politico.com/news/2020/06/17/michael-flynn-prosecutors-justice-department-326240

From the prosecutors? What do you think the bolded says?. You accused the DOJ lead prosecutor of wrongdoing, yet the DOJ doesn't agree with you. The DOJ 'suggestions of impropriety' from the FBI simply ring hollow considering they took no action whatsoever against those FBI officials and agents, which is why it's a flimsy excuse.

[TSA]

Yes it is. I said this evidence was apparently not new to the DOJ. You just said the DOJ prosecutor was sitting on it. So yeah, it's exactly what I said.You keep repeating the evidence was not new and you keep getting it wrong.

"In its motion, the government explains that in light of newly discovered evidence of misconduct by the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the prosecution can no longer prove beyond a reasonable doubt that any false statements made by Flynn were material to a legitimate investigation—an element the government contends is necessary under Section 1001. See United States v. Gaudin, 515 U.S. 506, 509 (1995)."




From the prosecutors? What do you think the bolded says?. You accused the DOJ lead prosecutor of wrongdoing, yet the DOJ doesn't agree with you. The DOJ 'suggestions of impropriety' from the FBI simply ring hollow considering they took no action whatsoever against those FBI officials and agents, which is why it's a flimsy excuse.

I didn’t just accuse the lead prosecutor of wrongdoing I showed what wrongdoing took place. Feel free to dig up my posts in this thread on Van Grack lying to the court. And lol at “took no action”...there are multiple investigations being run by multiple US Attorneys into the actions of these FBI officials and agents. And Im sure you were one of the ones saying these investigations take time during the Mueller investigation.

[ElNono]

You keep repeating the evidence was not new and you keep getting it wrong.

"In its motion, the government explains that in light of newly discovered evidence of misconduct by the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the prosecution can no longer prove beyond a reasonable doubt that any false statements made by Flynn were material to a legitimate investigation—an element the government contends is necessary under Section 1001. See United States v. Gaudin, 515 U.S. 506, 509 (1995)."

You keep plastering the same quote I already addressed. See post #50778. You simply cannot claim this is new evidence AND that the lead prosecutor was sitting on it. The lead prosecutor always worked for the DOJ. So pick a lane.


I didn’t just accuse the lead prosecutor of wrongdoing I showed what wrongdoing took place. Feel free to dig up my posts in this thread on Van Grack lying to the court. And lol at “took no action”...there are multiple investigations being run by multiple US Attorneys into the actions of these FBI officials and agents. And Im sure you were one of the ones saying these investigations take time during the Mueller investigation.

So you agree Barr's own DOJ completely shat on any of your arguments about prosecutor wrongdoing with that filing?

And yes lol at took no action. Either you have evidence of wrongdoing and thus the reason to move to dismiss a case, or you do not. If you do, then there's nothing stopping the DOJ from indicting these people. Happened with the Mueller investigation too. As soon as they had evidence on Cohen, Stone, etc they filed the cases and got the bad actors indicted, even if the investigation didn't conclude. Same happened with Flynn.

[spurraider21]

https://thehill.com/policy/national-security/497044-former-doj-official-department-twisted-my-words-in-motion-to-drop

[ElNono]

https://thehill.com/policy/national-security/497044-former-doj-official-department-twisted-my-words-in-motion-to-drop

I think this is what TSA doesn't understand. The issue here is that due to the extraordinary nature of the DOJ move to close the case after it won it already, it's the DOJ that's suspect and cannot be taken at it's word.

[TSA]

You keep plastering the same quote I already addressed. See post #50778. You simply cannot claim this is new evidence AND that the lead prosecutor was sitting on it. The lead prosecutor always worked for the DOJ. So pick a lane.



So you agree Barr's own DOJ completely shat on any of your arguments about prosecutor wrongdoing with that filing?

And yes lol at took no action. Either you have evidence of wrongdoing and thus the reason to move to dismiss a case, or you do not. If you do, then there's nothing stopping the DOJ from indicting these people. Happened with the Mueller investigation too. As soon as they had evidence on Cohen, Stone, etc they filed the cases and got the bad actors indicted, even if the investigation didn't conclude. Same happened with Flynn.

So your claim is the DOJ already had the evidence of FBI misconduct?

[TSA]

I think this is what TSA doesn't understand. The issue here is that due to the extraordinary nature of the DOJ move to close the case after it won it already, it's the DOJ that's suspect and cannot be taken at it's word.

When the DOJ won the case did the DOJ know that the Flynn interview was tied to an FBI investigation that was not legally predicated? yes or no

[TSA]

https://thehill.com/policy/national-security/497044-former-doj-official-department-twisted-my-words-in-motion-to-drop

https://www.redstate.com/shipwreckedcrew/2020/05/11/834832/

:lol McCord

[DMC]

You keep plastering the same quote I already addressed. See post #50778. You simply cannot claim this is new evidence AND that the lead prosecutor was sitting on it. The lead prosecutor always worked for the DOJ. So pick a lane.



So you agree Barr's own DOJ completely shat on any of your arguments about prosecutor wrongdoing with that filing?

And yes lol at took no action. Either you have evidence of wrongdoing and thus the reason to move to dismiss a case, or you do not. If you do, then there's nothing stopping the DOJ from indicting these people. Happened with the Mueller investigation too. As soon as they had evidence on Cohen, Stone, etc they filed the cases and got the bad actors indicted, even if the investigation didn't conclude. Same happened with Flynn.

Technically it wasn't evidence if it wasn't presented to the court. No evidence is new if you use the concept of it existed already.

[ElNono]

So your claim is the DOJ already had the evidence of FBI misconduct?

There's no proven FBI misconduct so far, that's merely an allegation. I do think when they had to prove materiality to the judge, they did have to review that evidence, and the judge (a third party) concluded it was material.


When the DOJ won the case did the DOJ know that the Flynn interview was tied to an FBI investigation that was not legally predicated? yes or no

The DOJ knew it's case throughout. You don't prosecute a case for 2 years and don't know the details of it. According to the same DOJ, this year, it was legally predicated.

So, again, it's the DOJ that suddenly changed tune here, not the judge or the FBI, and the motion wasn't even presented by the lead prosecutor who has been handling the case.

Which is why the move is extraordinary in itself, and the judge correctly interpreted it as something exceptionally fishy.

[ElNono]

Technically it wasn't evidence if it wasn't presented to the court. No evidence is new if you use the concept of it existed already.

We're talking whether the DOJ had that evidence (and was sitting on it, according to TSA) at any point while the case was ongoing. We already established neither the court or the defense had it.

[ElNono]

The problem here is that the lead prosecutor (who the DOJ itself claims did nothing wrong) disagrees with the DOJ as far as the legality of the interview, and thus the motion to dismiss.

See how this is all a DOJ problem?

[TSA]

There's no proven FBI misconduct so far, that's merely an allegation. I do think when they had to prove materiality to the judge, they did have to review that evidence, and the judge (a third party) concluded it was material.



The DOJ knew it's case throughout. You don't prosecute a case for 2 years and don't know the details of it. According to the same DOJ, this year, it was legally predicated.

So, again, it's the DOJ that suddenly changed tune here, not the judge or the FBI, and the motion wasn't even presented by the lead prosecutor who has been handling the case.

Which is why the move is extraordinary in itself, and the judge correctly interpreted it as something exceptionally fishy.

Again, you’re wrong. That evidence wasn’t presented when Sullivan ruled on materiality. And the DOJ did prosecute the case for 2 years and didn’t know the details of it as they admitted in their motion to dismiss.

[ElNono]

Again, you’re wrong. That evidence wasn’t presented when Sullivan ruled on materiality. And the DOJ did prosecute the case for 2 years and didn’t know the details of it as they admitted in their motion to dismiss.

So the lead prosecutor didn't "sit" on it?

[ElNono]

And, again, we certainly cannot take the DOJ at it's word in it's motion to dismiss. That's exactly what's suspect.

[TSA]

The problem here is that the lead prosecutor (who the DOJ itself claims did nothing wrong) disagrees with the DOJ as far as the legality of the interview, and thus the motion to dismiss.

See how this is all a DOJ problem?

And Jocelyn Ballantine who was also a prosecutor on the case signed the petition for writ and supported case being dismissed.

[ElNono]

And Jocelyn Ballantine who was also a prosecutor on the case signed the petition for writ and supported case being dismissed.

And who does Jocelyn works for?

[TSA]

So the lead prosecutor didn't "sit" on it?

Using DOJ for both Van Grack and DOJ after Jensen was assigned is getting confusing.

Van Grack sat on it. DOJ post Jensen admitted the error prosecuting after new evidence was produced.

[ElNono]

Using DOJ for both Van Grack and DOJ after Jensen was assigned is getting confusing.

Van Grack sat on it. DOJ post Jensen admitted the error prosecuting after new evidence was produced.

You can't have both. The same DOJ said now Van Grack did nothing wrong. So he couldn't both sit on it, and then be found post Jensen.

For the nth time, this whole thing is a DOJ leadership changing it's opinion (Van Grack stated he doesn't agree with the motion to dismiss), not the court, or the case, or the defense.

[ElNono]

Also, you want to take the DOJ at their word for the dismissal, but not when it says Van Grack did nothing wrong... again, which is it?

[boutons_deux]

https://www.cdn-liker.com/uploads/large_images/5ef892eca8897.jpg

[boutons_deux]

https://www.cdn-liker.com/uploads/large_images/5ef9f3a783569.jpg

[boutons_deux]

BUSTED:

Trump engaged in 3-week ‘flurry of communication’ with Putin this year – and the White House hid some of the calls

President Donald Trump engaged in an unprecedented – and previously unknown – “flurry of communication” with Russian President Vladimir Putin during a three-week period earlier this year

“On March 30, Russian leader Vladimir Putin and U.S. President Donald Trump spoke by telephone,

the first of five calls between the two over a period of three weeks,

a flurry of communication unprecedented during Trump’s 3 1/2 years in office,”

“For many Russia watchers, the flurry of behind-the-scenes phone calls and other communications is a clear indication that

something’s going on,”

“the two countries’ diplomats have spoken at least three times over that same period, which also coincided with an unusual shipment of Russian coronavirus-related humanitarian aid to the United States.”

The

White House appears to be hiding readouts from calls between President Donald Trump and President Vladimir Putin.

In fact, in a serious deviation,

there are no readouts of any calls between President Trump and any foreign leader that took place this year, posted to the White House’s website for the public to access.

In late September

the Kremlin announced no calls between Trump and Putin could be released to the public without “mutual accord (https://apnews.com/02a730dea5844fd1a834273ba71b3d5f),” another extreme deviation from prior practice.

Notably,

the Kremlin repeatedly has released readouts of calls and other interactions between Trump and Putin or other Russian leaders when

the White House has not, embarrassing the U.S.

https://www.rawstory.com/2020/06/busted-trump-engaged-in-3-week-flurry-of-communication-with-putin-this-year-and-the-white-house-hid-some-of-the-calls/?utm_source=&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=4883&recip_id=298460&list_id=1 (https://www.rawstory.com/2020/06/busted-trump-engaged-in-3-week-flurry-of-communication-with-putin-this-year-and-the-white-house-hid-some-of-the-calls/?utm_source=&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=4883&recip_id=298460&list_id=1)

Is Trash trying to negotiate a "safe haven" in Moscow?

"Some say" Trash my drop out the campaign. Leaving us with .... Penice?

[boutons_deux]

https://www.cdn-liker.com/uploads/large_images/5efa89bd3ca0d.jpg

[boutons_deux]

https://www.cdn-liker.com/uploads/large_images/5efb94f1da091.jpg

[boutons_deux]

https://www.cdn-liker.com/uploads/large_images/5efbe8f2baee3.jpg

[boutons_deux]

Putin Considering Not Running Trump for Reëlection

https://media.newyorker.com/photos/5efe015935257179ff2c32fe/master/w_2560%2Cc_limit/Borowitz-WorriedPutin.jpg


MOSCOW —Faced with “deeply discouraging” 2020 polls, Vladimir Putin is “seriously considering” not running Donald J. Trump for reëlection, according to Kremlin sources.

The Russian President had been holding out hope that Trump could somehow stop his precipitous slide in popularity, but a recent roundup of

polls showing Joe Biden crushing him in several battleground states made Putin realize that “his guy is a lost cause,” one source said.

“Putin has been talking about not running Trump for reëlection for months now, but it looks like he’s finally ready to pull the rip cord,” the source added.

According to Kremlin insiders,

Putin is actively mulling a number of possible Republican replacements for Trump, including

Representative Devin Nunes,

Senator Mitch McConnell, and

Senator Rand Paul,

but he does not relish the idea of making the switch.

“You have to understand,

Putin has spent years training Trump to be so obedient,” the source said.

“It’s going to be hard breaking in a new one.”

https://www.newyorker.com/humor/borowitz-report/putin-considering-not-running-trump-for-reelection (https://www.newyorker.com/humor/borowitz-report/putin-considering-not-running-trump-for-reelection)

[TSA]

Lololol

judge ruled that dems get the

mueller grand jury materials



the cover up is finally unraveling

https://mobile.twitter.com/ChadPergram/status/1278848114183548929

:lol

[boutons_deux]

Trump Throws A Fit Whenever His National Security Briefers Even Mention Russia

Trump can’t even get through his verbal briefings without going off on tangents

– especially if the briefer brings up Russia.

“His intelligence briefers have essentially internalized this notion that

if you bring up Russia around him, he’s just going to explode,”

“He doesn’t want to hear anything about Russia.”

“He doesn’t want to be second guessed about his relationship with Vladimir Putin and

whether or not that may have impacted the 2016 election,”

https://www.politicususa.com/2020/07/02/trump-throws-a-fit-whenever-his-national-security-briefers-even-mention-russia.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+politicususa%2FfJAl+%28Politi cus+USA+%29 (https://www.politicususa.com/2020/07/02/trump-throws-a-fit-whenever-his-national-security-briefers-even-mention-russia.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+politicususa%2FfJAl+%28Politi cus+USA+%29)

[boutons_deux]

This imo The Best Analysis of Trash and His Mafiya Colluding with Pootin

An obvious explanation for Trump’s subservience to Putin is staring us in the face

While special counsel Robert Mueller didn’t find actions that could be charged as criminal conspiracy on Trump’s behalf,

he found extensive collusion with that conspiracy, by both Trump himself and his campaign staff.

Like anything else Trump calls a “hoax,” the Russia collusion story was real — and very damning.

The current scandal about the Russian bounties —

which is in the mix with other scandals, such as Trump’s mishandling of the economic crisis and his non-decision to let the coronavirus wash over the country in a deadly wave and, oh yeah, the white supremacist stuff (https://www.salon.com/2020/07/01/its-going-to-be-a-long-four-months-trump-and-fox-news-just-keep-ramping-up-the-racism/) —

goes right back to Trump’s peculiar affection for Russia and its authoritarian leader, Vladimir Putin.

It isn’t just that Trump loves Putin and won’t hear a bad word about Russia.

It’s that

he has a long history, documented in the Mueller report, of inviting Russia to help him cheat in elections and making it clear that he would use his power to assist Putin’s agenda in return.

analysis of the Mueller report (https://www.justsecurity.org/63838/guide-to-the-mueller-reports-findings-on-collusion/)and found that “it provides significant evidence that

Trump Campaign associates coordinated with, cooperated with, encouraged, or gave support to the Russia/WikiLeaks election interference activities.”


The amount of such activity — some might call it collusion — is dizzying (https://www.salon.com/2019/07/24/muellers-russia-testimony-exposes-the-depth-of-donald-trumps-corruption/).

Trump’s campaign chair, Paul Manafort, shared internal campaign data with a Russian spy.

Deputy campaign manager Rick Gates was in the car with Trump when Trump got a call tipping him off to a WikiLeaks dump,

which we now know involved emails stolen by Russian intelligence.

Donald Trump Jr. and other campaign staffers took a meeting in Trump Tower to discuss what they clearly hoped was a chance to get deeper into the conspiracy.

Behind the scenes, Trump Jr. encouraged the Russian conspiracy and

tried to set up back channels in order to get more involved.

Mueller proved a “quid.” There was a ton of evidence of the “quo.”

There just wasn’t direct evidence of the “pro,” so much as a lot of raised eyebrows and a mutual, if unspoken, understanding.

34 individuals were indicted or convicted or pled guilty to crimes as a result of Mueller’s investigation.

Trump himself clearly committed multiple obstruction of justice crimes in his efforts to cover up the conspiracy, and

it’s somewhere between possible and likely that

his obstruction successfully concealed more evidence of collusion or even outright conspiracy.

Most likely there wasn’t an overt conspiracy because there didn’t have to be.

Trump understood he was getting illegal help from the Russians, and

used his public platform repeatedly to indicate to let Moscow know they would feel his gratitude for their help.

This history suggests that Trump may not be directly conspiring with Putin,

but appears to have an unspoken understanding with the Russian president:

Putin will give Trump campaign help and

Trump will look the other way when Putin takes actions to undermine Western democracy.

“The President has created an environment that

dissuades, if not prohibits, the mentioning of any intelligence that isn’t favorable to Russia,”

he’s intimidated intelligence officials into rarely or never broaching the subject, and

has actively used the powers of his office to aid Putin, such as trying to get Russia back into the G7.

the most obvious one is staring us in the face:

Trump wants Russia to help him cheat in 2020,

just like they helped him cheat in 2016, and

he’s willing to do whatever he can to make sure that happens.

If the price requires the blood of American soldiers, then so be it.

https://www.rawstory.com/2020/07/an-obvious-explanation-for-trumps-subservience-to-putin-is-staring-us-in-the-face/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+TheRawStory+%28The+Raw+Story% 29 (https://www.rawstory.com/2020/07/an-obvious-explanation-for-trumps-subservience-to-putin-is-staring-us-in-the-face/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+TheRawStory+%28The+Raw+Story% 29)

Any why has Trash been talking to Pootin in secret conversations (and other heads of state)?

What is Trash HIDING?

[ElNono]

https://mobile.twitter.com/ChadPergram/status/1278848114183548929

:lol

Well, the SCOTUS didn't actually deny access, it wants to hear the administration's case before making a decision. By that time, the current administration might no longer be around.

Ultimately, it's really a matter of time until that material reaches Congress and/or the public, tbh.

The actual effect is preventing Congress from using that as ammo for the election, which, IMVHO, it's the SCOTUS saving the Dems from themselves.

[boutons_deux]

https://scontent-dfw5-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/106008154_3225385920862027_800031363793060542_n.jp g?_nc_cat=111&_nc_sid=1480c5&_nc_ohc=QuoqyDwrOG4AX9BXgWj&_nc_ht=scontent-dfw5-1.xx&oh=79ef276c9eeef429ddbf15f9c7644fb5&oe=5F260D6A

[boutons_deux]

The actual effect is preventing Congress from using that as ammo for the election

It's Repug SCOTUS protecting Trash by delaying until after the election

[ElNono]

It's Repug SCOTUS protecting Trash by delaying until after the election




If Democrats can't win this election without talking about Russia and Putin, they deserve to lose, tbh

[Chris]

https://twitter.com/TomFitton/status/1280598908540944385?s=19

[boutons_deux]

Mueller really, really fucked up.

He had MUCH more to work with, Trash's multiple obstructions worse than Nixon's, than Ken Starr ever had.

Trash/Barr know exactly what they are doing by criminally obstructing access to the full Mueller report and to the underlying evidence.

[boutons_deux]

Bombshell Report Says Trump Ordered CIA to Share Counterterrorism Intel with Russia ‘Despite No Discernible Reward’

Not long after the Russia-Taliban bounty scandal first started unfolding in public view,

a bombshell new report from Just Security (https://www.justsecurity.org/71279/trump-pushed-cia-to-give-intelligence-to-kremlin-while-taking-no-action-against-russia-arming-taliban/) claims that President Donald Trump

directed the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) to provide the Russian government with U.S. intelligence information concerning terrorist groups in the Middle East—

whom Vladimir Putin was likely supplying with weapons—

without getting anything in return.

According to the report,

which was sourced from several former Trump administration intelligence officials,

the administration’s failure to address Russia’s furnishing of weapons to the Taliban,

coupled with Trump’s “embrace” of Putin,

may have set the stage for Kremlin officials to green-light the audacious bounty operation.

https://lawandcrime.com/high-profile/bombshell-report-says-trump-ordered-cia-to-share-counterterrorism-intel-with-russia-despite-no-discernible-reward/

Russiagate continues unabated

[Chris]

https://twitter.com/CBS_Herridge/status/1281297408329158656?s=19

TSA

[ElNono]

TSA we have victory! :lol

Not so fast :lol

Flynn judge asks appeals court to reconsider dismissal order
In an extraordinary move, Judge Emmet Sullivan asked the full court to allow him to reach his own conclusion in the former national security adviser's case.

A federal court judge is putting up a highly unusual fight against an appeals court ruling seeking to immediately shut down the prosecution of former national security adviser Michael Flynn for making false statements in the FBI’s investigation into ties between the Trump campaign and Russia.

Lawyers for U.S. District Court Judge Emmet Sullivan filed a petition Thursday asking the full bench of the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals to review a 2-1 decision a panel of that court issued last month, directing Sullivan to cancel his plans for a hearing and instead grant the government’s request to drop the case.

Sullivan’s petition says the steps he was taking, like setting a schedule for legal briefs, inviting friend-of-the-court submissions and scheduling a hearing, are commonplace. The appeals court panel’s earlier decision to shut down that process represents “a dramatic break from precedent that threatens the orderly administration of justice,” the judge’s submission argues.

The move by a district court judge to ask for so-called en banc review of a panel ruling is exceptionally rare. However, it is just the latest in a series of extraordinary developments in recent weeks in the criminal case against Flynn, who spent just 24 days as President Donald Trump’s first national security adviser.

https://www.politico.com/news/2020/07/09/flynn-judge-calls-on-appeals-court-to-review-355389

[TSA]

Not so fast :lol

Flynn judge asks appeals court to reconsider dismissal order
In an extraordinary move, Judge Emmet Sullivan asked the full court to allow him to reach his own conclusion in the former national security adviser's case.

A federal court judge is putting up a highly unusual fight against an appeals court ruling seeking to immediately shut down the prosecution of former national security adviser Michael Flynn for making false statements in the FBI’s investigation into ties between the Trump campaign and Russia.

Lawyers for U.S. District Court Judge Emmet Sullivan filed a petition Thursday asking the full bench of the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals to review a 2-1 decision a panel of that court issued last month, directing Sullivan to cancel his plans for a hearing and instead grant the government’s request to drop the case.

Sullivan’s petition says the steps he was taking, like setting a schedule for legal briefs, inviting friend-of-the-court submissions and scheduling a hearing, are commonplace. The appeals court panel’s earlier decision to shut down that process represents “a dramatic break from precedent that threatens the orderly administration of justice,” the judge’s submission argues.

The move by a district court judge to ask for so-called en banc review of a panel ruling is exceptionally rare. However, it is just the latest in a series of extraordinary developments in recent weeks in the criminal case against Flynn, who spent just 24 days as President Donald Trump’s first national security adviser.

https://www.politico.com/news/2020/07/09/flynn-judge-calls-on-appeals-court-to-review-355389

"orderly administration of justice" :lmao

There has been a plus side to Sullivan dragging his feet as it keeps giving US Attorney Jensen more time to hand over previously undisclosed evidence to the defense team.

https://twitter.com/CBS_Herridge/status/1280597402647494657

[ElNono]

"orderly administration of justice" :lmao

There has been a plus side to Sullivan dragging his feet as it keeps giving US Attorney Jensen more time to hand over previously undisclosed evidence to the defense team.

Well, 'notes' doesn't really say much. We'll see how this develops, tbh

[boutons_deux]

Pootin LAFFING his ass off, USA insulted, degraded once again. Heckuva job, Donnie

Defying U.S., China and Iran Near Trade and Military Partnership

The investment and security pact would

vastly extend China’s influence in the Middle East,

throwing Iran an economic lifeline and

creating new flash points with the United States.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/11/world/asia/china-iran-trade-military-deal.html

Don The Con Trash, very stable geopolitical genius who loves to suck Russian dick

[DMC]

Activist judge showing his ass - highly unusual

Higher court issuing orders to dismiss case per DOJ - corruption

[boutons_deux]

https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0?ui=2&ik=c5ffe9fe07&attid=0.2&permmsgid=msg-a:r-2772065504294256093&th=1734103ebbaa399e&view=fimg&sz=s0-l75-ft&attbid=ANGjdJ_M7gTReLtP16H-K0K_PTj-y1b-gfK3IWTV_9gsw7OhIftB3IcJcRuc015uge95sN3qJoX4jeV7nh 4WtLi-vxlW8Bk9bH7dxup_zSNskKe7LCU_pMZcDQgS9zg&disp=emb&realattid=ii_kcii7cc11

[TSA]

https://twitter.com/MZHemingway/status/1285212363340251137

[TSA]

https://mobile.twitter.com/DrewHolden360/status/1285363658235809792

https://mobile.twitter.com/DrewHolden360/status/1285363672286736385

https://mobile.twitter.com/DrewHolden360/status/1285363684689223680

https://mobile.twitter.com/DrewHolden360/status/1285363699008577537

https://mobile.twitter.com/DrewHolden360/status/1285363712883339264

https://mobile.twitter.com/DrewHolden360/status/1285363728112848897

https://mobile.twitter.com/DrewHolden360/status/1285363742709030913

https://mobile.twitter.com/DrewHolden360/status/1285363757233909762

https://mobile.twitter.com/DrewHolden360/status/1285363772153102336

https://mobile.twitter.com/DrewHolden360/status/1285363785394532352

https://mobile.twitter.com/DrewHolden360/status/1285363798522712064

https://mobile.twitter.com/DrewHolden360/status/1285363812418428928

https://mobile.twitter.com/DrewHolden360/status/1285375617006014466

https://mobile.twitter.com/DrewHolden360/status/1285375631690280960

https://mobile.twitter.com/DrewHolden360/status/1285386464088424453

:rollin

[boutons_deux]

More Regugs COLLUDING with Pootin

Dem leaders demand FBI briefing on

'foreign interference campaign' targeting lawmakers

members of Congress are being targeted by a foreign operation intended to influence the 2020 presidential election,

Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) has become

a vehicle for “laundering” a foreign influence campaign to damageDemocratic presidential nominee Joe Biden,

“specific” intelligence that a foreign influence operation targeted lawmakers to “launder and amplify disinformation in order to influence congressional activity.”

https://www.politico.com/news/2020/07/20/democrats-fbi-briefing-foreign-interference-campaign-373134

[Spurs Homer]

FACTS about the latest comrade TSA “dossier” propaganda hyperventilation tantrum:

1) more things in the steele dossier have been confirmed to be accurate vs anything that russian propaganda traitors allege as being inaccurate


2) counter-intelligence investigations are run according to the rule of law- NOT the way Fox news or the GOP (Govt of Putin) - WISHES - that they SHOULD be run

i.e. The FBI was not married to the dossier but were vetting everything - and for the millionth time- the dossier was ONE piece of evidence amongst THOUSANDS of pieces of evidence

and just because Leningrad Lindsey or comrade Sean Hannity proclaim that the FBI should have immediately proclaimed the investigation as “illegitimate” because ONE piece of evidence did not check out is the stupidest bundle of false propaganda that idiots like TSA swallow whole.

[Spurs Homer]

Has anyone posted the statement about election meddling and the way Biden threw down the gauntlet at Putin/Russia?


THAT is how a US leader needs to address that pos putin


ill find it and post it later


TSA - why is your cult hero scared shitless to do this?

(cue the bullshit “no one has been tougher on russia than trump” propaganda from russia in 5,4,3....)

[hombre]

Ron Johnson is a traitor.

[TSA]

FACTS about the latest comrade TSA “dossier” propaganda hyperventilation tantrum:

1) more things in the steele dossier have been confirmed to be accurate vs anything that russian propaganda traitors allege as being inaccurate


2) counter-intelligence investigations are run according to the rule of law- NOT the way Fox news or the GOP (Govt of Putin) - WISHES - that they SHOULD be run

i.e. The FBI was not married to the dossier but were vetting everything - and for the millionth time- the dossier was ONE piece of evidence amongst THOUSANDS of pieces of evidence

and just because Leningrad Lindsey or comrade Sean Hannity proclaim that the FBI should have immediately proclaimed the investigation as “illegitimate” because ONE piece of evidence did not check out is the stupidest bundle of false propaganda that idiots like TSA swallow whole.

https://mobile.twitter.com/DrewHolden360/status/1285363658235809792

https://mobile.twitter.com/DrewHolden360/status/1285363672286736385

https://mobile.twitter.com/DrewHolden360/status/1285363684689223680

https://mobile.twitter.com/DrewHolden360/status/1285363699008577537

https://mobile.twitter.com/DrewHolden360/status/1285363712883339264

https://mobile.twitter.com/DrewHolden360/status/1285363728112848897

https://mobile.twitter.com/DrewHolden360/status/1285363742709030913

https://mobile.twitter.com/DrewHolden360/status/1285363757233909762

https://mobile.twitter.com/DrewHolden360/status/1285363772153102336

https://mobile.twitter.com/DrewHolden360/status/1285363785394532352

https://mobile.twitter.com/DrewHolden360/status/1285363798522712064

https://mobile.twitter.com/DrewHolden360/status/1285363812418428928

https://mobile.twitter.com/DrewHolden360/status/1285375617006014466

https://mobile.twitter.com/DrewHolden360/status/1285375631690280960

https://mobile.twitter.com/DrewHolden360/status/1285386464088424453

:lmao

[Spurs Homer]

Only idiots/russians/traitors believe/swallow ^ that bullshit propaganda


why still trying soooo hard to prove the “exoneration?”


:lol:lol:lol:lol

has OJ caught the “killers” yet?

[LkrFan]

Now we know why he got pardoned
https://twitter.com/KAYLEEBURRIS/status/1285417961575129088?s=19

This is a damn 4-star General doing dumb shit. SMDH

[ElNono]

what's the gist of that wall of tweets?

[Spurminator]

what's the gist of that wall of tweets?

:lol Who reads that shit?

[ElNono]

:lol Who reads that shit?

not me

[ChumpDumper]

https://mobile.twitter.com/DrewHolden360/status/1285363658235809792

https://mobile.twitter.com/DrewHolden360/status/1285363672286736385

https://mobile.twitter.com/DrewHolden360/status/1285363684689223680

https://mobile.twitter.com/DrewHolden360/status/1285363699008577537

https://mobile.twitter.com/DrewHolden360/status/1285363712883339264

https://mobile.twitter.com/DrewHolden360/status/1285363728112848897

https://mobile.twitter.com/DrewHolden360/status/1285363742709030913

https://mobile.twitter.com/DrewHolden360/status/1285363757233909762

https://mobile.twitter.com/DrewHolden360/status/1285363772153102336

https://mobile.twitter.com/DrewHolden360/status/1285363785394532352

https://mobile.twitter.com/DrewHolden360/status/1285363798522712064

https://mobile.twitter.com/DrewHolden360/status/1285363812418428928

https://mobile.twitter.com/DrewHolden360/status/1285375617006014466

https://mobile.twitter.com/DrewHolden360/status/1285375631690280960

https://mobile.twitter.com/DrewHolden360/status/1285386464088424453

:rollinNow do Seth Rich.

[TSA]

what's the gist of that wall of tweets?

Media and politicians trying to bolster the credibility of the full of shit Steele dossier. I bet every single one of those articles and tweets were posted in this thread by people who are now too embarrassed to come back to this thread.

[TSA]

https://mobile.twitter.com/adamhousley/status/1286478669423063043

[ElNono]

Media and politicians trying to bolster the credibility of the full of shit Steele dossier. I bet every single one of those articles and tweets were posted in this thread by people who are now too embarrassed to come back to this thread.

Didn't Trump created a full commission and investigation into voter fraud, which was well known to be a red herring?

What I mean by that is, government doesn't need much to start wasting money into investigations.

[TSA]

https://mobile.twitter.com/finwiz416/status/1287025283288178688

[Chris]

https://mobile.twitter.com/adamhousley/status/1286478669423063043

lawdy!


https://twitter.com/RyanAFournier/status/1287152318035656705?s=19

[ChumpDumper]

:lmao

[ElNono]

:lmao:lmao:lmao

[Spurs Homer]

:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao

[TSA]

More willful blindness by the media on spying by Obama administration

The Washington press corps seems engaged in a collective demonstration of the legal concept of willful blindness, or deliberately ignoring facts, following the release of yet another declassified document that directly refutes past statements about the Russia collusion investigation. The document shows the FBI used a security briefing of then candidate Donald Trump and top aides to gather possible evidence for Crossfire Hurricane, its code name for the Russia investigation.

What is astonishing is that the media has refused to see what should be one of the biggest stories in decades. The Obama administration targeted the campaign of the opposing party based on false evidence. The media endlessly covered former Obama administration officials ridiculing suggestions of spying on the Trump campaign or of improper conduct in the Russia investigation. When Attorney General William Barr told the Senate last year that he believed spying did occur, he was lambasted in the media, including by James Comey and others involved in that investigation. The mocking "wow" response of the fired FBI director received extensive coverage.

The new document shows that, in the summer of 2016, FBI agent Joe Pientka briefed Trump campaign advisers Michael Flynn and Chris Christie on national security issues, a standard practice ahead of the election. It included a discussion of Russia interfering in the election. But this was different. The document detailing the questions asked by Trump and his aides and their reactions was filed a few days after the meeting under Crossfire Hurricane and Crossfire Razor, the FBI investigation of Flynn. The two FBI officials listed who approved the report are Kevin Clinesmith and Peter Strzok.

Clinesmith is the former FBI lawyer responsible for the FISA surveillance conducted on members of the Trump campaign. Clinesmith opposed Trump and sent an email after the election declaring "viva the resistance." He is reportedly under review for possible criminal charges for altering a FISA court filing. The FBI had used Trump adviser Carter Page as a basis for the original FISA application, due to his contacts with Russians. Soon after that surveillance was approved, however, federal officials discredited the collusion allegations and noted that Page was a CIA asset. Clinesmith had allegedly changed the information to state that Page was not working for the CIA.

Strzok is the FBI agent whose violation of FBI rules led Justice Department officials to refer him for possible criminal charges. Strzok did not hide his intense loathing of Trump and famously referenced an "insurance policy" if Trump were to win the election. After FBI officials concluded there was no evidence of any crime by Flynn at the end of 2016, Strzok prevented the closing of the investigation as FBI officials searched for any crime that might be used to charge the incoming national security adviser.

Documents also show Comey briefed President Obama and Vice President Joe Biden on the investigation shortly before the inauguration of Trump. When Comey admitted the communications between Flynn and Russian officials appeared legitimate, Biden reportedly suggested using the Logan Act, widely viewed as unconstitutional and never used to successfully convict a single person, as an alternative charge against Flynn. The memo of that meeting contradicts claims that Biden he did not know about the Flynn investigation. Let us detail some proven but mostly unseen facts.

First, the Russia collusion allegations were based in significant part on the dossier funded by the Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee. The Clinton campaign repeatedly denied paying for the dossier until long after the election, when it was confronted with irrefutable evidence that the money had been buried among legal expenditures. New York Times reporter Maggie Haberman wrote, "Folks involved in funding this lied about it and with sanctimony for a year."

Second, FBI agents warned that dossier author Christopher Steele may have been used by Russian intelligence to plant false information to disrupt the election. His source for the most serious allegations claims that Steele misrepresented what he had said and that it was little more than rumors recast by Steele as reliable intelligence.

Third, the Obama administration was told that the basis for the FISA application was highly dubious and likely false. Yet it continued the investigation as someone leaked its existence to the media. Another declassified document shows that, after the New York Times ran a leaked story on the investigation, even Strzok balked at the account as misleading and inaccurate. His early 2017 memo affirmed that there was no evidence of any individuals in contact with Russians. This information came as the collusion stories were turning into a frenzy that would last years.

Fourth, the investigation by special counsel Robert Mueller and inspectors general found no evidence of collusion or knowing contact between the Trump campaign and Russian officials. What inspectors general did find were false statements or possible criminal conduct by Comey and others. While unable to say that it was the reason for their decisions, they also found extensive statements of animus against Trump and his campaign by the very FBI officials directing the investigation. Former Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein has recently testified he never would have approved renewal of the FISA surveillance and encouraged further investigation into such bias.

Finally, Obama and Biden were aware of the investigation, as were the administration officials who publicly ridiculed Trump when he said there was spying on his campaign. Others, like House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff, declared they had evidence of collusion but never produced it. Countless reporters, columnists, and analysts have continued to deride, as writer Max Boot said it, the spinning of "absurd conspiracy theories" about how the FBI "supposedly spied on the Trump campaign."

Willful blindness has its advantages. The media eagerly covered the original leak and the false narrative of collusion, despite mounting evidence that it was false. They filled hours of cable news coverage and pages of print on a collusion story discredited by the FBI. Virtually none of these journalists or experts have acknowledged that the collusion leaks were proven false, let alone pursue the troubling implications of national security powers being used to target the political opponents of an administration. But then, in Washington, success often depends not on what you see but what you can unsee.

https://thehill.com/opinion/white-house/509002-more-willful-blindness-by-the-media-on-spying-by-obama-administration?amp&__twitter_impression=true

[Spurs Homer]

If investigations were conducted by the standards of THAT ^ Russian propaganda ^


then millions of “poor innocent” suspects would have a case that they were illegally “spied” on...


Here is a FACT:

Trump team traitors were warned about Russian advances.
Trump team traitors were advised by the FBI -


TO REPORT EVERY RUSSIAN ADVANCE/CONTACT

Trump team traitors had OVER 100 CONTACTS WITH RUSSIANS and RUSSIAN INTELLIGENCE!!!!!


Trump team traitors REPORTED ZERO of those illicit contacts


and LIED about the over 100 contacts when asked/interrogated/deposed



END OF FUCKING STORY.

[Spurs Homer]

:lmao:rollin:rollin:lmao:rollin:lmao

[TSA]

https://mobile.twitter.com/theconservador/status/1287416532579033088

All the amplifying and attempts to lend credibility to the Steele dossier from Comey’s BFF Benjamin Wittes and the Lawfare/Brookings crew finally makes sense.

[ChumpDumper]

:lmao

[boutons_deux]

Mark Meadows Invites Foreign Governments To Help Trump Win

welcomed the efforts of foreign governments to influence the presidential election for Donald Trump.

the previous administration, they talked about election interference and did very little to address it :lol

this president has signed off on to make sure that election integrity is — is important. :lol

Now, there’s a big difference between foreign interference and foreign influence. :lol semantics! :lol

in terms of actually affecting the vote totals and interacting, I think we’re in a good place. :lol

https://www.politicususa.com/2020/07/26/mark-meadows-foreign-election-influence.html (https://www.politicususa.com/2020/07/26/mark-meadows-foreign-election-influence.html)

McConnell BLOCKED Obama from spilling Pootin's interference

McConnell has blocked all spending to help states's election integrity

[TSA]

https://mobile.twitter.com/theconservador/status/1287416532579033088

All the amplifying and attempts to lend credibility to the Steele dossier from Comey’s BFF Benjamin Wittes and the Lawfare/Brookings crew finally makes sense.

Brookings Institution: A Key Collusion Collaborator

The liberal think tank helped perpetrate one of the biggest frauds in political history on the American people.

https://amgreatness.com/2020/07/23/brookings-institution-a-key-collusion-collaborator/

[TSA]

https://mobile.twitter.com/MaxAbrahms/status/1287925352463990784

[TSA]

https://mobile.twitter.com/ByronYork/status/1287901869600378880

:corn:

[ChumpDumper]

Nothingburger.

[spurraider21]

wouldnt expect anything different from barr

[ChumpDumper]

nothingBarrger

[TSA]

wouldnt expect anything different from barr

Would you prefer the AG ignore the surveillance and investigation into the President elect/President that wasn’t properly predicated and based on fabricated “intelligence” paid for by the opposing party and also ignore the illegal FISA’s obtained during said investigation?

[DMC]

Would you prefer the AG ignore the surveillance and investigation into the President elect/President that wasn’t properly predicated and based on fabricated “intelligence” paid for by the opposing party and also ignore the illegal FISA’s obtained during said investigation?

It's all about which color jersey the POTUS wears.

[Spurs Homer]

Would you prefer the AG ignore the surveillance and investigation into the President elect/President that wasn’t properly predicated and based on fabricated “intelligence” paid for by the opposing party and also ignore the illegal FISA’s obtained during said investigation?

you spew shit the exact same way hannity does- like building a shit lego house

with lies stacked upon propaganda on top of garbage on top of lies


all tied together with a false bullshit premise

cut thru the garbage


trump team traitors were caught selling out the usa and colluding with russia to steal an election and helping russia attack a usa citizen


once caught they began whining like little bitches that the big bad investigators were unfair


never once do you care that the traitors are still on russia team and betraying the usa


watch barr lie under oath tomorrow or play games with semantics to avoid answering questions


and then you will still cheer him on


you are no different than the traitors

[TSA]

you spew shit the exact same way hannity does- like building a shit lego house

with lies stacked upon propaganda on top of garbage on top of lies


all tied together with a false bullshit premise

cut thru the garbage


trump team traitors were caught selling out the usa and colluding with russia to steal an election and helping russia attack a usa citizen


once caught they began whining like little bitches that the big bad investigators were unfair


never once do you care that the traitors are still on russia team and betraying the usa


watch barr lie under oath tomorrow or play games with semantics to avoid answering questions


and then you will still cheer him on


you are no different than the traitors

1. "The investigation did not establish that members of the Trump Campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities."

2. "The investigation examined whether [contacts between Russia and Trump figures] involved or resulted in coordination or a conspiracy with the Trump Campaign and Russia, including with respect to Russia providing assistance to the Campaign in exchange for any sort of favorable treatment in the future. Based on the available information, the investigation did not establish such coordination."

3. "The investigation did not establish that [Carter] Page coordinated with the Russian government in its efforts to interfere with the 2016 election."

4. "The Office did not identify evidence in those [contacts between Russians and people around Trump after the GOP convention] of coordination between the Campaign and the Russian government."

5. "The Office did not identify evidence of a connection between Manafort's sharing polling data and Russia's interference in the election ... [and] the investigation did not establish that Manafort otherwise coordinated with the Russian government on its election-interference efforts."

6. "The investigation did not establish that these [contacts between Russians and people around Trump during the transition] reflected or constituted coordination between the Trump Campaign and Russia in its election interference activities."

7. "The investigation did not identify evidence that any U.S. persons conspired or coordinated with the [Russian disinformation campaign]."

That is definitive. It is not kinda, sorta. It is definitive. As far as Mueller's conclusions are concerned — and remember, he was long considered the gold standard of Trump investigations — there was no collusion.

Love,

Mueller

[ChumpDumper]

1. "The investigation did not establish that members of the Trump Campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities."

2. "The investigation examined whether [contacts between Russia and Trump figures] involved or resulted in coordination or a conspiracy with the Trump Campaign and Russia, including with respect to Russia providing assistance to the Campaign in exchange for any sort of favorable treatment in the future. Based on the available information, the investigation did not establish such coordination."

3. "The investigation did not establish that [Carter] Page coordinated with the Russian government in its efforts to interfere with the 2016 election."

4. "The Office did not identify evidence in those [contacts between Russians and people around Trump after the GOP convention] of coordination between the Campaign and the Russian government."

5. "The Office did not identify evidence of a connection between Manafort's sharing polling data and Russia's interference in the election ... [and] the investigation did not establish that Manafort otherwise coordinated with the Russian government on its election-interference efforts."

6. "The investigation did not establish that these [contacts between Russians and people around Trump during the transition] reflected or constituted coordination between the Trump Campaign and Russia in its election interference activities."

7. "The investigation did not identify evidence that any U.S. persons conspired or coordinated with the [Russian disinformation campaign]."

That is definitive. It is not kinda, sorta. It is definitive. As far as Mueller's conclusions are concerned — and remember, he was long considered the gold standard of Trump investigations — there was no collusion.

Love,

MuellerNow post his op-ed.

[spurraider21]

Would you prefer the AG ignore the surveillance and investigation into the President elect/President that wasn’t properly predicated and based on fabricated “intelligence” paid for by the opposing party and also ignore the illegal FISA’s obtained during said investigation?
IG already said it was properly predicated even if FISA applications were crap

[TSA]

IG already said it was properly predicated even if FISA applications were crap

That’s such a chickenshit cop out and you know it :lol

You of all people know the limitations of an Inspector General’s investigation when compared to a US Attorney and which one can compel more testimony and access more evidence.

I’ll remove your chickenshit attempt at an out.

Would you prefer the AG ignore the surveillance and investigation into the President elect/President that was based on fabricated “intelligence” paid for by the opposing party and also ignore the illegal FISA’s obtained during said investigation?

[spurraider21]

it was known by the IG that the dossier was commissioned by the clinton campaign.

[ChumpDumper]

NothingBarrger report due in October.

[TSA]

it was known by the IG that the dossier was commissioned by the clinton campaign.

That has nothing to do with what I asked you.

Would you prefer the AG ignore the surveillance and investigation into the President elect/President that was based on fabricated “intelligence” paid for by the opposing party and also ignore the illegal FISA’s obtained during said investigation?

[spurraider21]

That has nothing to do with what I asked you.

Would you prefer the AG ignore the surveillance and investigation into the President elect/President that was based on fabricated “intelligence” paid for by the opposing party and also ignore the illegal FISA’s obtained during said investigation?
the investigation was properly predicated before the dossier. the surveillance issues are problematic, IG already went into that at length. if there are criminal referrals because there was willful/criminal misconduct i have no issue with those cases going forward

[TSA]

the investigation was properly predicated before the dossier. the surveillance issues are problematic, IG already went into that at length. if there are criminal referrals because there was willful/criminal misconduct i have no issue with those cases going forward

Do you acknowledge the limitations of the IG investigating compared to a US Attorney investigating? Yes or no.

Is it possible the US Attorney uncovered evidence the IG didn’t have access to? Yes or no.

Is it possible AG Barr has made statements based upon evidence the IG never had access to? Yes or no.

And you continue to dodge the question about our current AG. Clarify “wouldn’t expect anything different from Barr”

Would you prefer the AG ignore the surveillance and investigation into the President elect/President that was based on fabricated “intelligence” paid for by the opposing party and also ignore the illegal FISA’s obtained during said investigation?

[spurraider21]

Do you acknowledge the limitations of the IG investigating compared to a US Attorney investigating? Yes or no.

Is it possible the US Attorney uncovered evidence the IG didn’t have access to? Yes or no.

Is it possible AG Barr has made statements based upon evidence the IG never had access to? Yes or no.

And you continue to dodge the question about our current AG. Clarify “wouldn’t expect anything different from Barr”

Would you prefer the AG ignore the surveillance and investigation into the President elect/President that was based on fabricated “intelligence” paid for by the opposing party and also ignore the illegal FISA’s obtained during said investigation?
a US attorney can interview former employees, not limited to this still working. i get that. but reviewing internal files/records/documents to determine if there was a proper factual predicate is pretty cut and dry. i cant really see how outside info can change what can be documented by the department.

its possible that the US attorney uncovered evidence that IG didnt have access to which would prove there was criminal intent by some of the FBI officials, and i'd have no issue with them facing charges if that the case

what's to clarify about barr? ever since he's come in he's done nothing but carry trump's water and has been on a personal mission to discredit and undermine the investigation at all costs. this was at least a consideration in making him AG. before he came into office he was sending memos to the DOJ about how the investigation was unsupportable (again, before he was AG, and before he would have access to all this magic evidence), was pimping uranium one, etc. he was a hack before and was appointed to keep doing that

[ElNono]

Brookings Institution: A Key Collusion Collaborator

The liberal think tank helped perpetrate one of the biggest frauds in political history on the American people.

https://amgreatness.com/2020/07/23/brookings-institution-a-key-collusion-collaborator/

:lol

[ElNono]

what's to clarify about barr? ever since he's come in he's done nothing but carry trump's water and has been on a personal mission to discredit and undermine the investigation at all costs. this was at least a consideration in making him AG. before he came into office he was sending memos to the DOJ about how the investigation was unsupportable (again, before he was AG, and before he would have access to all this magic evidence), was pimping uranium one, etc. he was a hack before and was appointed to keep doing that

This is pretty much it, tbh... unfortunately, Barr just isn't credible. Even if we were to look past his commentary before becoming the acting AG (and his general doctrines for unchecked executive power), the questionable moves he's pulled in cases like Stone, Flynn and even the Mueller report, or even siding with Trump's lawyers with the notion that the POTUS has complete immunity (something the SCOTUS fortunately didn't agree with), paints him as a complete puppet and clown.

Unfortunately, just like it happened with Alberto Gonzales, if Biden happens to be the next administration, I doubt they're going to look into this disaster. Truly unfortunate.

[ElNono]

Generally good compendium of what we were talking above (note, opinion):

https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2020/07/28/william-barr-unethical-deceitful-attorney-general-column/5517466002/

[TSA]

a US attorney can interview former employees, not limited to this still working. i get that. but reviewing internal files/records/documents to determine if there was a proper factual predicate is pretty cut and dry. i cant really see how outside info can change what can be documented by the department.

its possible that the US attorney uncovered evidence that IG didnt have access to which would prove there was criminal intent by some of the FBI officials, and i'd have no issue with them facing charges if that the case

what's to clarify about barr? ever since he's come in he's done nothing but carry trump's water and has been on a personal mission to discredit and undermine the investigation at all costs. this was at least a consideration in making him AG. before he came into office he was sending memos to the DOJ about how the investigation was unsupportable (again, before he was AG, and before he would have access to all this magic evidence), was pimping uranium one, etc. he was a hack before and was appointed to keep doing that

:lol still dodging the question.

Would you prefer the AG ignore the surveillance and investigation into the President elect/President that was based on fabricated “intelligence” paid for by the opposing party and also ignore the illegal FISA’s obtained during said investigation?

[TSA]

:lol

For over 3 years 24/7 the American people were told that their President committed treason and colluded with Russia to steal the election. Name bigger frauds in political history on the American people.

[Spurs Homer]

For over 3 years 24/7 the American people were told that their President committed treason and colluded with Russia to steal the election. Name bigger frauds in political history on the American people.

trump committed treason
(aiding and abetting an enemy after said enemy attacked the usa democratic election process and even obstructed the investigatio into the investigation of russias attack)

name a bigger traitor in history to the usa and trump is the worst all-time

[TSA]

trump committed treason
(aiding and abetting an enemy after said enemy attacked the usa democratic election process and even obstructed the investigatio into the investigation of russias attack)

name a bigger traitor in history to the usa and trump is the worst all-time

1. "The investigation did not establish that members of the Trump Campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities."

2. "The investigation examined whether [contacts between Russia and Trump figures] involved or resulted in coordination or a conspiracy with the Trump Campaign and Russia, including with respect to Russia providing assistance to the Campaign in exchange for any sort of favorable treatment in the future. Based on the available information, the investigation did not establish such coordination."

3. "The investigation did not establish that [Carter] Page coordinated with the Russian government in its efforts to interfere with the 2016 election."

4. "The Office did not identify evidence in those [contacts between Russians and people around Trump after the GOP convention] of coordination between the Campaign and the Russian government."

5. "The Office did not identify evidence of a connection between Manafort's sharing polling data and Russia's interference in the election ... [and] the investigation did not establish that Manafort otherwise coordinated with the Russian government on its election-interference efforts."

6. "The investigation did not establish that these [contacts between Russians and people around Trump during the transition] reflected or constituted coordination between the Trump Campaign and Russia in its election interference activities."

7. "The investigation did not identify evidence that any U.S. persons conspired or coordinated with the [Russian disinformation campaign]."

That is definitive. It is not kinda, sorta. It is definitive. As far as Mueller's conclusions are concerned — and remember, he was long considered the gold standard of Trump investigations — there was no collusion.

Love,

Mueller

[spurraider21]

:lol still dodging the question.

Would you prefer the AG ignore the surveillance and investigation into the President elect/President that was based on fabricated “intelligence” paid for by the opposing party and also ignore the illegal FISA’s obtained during said investigation?
First two paragraphs addressed it directly

[TSA]

First two paragraphs addressed it directly

"a US attorney can interview former employees, not limited to this still working. i get that. but reviewing internal files/records/do ents to determine if there was a proper factual predicate is pretty cut and dry. i cant really see how outside info can change what can be do ented by the department.

its possible that the US attorney uncovered evidence that IG didnt have access to which would prove there was criminal intent by some of the FBI officials, and i'd have no issue with them facing charges if that the case"

???

[boutons_deux]

A KGB Man to the End

The origins of Putin’s worldview—and the rise of Russia’s new ruling class

Putin's People: How the KGB Took Back Russia and Then Took On the West

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2020/09/catherine-belton-putins-people/614212/

Trash, his mafiya, the Repugs, TSA and other Pootin apologists are fucking traitors, too fucking stupid and venal to realize that they are foreign agents.

[TSA]

A KGB Man to the End

The origins of Putin’s worldview—and the rise of Russia’s new ruling class

Putin's People: How the KGB Took Back Russia and Then Took On the West

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2020/09/catherine-belton-putins-people/614212/

Trash, his mafiya, the Repugs, TSA and other Pootin apologists are fucking traitors, too fucking stupid and venal to realize that they are foreign agents.





You've been spreading fake news in this thread for over 3 years. You are doing exactly what Putin wants and are nothing more than a Putin puppet.

[spurraider21]

"a US attorney can interview former employees, not limited to this still working. i get that. but reviewing internal files/records/do ents to determine if there was a proper factual predicate is pretty cut and dry. i cant really see how outside info can change what can be do ented by the department.

its possible that the US attorney uncovered evidence that IG didnt have access to which would prove there was criminal intent by some of the FBI officials, and i'd have no issue with them facing charges if that the case"

???
:tu

[Spurs Homer]

A KGB Man to the End

The origins of Putin’s worldview—and the rise of Russia’s new ruling class

Putin's People: How the KGB Took Back Russia and Then Took On the West

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2020/09/catherine-belton-putins-people/614212/

Trash, his mafiya, the Repugs, TSA and other Pootin apologists are fucking traitors, too fucking stupid and venal to realize that they are foreign agents.






anyone with a pair of eyes/ears

can see this

[ElNono]

For over 3 years 24/7 the American people were told that their President committed treason and colluded with Russia to steal the election. Name bigger frauds in political history on the American people.

Richard Nixon comes to mind. He actually did commit crimes and lost his job over it.

And sorry but no, this POTUS was merely formally investigated (god forbid!) and his campaign eventually cleared out.

[ChumpDumper]

For over 3 years 24/7 the American people were told that their President committed treason and colluded with Russia to steal the election. Name bigger frauds in political history on the American people.Pizzagate.

Q.

Seth Rich conspiracy.

[TSA]

Richard Nixon comes to mind. He actually did commit crimes and lost his job over it.

And sorry but no, this POTUS was merely formally investigated (god forbid!) and his campaign eventually cleared out.

When you quoted one of the biggest political frauds it was in regards to Brookings/media committing the fraud on the American people, not the investigation itself.

[TSA]

https://twitter.com/Heminator/status/1288156706095222786

[TSA]

https://twitter.com/gusmac2/status/1288161926682497027

[spurraider21]

https://twitter.com/Heminator/status/1288156706095222786
thats how a lot of these things go, unfortunately. congressmen filibuster for minutes just to get airtime instead of an actual Q&A

[ChumpDumper]

https://twitter.com/gusmac2/status/1288161926682497027Undercover Bash!

[spurraider21]

so we went from huber to durham to bash?

[TSA]

so we went from huber to durham to bash?

Durham, Bash, and Jensen have all been tasked with investigating different aspects. Pretty eye opening that one US Attorney couldn't handle it all by themselves.

[ChumpDumper]

Oh shit Undercover Jensen too!

[TSA]

"Former FBI counterintelligence agent Peter Strzok, who played a key role in the Russia investigation but whose pejorative text messages about Donald Trump during the 2016 campaign made him a target of the president’s wrath, is releasing a book on his concerns the president could be compromised."

"Former FBI Director James Comey and former Deputy Director Andrew McCabe have each released books that describe aspects of the Trump investigation.

Andrew Weissmann, a former Justice Department prosecutor who served on Mueller’s team, is due out with a book in September."

https://apnews.com/a63cca581185eb6ae82468f173bd0e4e

:rollin

[ElNono]

When you quoted one of the biggest political frauds it was in regards to Brookings/media committing the fraud on the American people, not the investigation itself.

You can't commit actual fraud by political commentary. Otherwise, Fox News, the precursor of political edgelord sensationalism in modern media, would've been shut down a long time ago.

You guys need to accept the fact that the 1st amendment protects speech whether you like the speech or not, and whether the speech is factually right or wrong.

Jeez, if we're talking about outright lying to the American people being fraud, this POTUS would've been gone a long time ago.

[ElNono]

"Former FBI counterintelligence agent Peter Strzok, who played a key role in the Russia investigation but whose pejorative text messages about Donald Trump during the 2016 campaign made him a target of the president’s wrath, is releasing a book on his concerns the president could be compromised."

"Former FBI Director James Comey and former Deputy Director Andrew McCabe have each released books that describe aspects of the Trump investigation.

Andrew Weissmann, a former Justice Department prosecutor who served on Mueller’s team, is due out with a book in September."

https://apnews.com/a63cca581185eb6ae82468f173bd0e4e


Thanks for the heads up. Will add them to the reading list :tu

[spurraider21]

next time a sitting president is under federal investigation the media should absolutely not report on that fact until the investigation is over and findings are released

[TSA]

You can't commit actual fraud by political commentary. Otherwise, Fox News, the precursor of political edgelord sensationalism in modern media, would've been shut down a long time ago.

You guys need to accept the fact that the 1st amendment protects speech whether you like the speech or not, and whether the speech is factually right or wrong.

Jeez, if we're talking about outright lying to the American people being fraud, this POTUS would've been gone a long time ago.

She called it a political fraud. What term would you have preferred she used for what Brookings/media did for 3+ years?

[ElNono]

next time a sitting president is under federal investigation the media should absolutely not report on that fact until the investigation is over and findings are released

Also, no opinions! Universal gag order. Not really constitutional, but who cares?

[ElNono]

She called it a political fraud. What term would you have preferred she used for what Brookings/media did for 3+ years?

Run of the mill politics. I mean, if we have to go through 'think thanks' that are full of shit on either side, we're going to break Spurstalk.

[TSA]

next time a sitting president is under federal investigation the media should absolutely not report on that fact until the investigation is over and findings are releasedBecause that is all the media did :lol


https://mobile.twitter.com/DrewHolden360/status/1285363658235809792

https://mobile.twitter.com/DrewHolden360/status/1285363672286736385

https://mobile.twitter.com/DrewHolden360/status/1285363684689223680

https://mobile.twitter.com/DrewHolden360/status/1285363699008577537

https://mobile.twitter.com/DrewHolden360/status/1285363712883339264

https://mobile.twitter.com/DrewHolden360/status/1285363728112848897

https://mobile.twitter.com/DrewHolden360/status/1285363742709030913

https://mobile.twitter.com/DrewHolden360/status/1285363757233909762

https://mobile.twitter.com/DrewHolden360/status/1285363772153102336

https://mobile.twitter.com/DrewHolden360/status/1285363785394532352

https://mobile.twitter.com/DrewHolden360/status/1285363798522712064

https://mobile.twitter.com/DrewHolden360/status/1285363812418428928

https://mobile.twitter.com/DrewHolden360/status/1285375617006014466

https://mobile.twitter.com/DrewHolden360/status/1285375631690280960

https://mobile.twitter.com/DrewHolden360/status/1285386464088424453

[ElNono]

cliffnotes?

[spurraider21]

i dont have issue with much of those characterizations.

the most over the top ones, like maddow, jacobus, tribe, tend not to be journalists

[ChumpDumper]

She called it a political fraud. What term would you have preferred she used for what Brookings/media did for 3+ years?Fraud is a strong word that should be reserved for things like Trump University.

[boutons_deux]

yet another Trash gift to Pootin, obeying Pootin's dictates

U.S. to withdraw 12,000 American troops from Germany

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/us-withdraw-12000-american-troops-germany-nato/?utm_term=OZY&utm_source=Campaigner&utm_campaign=PDB&utm_content=Thursday_07.30.2020&cmp=1&utm_medium=email (https://www.cbsnews.com/news/us-withdraw-12000-american-troops-germany-nato/?utm_term=OZY&utm_source=Campaigner&utm_campaign=PDB&utm_content=Thursday_07.30.2020&cmp=1&utm_medium=email)

[ElNono]

Appeals court will rehear case about Michael Flynn prosecution
D.C. Circuit agrees to judge's request for en banc hearing of dispute about DOJ's move to abandon false-statement case.

The full bench of a federal appeals court in Washington has agreed to consider whether a lower-court judge should be forced to dismiss a felony charge against Michael Flynn, the former national security adviser to Donald Trump.

The announcement Thursday from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit is a setback for Flynn, who scored an unexpected victory on the issue last month, when a smaller panel of that court voted, 2-1, to order U.S. District Judge Emmet Sullivan to grant the government’s motion to drop the prosecution.

The appeals court said it will sit en banc to hear arguments in the case on Aug. 11.

https://www.politico.com/news/2020/07/30/appeals-court-michael-flynn-388384

[spurraider21]

Appeals court will rehear case about Michael Flynn prosecution
D.C. Circuit agrees to judge's request for en banc hearing of dispute about DOJ's move to abandon false-statement case.

The full bench of a federal appeals court in Washington has agreed to consider whether a lower-court judge should be forced to dismiss a felony charge against Michael Flynn, the former national security adviser to Donald Trump.

The announcement Thursday from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit is a setback for Flynn, who scored an unexpected victory on the issue last month, when a smaller panel of that court voted, 2-1, to order U.S. District Judge Emmet Sullivan to grant the government’s motion to drop the prosecution.

The appeals court said it will sit en banc to hear arguments in the case on Aug. 11.

https://www.politico.com/news/2020/07/30/appeals-court-michael-flynn-388384
dick slapped

[spurraider21]

but seriously...

i'm still baffled by the initial 2-1 ruling. its just a mess procedurally to set the precedent that a party can seek a writ of mandate BEFORE a ruling is even made by a judge on the matter at issue. i have to believe it's going to be overturned

with that said, i still believe the most likely outcome is that sullivan will grant the motion to dismiss on his own terms. if he doesnt, that would be ripe for appeal, and i'm inclined to believe it would be overturned on appeal in that scenario

[Spurs Homer]

So...

premature spiking of the treasonous football?


:lmao:lmao TSA

[TSA]

https://mobile.twitter.com/EliLake/status/1289182336731344898

[RandomGuy]

She called it a political fraud. What term would you have preferred she used for what Brookings/media did for 3+ years?

Fraud... you mean like the Trump charity?

Or...Trump draft deferrments?

or... Trumps college application?

or... like Trumps "degree"?

On a scale of fraud with zero being not a fraud at all, and 10 being just about anything Trump has touched, where would you put this fraud?

[TSA]

Fraud... you mean like the Trump charity?

Or...Trump draft deferrments?

or... Trumps college application?

or... like Trumps "degree"?

On a scale of fraud with zero being not a fraud at all, and 10 being just about anything Trump has touched, where would you put this fraud?

What does it feel like to now know you were duped and were an active participant in one of the biggest political frauds our country has ever seen?

[ChumpDumper]

Not that big a fraud tbh.

The only reason this blew up was because that dumbass Trump fired Comey.

His fault.

[boutons_deux]

Republicans are planning a mass attack against Biden using information from pro-Russian agents

In 2020, Republicans in both House and Senate—having given Trump a free pass to invite foreign interference and approving the whitewashing of Trump’s crimes by Attorney General William Barr—are all on board.

That includes Barr, who has all but promised (https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2020/7/30/1965119/-Barr-makes-it-clear-that-he-intends-to-deliver-an-October-surprise-that-will-surprise-no-one) to provide America with a QAnon-sanctioned October surprise.

It includes Republican lawmakers like Rep. Devin Nunes, who are sitting on a packet of documents prepared by a pro-Russian official from Ukraine.

It includes Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, who has been using the State Department to pile up a stack of unsubstantiated attacks on Joe Biden.

Barr, Nunes, and Pompeo are not just sitting on this information:

they’re deliberately hiding it,

looking for the moment to strike when no one has a chance to see what a baseless conspiracy they’re really pushing.

Nunes made it clear that his loyalty to Trump exceeded any other responsibility.

when it came to questions about when Nunes would be truthful with his House colleagues,

he could not have been more clear: “Never (https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2017/3/28/1648156/-Nunes-says-he-will-never-brief-the-rest-of-the-Intelligence-Committee).”

Devin Nunes has been working directly with a pro-Russian Ukrainian lawmaker who previously passed along information through Rudy Giuliani.

In the next 97 days,

the attack on Joe Biden is going to come from William Barr, from Mike Pompeo, from Senate Republicans, and from Republican representatives like Nunes,

all of them using information that has not been vetted, or even seen, by anyone outside the GOP.

They’re not planning an October surprise:

They’re planning a bullshit assault from every direction.

https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2020/7/31/1965408/-House-Republicans-have-a-packet-of-information-from-pro-Russian-agent-they-ve-been-hiding-for-months?detail=emaildkre

there will not be ANY policy points, nothing but The Politics of Personal Destruction, using lies, slander, info from Pootin

[Spurminator]

What does it feel like to now know you were duped and were an active participant in one of the biggest political frauds our country has ever seen?

It's probably in the top ten political sideshows since Benghazi, but I'd still put the Comey memo shenanigans above it.

[DarrinS]

https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/08/new-disclosures-confirm-trump-was-the-target-of-obama-administrations-russia-probe/

[ChumpDumper]

https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/08/new-disclosures-confirm-trump-was-the-target-of-obama-administrations-russia-probe/:lol McCarthy has to be disappointed this is going nowhere.

[boutons_deux]

Trash is a USSR / Pootin asset

https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/11/19/trump-first-moscow-trip-215842

https://time.com/4437403/trump-gorbachev-history/

https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2018/07/trump-putin-russia-collusion.html

https://medium.com/@abbievansickle/timeline-of-trumps-relationship-to-russia-5e78c7e7f480

[DarrinS]

Trash is a USSR / Pootin asset

https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/11/19/trump-first-moscow-trip-215842

https://time.com/4437403/trump-gorbachev-history/

https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2018/07/trump-putin-russia-collusion.html

https://medium.com/@abbievansickle/timeline-of-trumps-relationship-to-russia-5e78c7e7f480


^Macolm Nance would love these dumb articles

[boutons_deux]

Trump’s withdrawal of troops from Germany is a parting ‘gift’ to Putin


has the added benefit of angering a staunch U.S. ally much to the delight of the Russian strongman.

re-election prospects are in “freefall,”

“the gift that keeps on giving for the Kremlin:

his unpredictability, while often a pain,

for them is continual grist for their propaganda mill.”

the president’s contentious relationship with Germany’s Angela Merkel who he considers a rival on the world stage,

which has led to several years of confrontations.

“The reality is Trump has bullied German Chancellor Angela Merkel from the get-go, and

not just on Germany’s sub-par defence spending commitment of 1.38% of GDP,

but about exports of BMW cars and trade in general,” he wrote.

“At their first meeting in the White House in spring 2017

the President barely looked Merkel in the eye,

refusing to shake her hand;

at a NATO summit in 2018 he berated her over breakfast.

And now this.”

the reality leaves allies rattled and runs counter to the US’s long-term benefit;

“He is simultaneously enabling Russian President Vladimir Putin,

a strategic foe who is already on the offensive,

while disabling allies vital in that same fight.

It is a double own goal,

typical of a US President who insists on playing by his own rules.

https://www.rawstory.com/2020/08/trumps-withdrawal-of-troops-from-germany-is-a-parting-gift-to-putin-cnn-analyst/

Trash is, has been, a Pootin agent, Trash has been groomed for decades by Russians.

[Winehole23]

welp


Statement of Assistant Attorney General for National Security John C. Demers on the Public Release of the Department’s Findings with Respect to the 29 FISA Applications that Were the Subject of the March 2020 OIG Preliminary Report

Assistant Attorney General for National Security John C. Demers stated:

“The Department of Justice has completed its review of the 29 FISA applications that were the subject of preliminary findings by the DOJ Inspector General (OIG) in March 2020. We are pleased that our review of these applications concluded that all contained sufficient basis for probable cause and uncovered only two material errors, neither of which invalidated the authorizations granted by the FISA Court. These findings, together with the more than 40 corrective actions undertaken by the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the National Security Division, should instill confidence in the FBI’s use of FISA authorities.



https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/statement-assistant-attorney-general-national-security-john-c-demers-public-release

[ChumpDumper]

welp

https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/statement-assistant-attorney-general-national-security-john-c-demers-public-releaseUndercover Demers

[Winehole23]

Undercover DemersTrump DOJ

[Spurs Homer]

But- but

CARTERRR PaGE!!!!


:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao TSA

[Winehole23]

without that peg removed, it's hard to see where TSA hangs the Obamagate conspiracy cloak, but I'm sure he'll be back soon to remind us.

[TSA]

welp

https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/statement-assistant-attorney-general-national-security-john-c-demers-public-release

That makes the Carter Page applications even more damning.

“We identified at least 17 significant errors or omissions in the Carter Page FISA applications.”

[Winehole23]

That makes the Carter Page applications even more damning.

“We identified at least 17 significant errors or omissions in the Carter Page FISA applications.”Two of them material, neither of which invalidated the applications. Sufficient probable cause existed for all of them according to Trump's DOJ.

You can take exception of course, but DOJ has the last word.

[TSA]

Two of them material, neither of which invalidated the applications. Sufficient probable cause existed for all of them according to Trump's DOJ.

You can take exception of course, but DOJ has the last word.

And what does any of that have to do with the Carter Page apps? I don’t think you realize what you’re posting.

Finding 2 material errors out of 29 applications (not the Carter Page applications) and having 17 errors/omissions on Carter Page alone is damning.

[Spurs Homer]

:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao

[Winehole23]

So, how is it even worse, TSA?

[Winehole23]

And what does any of that have to do with the Carter Page apps? I don’t think you realize what you’re posting.

Finding 2 material errors out of 29 applications (not the Carter Page applications) and having 17 errors/omissions on Carter Page alone is damning.Do go on, I'm interested in what you have say.

[Winehole23]

Are there other investigations still pending?

[boutons_deux]

Trump Fears Next Election Will Be Decided by Americans

https://media.newyorker.com/photos/5a6211843a044120643b4ec6/master/w_2560%2Cc_limit/Borowitz-Trump-Fears-Next-Election-Will-Be-Decided-by-Americans.jpg

WASHINGTON —Donald J. Trump is “scared to death” that the 2020 Presidential election will be decided by Americans, an aide to Trump has confirmed.


The aide, who spoke on the condition of anonymity, said that Trump is panicking over

a doomsday scenario in which Americans, sidelined during the 2016 election, play a dominant role in influencing the 2020 contest.

“It sounds paranoid, but, as we speak,

representatives of the United States are already plotting to remove him from office in 2020,” the aide said.

“They are determined to replace him with someone who takes a move favorable view toward their country.”

The aide said that the Americans, frustrated by Trump’s open hostility to the United States since taking office,

will “stop at nothing” to achieve their ultimate goal: installing an agent of the U.S. in the Oval Office.

“It’s pretty clear what the Americans are up to,” the aide said.

“They want a puppet who will do the bidding of the United States of America.”

While Trump has reportedly ordered his staff to do everything in its power to prevent Americans from meddling in the 2020 election,

the prospect of U.S. nationals deciding the next Presidential race has clearly left the White House rattled.

“Americans are going to use voter registration, social media, and anything else at their disposal

to hand the election to someone who will advance their interests,” he said.

“That’s what keeps Trump up at night.”

(https://www.newyorker.com/humor/borowitz-report/trump-fears-next-election-will-be-decided-by-americans)https://www.newyorker.com/humor/borowitz-report/trump-fears-next-election-will-be-decided-by-americans (https://www.newyorker.com/humor/borowitz-report/trump-fears-next-election-will-be-decided-by-americans)

[boutons_deux]

Audit found only minor FBI errors in FISA warrants

An internal audit of 29 warrant applications submitted by the FBI to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court found only minor clerical errors in a process that has come under heavy political scrutiny in recent years.

stem from an independent review of the FBI's application process for surveillance warrants by Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz (https://thehill.com/person/michael-horowitz).

the FBI had made more than a dozen errors in its applications to look into Carter Page,

the internal review looked over "hundreds of pages of facts contained in the 29 applications audited by the Office of the Inspector General" and

found "only one material misstatement and one material omission."

"The complete absence in the twenty-nine applications of material errors impacting probable cause

should instill confidence in the FBI's use of its FISA authorities,"

https://thehill.com/policy/national-security/510535-audit-found-only-minor-fbi-errors-in-fisa-warrants-court-filing

[Winehole23]

are you ok, TSA?

[boutons_deux]

Trump Threatens Mail-In Voting Executive Order

“I have the right to do it,” :lol President Donald Trump said, though he did not say what such a measure would entail.

As more states consider action to protect voters' health, the administration takes Nevada to court over its move toward universal mail-in ballots.

Politico: Trump Claims Right To Issue Executive Order On Vote-By-Mail

President Donald Trump on Monday claimed to have the authority to issue an executive order addressing the expected influx of mail-in voting in the November election and said he hadn’t ruled out doing so,

in spite of the Constitution’s expressly giving states the right to run their elections.

“I have the right to do it,” Trump insisted, adding:

“We haven’t got there yet, but we’ll see what happens.”

(https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-nevada/trump-vows-to-sue-nevada-to-block-universal-mail-in-ballots-idUSKCN24Z2DV)Reuters: Trump Vows To Sue Nevada To Block Universal Mail-In Ballots
https://khn.org/morning-breakout/trump-threatens-mail-in-voting-executive-order/

[spurraider21]

conservatives who hated obama's tyranny not saying anything about trump declaring that he has the right to unilaterally change election laws and protocols at the stroke of a pen

[Winehole23]

conservatives who hated obama's tyranny not saying anything about trump declaring that he has the right to unilaterally change election laws and protocols at the stroke of a penThe beauty part of being a hypocrite is never apologizing. Brazenness has a swagger to it: impunity.

[Winehole23]

of course in this, as in so many other gambits, Trump's malevolence is tempered by his administrative and legal incompetence. He's likely to lose the challenges, but he will have succeeded in kicking up dust about the legitimacy of the election in any case.

[spurraider21]

The beauty part of being a hypocrite is never apologizing. Brazenness has a swagger to it: impunity.
calling it out seems to ruffle feathers, as well


When will you just succumb to the fact that hypocrisy is the one constant on these forums and stop clutching your pearls every time someone illustrates it to you again? You've made a posting career talking about it.

[Winehole23]

pearl clutching about pearl clutching, how poignant.

how macho.

[Spurs Homer]

Sally Yates giving her opening statement right now (0937 hrs)

on CSPAN 1

she is dropping truth nukes about flynn and the rest of the treasonous trump team...

[Spurs Homer]

Lolol


Leningrad Lindsey’s “hearing” falls under the

”be careful who you call to testify under oath to try and discredit”

because you might not want to really hear what they say -

especially when you are on russia’s side and trumps side and are complicit in russias attack on our democracy.


Most career pros are just like Sally Yates- they all are more than happy to testify because they have nothing to hide and if they made a mistake


it is NOT in the same universe as....


Being in bed with the Russians.

[TSA]

So, how is it even worse, TSA?

:lol

[TSA]

Are there other investigations still pending?

3 that I’m aware of.

[TSA]

Lolol


Leningrad Lindsey’s “hearing” falls under the

”be careful who you call to testify under oath to try and discredit”

because you might not want to really hear what they say -

especially when you are on russia’s side and trumps side and are complicit in russias attack on our democracy.


Most career pros are just like Sally Yates- they all are more than happy to testify because they have nothing to hide and if they made a mistake


it is NOT in the same universe as....


Being in bed with the Russians.

Yates testified FBI went rogue.

[TSA]

dick slapped

https://mobile.twitter.com/Techno_Fog/status/1291044659293192192

https://mobile.twitter.com/shipwreckedcrew/status/1291071104291766273

[Spurs Homer]

Yates testified FBI went rogue.

propaganda/misinformation ^

lemme fact-check comrade TSA:


Yates testified that Comey - not the FBI - Comey did not give her prior notice of ONE of his decisions and she was not pleased about it

when the republican comrade tried to put words in her mouth and she refused to be used this way

the traitor republican finally got her to agree that “comeys ONE decision”
was considered a “rogue” act


propaganda can be used in very dishonest ways- but what else would a russian asset (witting or unwitting russian asset)
like TSA do?


It is all he has ever done.

[ElNono]

https://mobile.twitter.com/Techno_Fog/status/1291044659293192192

https://mobile.twitter.com/shipwreckedcrew/status/1291071104291766273

That's quite the inference, but I think it has more to do with the fact of answering the legal side of the judge becoming a virtual party to the proceedings due to the DOJ going away as the opposing party.

[DarrinS]

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1291154034057973762.html

[ChumpDumper]

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1291154034057973762.html"It doesn't affect me."

[ElNono]

AFAIK, FISA has nothing to do with Flynn...

[boutons_deux]

Sally Yates’ testimony was devastating to Trump’s ‘Deep State’ conspiracy theories

Jennifer Rubin outlined why the testimony of former acting Attorney General Sally Yates was a body blow to the “Deep State” conspiracy theories of President Donald Trump and his allies.

“Republicans have been so immersed in a false account of events and in conspiracy-mongering for a failed president that they seemed startled when Yates corrected them again and again.”

Yates, wrote Rubin, argued seven main points:

Former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn was not being surveilled;

Flynn was only caught up because he was plotting to “neuter” sanctions against Russia with a surveilled Russian official;

Flynn lied to Vice President Mike Pence about what he was doing;

the FBI was running a counterintelligence investigation, not a criminal one;

the FBI continued the investigation because they had evidence of Flynn’s contacts with Russia;

Flynn told material lies to FBI officials in the course of the investigation; and

Attorney General William Barr’s efforts to block the prosecution of Flynn were completely improper.

She aptly demonstrated that, while Republicans have been sucked into a parallel world of conspiracies and falsehoods,

the facts are the facts.”

“It is this

deportment, candor and professionalism that Barr has shredded while in office,”

https://www.rawstory.com/2020/08/sally-yates-testimony-was-devastating-to-trumps-deep-state-conspiracy-theories-conservative-columnist/?utm_source=&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=5135

[Winehole23]

sidebar on "Russian interference": this article balances roughly where I come out on it.

shenanigans are real, but it's probably not an organized plot jmo.

https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/united-states/2020-08-05/there-no-russian-plot-against-america

[Spurs Homer]

sidebar on "Russian interference": this article balances roughly where I come out on it.

shenanigans are real, but it's probably not an organized plot jmo.

https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/united-states/2020-08-05/there-no-russian-plot-against-america


So you agree with Russian propaganda?

Not surprised at all.

[Winehole23]

So you agree with Russian propaganda?

Not surprised at all.Because I don't agree with you doesnt mean I'm someone else's puppet. Russian shenanigans are real enough but are direly overstated, by you among many other people.

Jmo.

[Winehole23]

Did you read the article, Spurs Homer?

[Spurs Homer]

Did you read the article, Spurs Homer (https://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=52221)?

yes

very very obvious apologist piece for russia

minimizing their aggressive attacks and equivocating usa and russian actions

[boutons_deux]

Because I don't agree with you doesnt mean I'm someone else's puppet. Russian shenanigans are real enough but are direly overstated, by you among many other people.

Jmo.

how overstated?

do you know the full extent of Pootin's years long attack on USA,

of Russia's grooming of Trash for 30 years,

of Pootin laundering money through DB to Trash?

etc, etc

There's no harm in overstating, the risk is underestimating.

[Winehole23]

how overstated?

do you know the full extent of Pootin's years long attack on USA,

of Russia's grooming of Trash for 30 years,

of Pootin laundering money through DB to Trash?

etc, etc

There's no harm in overstating, the risk is underestimating.


All that seems plausible to me without there being any organized plot.

Seems overblown to me. I could be wrong about that.

[Spurs Homer]

All that seems plausible to me without there being any organized plot.

Seems overblown to me. I could be wrong about that.

Sure,

attacking our democracy and an alleged american actively aiding and abetting the attackers


is just a bothersome little non-issue because you have more important things to worry about than keeping our democracy


this is the state of sleeping complacent americans....


and there is NOTHING more that pleases putin/russia than sleeping ignorant lazy americans

[Spurs Homer]

^ not to mention that in 2016 - russia attacked and republicans claimed it wasnt happening and spent 4 years attacking the investigations/investigations

now in 2020

it has been proven that russia attacked to help trump

npw

as they repeat their attacks


senate republicans are not even denying it


they are actively receiving propaganda from russsian intelligence and USING that russian propaganda to actively assist the russians and open investigations AGAINST americans

and using that russian propaganda as a basis for their treasonous activities


they arent even pretending now that the attacks from russia are ongoing...

they are just blatantly helping russia


but


”nothing to see here- ho hum- lets not panic”

[TSA]

Should Judge Sullivan Be Disqualified from Flynn Case? An Appeals Court Is Asking

https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/08/should-judge-sullivan-be-disqualified-from-flynn-case-an-appeals-court-is-asking/amp/?__twitter_impression=true

[boutons_deux]

Intel officials altered finding Russia wants Trump to win in 2020 to spare themselves from the president’s anger

a key “finding” indicating that Russian President Vladimir

Putin is highly interested in keeping Donald Trump in the Oval Office past 2020

was omitted by officials fearing the president’s wrath (https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/08/magazine/us-russia-intelligence.html).

the N.I.E. report was intended to document Russia’s efforts to meddle in both the 2020 presidential election as well as the one slated for 2024.

“Key Judgment 2 was that in the 2020 election, Russia favored the current president: Donald Trump.”

That particular conclusion was subsequently altered over fears of how the president would receive it.

in the lead-up to 2020, Russia worked in support of the Democratic presidential candidate Bernie Sanders as well,”

“To allay any speculation that Putin’s interest in Trump had cooled,

Key Judgment 2 was substantiated by current information from a highly sensitive foreign source described by someone who read the N.I.E. as ‘100 percent reliable.'”

According to a former senior adviser to Trump,

“You couldn’t have any conversation about Russia and the election without

the president assuming you were calling his election into question.

Everyone in the White House knew that, and so you just didn’t talk about that with him.”

a way to make sure [then director of the National Counterterrorism Center, Vice Adm. Joseph] Maguire doesn’t get fired.”

“The problem is that when you’ve been treated the way the intelligence community has, they become afraid of their own shadow.

The most dangerous thing now is the churn —

the not knowing who’s going to be fired, and

what it is you might say that could cost you your job.

It’s trying to put out something and not get creamed for it.”

https://www.rawstory.com/2020/08/intel-officials-altered-finding-russia-wants-trump-to-win-in-2020-to-spare-themselves-from-the-presidents-anger-report/?utm_source=&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=5149 (https://www.rawstory.com/2020/08/intel-officials-altered-finding-russia-wants-trump-to-win-in-2020-to-spare-themselves-from-the-presidents-anger-report/?utm_source=&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=5149)

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/08/magazine/us-russia-intelligence.html (https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/08/magazine/us-russia-intelligence.html)

[TSA]

welp

https://mobile.twitter.com/mtaibbi/status/1292471465502285824

I know the consequences of my speaking out. America is now in a political “UnCivil War” where individuals—even at outlets like The New York Times and Washington Post that profess objective journalism—are personally attacked if their facts don’t fit entrenched narratives. Key politicians and intelligence figures would like the facts surrounding Russiagate’s origins classified and buried for decades, as with past U.S./MI6 intelligence scandals. I can’t let that happen. After all, I inadvertently helped jump-start it. Even if this story is hidden now, it will ultimately impact Trump, Biden, the 2020 election, and our country for years.

There is far too much to tell in a single article. In the next several weeks I plan to reveal what I know, including: the comedy of errors leading to a Cambridge Four member meeting and targeting the FBI’s main surveillance excuse Carter Page; the information given to an FBI source in August 2016 should have immediately ended their investigation alleging Page was a master spy linking top Trump officials to Putin; how a secret anti-Trump source sought one of the world’s most powerful positions that could undermine the president; and official statements by FBI’s Crossfire Hurricane officials to the DOJ Inspector General were factually inaccurate or wildly inconsistent with other evidence, raising the question of if those officials risked criminal prosecution to conceal their acts.

This is not a position I ever sought. As I worked with government investigators it seemed inconceivable that key facts could be covered up until now. Yet with both Flynn’s hearing and the election approaching, whatever the consequences, everyone impacted deserves to know the truth.

[ChumpDumper]

He was fucked.

He deserved to be fucked.

Trump's firing Flynn was the smartest thing he did his entire term.

[TSA]

https://mobile.twitter.com/MariaBartiromo/status/1292454303999897602

https://mobile.twitter.com/ChadPergram/status/1292483067349737472

[boutons_deux]

Trash's sycophants working hard to destroy Trash's dick-sucking puppetship under Pootin.

See where Trash won't even let anybody mention Pootin/Russia because he's so sensitive about being Pootin's butt boy

[TSA]

Trash's sycophants working hard to destroy Trash's dick-sucking puppetship under Pootin.

See where Trash won't even let anybody mention Pootin/Russia because he's so sensitive about being Pootin's butt boy

He’s the worst butt boy then

https://www.politico.com/news/2020/08/03/delta-crescent-energy-syrian-oil-391033

[DMC]

welp

https://mobile.twitter.com/mtaibbi/status/1292471465502285824

I know the consequences of my speaking out. America is now in a political “UnCivil War” where individuals—even at outlets like The New York Times and Washington Post that profess objective journalism—are personally attacked if their facts don’t fit entrenched narratives. Key politicians and intelligence figures would like the facts surrounding Russiagate’s origins classified and buried for decades, as with past U.S./MI6 intelligence scandals. I can’t let that happen. After all, I inadvertently helped jump-start it. Even if this story is hidden now, it will ultimately impact Trump, Biden, the 2020 election, and our country for years.

There is far too much to tell in a single article. In the next several weeks I plan to reveal what I know, including: the comedy of errors leading to a Cambridge Four member meeting and targeting the FBI’s main surveillance excuse Carter Page; the information given to an FBI source in August 2016 should have immediately ended their investigation alleging Page was a master spy linking top Trump officials to Putin; how a secret anti-Trump source sought one of the world’s most powerful positions that could undermine the president; and official statements by FBI’s Crossfire Hurricane officials to the DOJ Inspector General were factually inaccurate or wildly inconsistent with other evidence, raising the question of if those officials risked criminal prosecution to conceal their acts.

This is not a position I ever sought. As I worked with government investigators it seemed inconceivable that key facts could be covered up until now. Yet with both Flynn’s hearing and the election approaching, whatever the consequences, everyone impacted deserves to know the truth.

Except that's not what was said. What was said was that if Flynn's reaction to political pressure against him was to blow up, he's really fucked. In context it means something completely different than just saying "Flynn is completely fucked".

[ElNono]

Except that's not what was said. What was said was that if Flynn's reaction to political pressure against him was to blow up, he's really fucked. In context it means something completely different than just saying "Flynn is completely fucked".

Also, he was effectively fucked when he admitted to lying to federal officers in front a judge, not once but twice.

[TSA]

New FBI Document Released by Senate Judiciary Comm Shows FBI — AND Mueller — Deliberately Misled Senate About Steele Memos

“this newly released Memo can be seen as taking license with that fact — presenting information to the Senate Intelligence Committee claiming that Danchenko “validated” the claims in Steele’s memos, thereby justifying the continued pursuit by the SCO of the Russia-hoax investigation.

Everything in this memo would have been vetted by the SCO. Everything in this memo was part of “Crossfire Hurricane”, and when Rosenstein appointed Mueller he assigned to the SCO the entirely of the investigation that Comey had referred to during his testimony before Congress in late March 2017 — including everything in the Steele memos. These subjects were now under the control and supervision of the SCO, and on these issues the FBI was working for the SCO.

To the extent this memo misled the Senate, that was Robert Mueller’s SCO misleading the Senate — plain and simple.“

https://www.redstate.com/shipwreckedcrew/2020/08/09/new-fbi-document-released-by-senate-judiciary-comm-shows-fbi-and-mueller-deliberately-misled-congress-about-steele-memos/amp/?__twitter_impression=true

[TSA]

Except that's not what was said. What was said was that if Flynn's reaction to political pressure against him was to blow up, he's really fucked. In context it means something completely different than just saying "Flynn is completely fucked".

I didn’t write the tweet and just included to provide the link. Some of Taibii’s articles are behind a paywall. More interested in the below being revealed.

“There is far too much to tell in a single article. In the next several weeks I plan to reveal what I know, including: the comedy of errors leading to a Cambridge Four member meeting and targeting the FBI’s main surveillance excuse Carter Page; the information given to an FBI source in August 2016 should have immediately ended their investigation alleging Page was a master spy linking top Trump officials to Putin; how a secret anti-Trump source sought one of the world’s most powerful positions that could undermine the president; and official statements by FBI’s Crossfire Hurricane officials to the DOJ Inspector General were factually inaccurate or wildly inconsistent with other evidence, raising the question of if those officials risked criminal prosecution to conceal their acts.”

[ChumpDumper]

No one ever said Carter Page was a master spy.

At best he was a frothy-mouth stooge.

[Spurminator]

Imagine still being this interested in protecting Michael Flynn's reputation.

[DarrinS]

Imagine still being this interested in protecting Michael Flynn's reputation.

His reputation already destroyed by unethical, perhaps illegal means.

Who's reputation are you interested in protecting?

[ElNono]

His reputation already destroyed by unethical, perhaps illegal means.

Who's reputation are you interested in protecting?

What was illegal in himself admitting to lying, twice?

[Spurminator]

His reputation already destroyed by unethical, perhaps illegal means.

Who's reputation are you interested in protecting?

I typically focus my energies on people who don't lie to the FBI and then get let off the hook by the President they're friendly with.

[TSA]

Imagine still being this interested in protecting Michael Flynn's reputation.

Imagine thinking this is about protecting Michael Flynn’s reputation and at the same time still being this uninterested that the FBI/DOJ lied to Congress and the FISA court to illegally spy on a presidential campaign. Imagine being this uninterested that the FBI/DOJ continued the investigation into a sitting President knowing for years there was no conspiracy with Russia.

[ChumpDumper]

His reputation already destroyed by unethical, perhaps illegal means.

Who's reputation are you interested in protecting?Does Flynn live in your zip code?

[Winehole23]

Imagine thinking this is about protecting Michael Flynn’s reputation and at the same time still being this uninterested that the FBI/DOJ lied to Congress and the FISA court to illegally spy on a presidential campaign. Imagine being this uninterested that the FBI/DOJ continued the investigation into a sitting President knowing for years there was no conspiracy with Russia.It's amazing that so many people close Trump pled out to federal crimes over "nothing.". The ones who took their chances were convicted.

So many guilty people in the pay of an innocent man, don't you ever wonder?

[boutons_deux]

CBS’ Brennan Repeatedly Confronts NatSec Adviser O’Brien on

Foreign Interference ‘Happening on President Trump’s Watch’:

What Are You Doing to Stop It?

“We’ve got our cyber teams in place. DHS is working very hard to track down those malign actors,” O’Brien said.

“is it Russia again?” Brennan asked.

“We know it’s China. We know it’s Russia. We know it’s Iran,” O’Brien said.


“Tampering with election infrastructure?” Brennan asked.

O’Brien said yes

“The president has told the Russians, and

we’ve told the Russians, our counterparts, many, many times

not to get involved in our election,” O’Brien said. :lol Please, pretty please, please stop :lol

“But they’re doing it again, which is what you’re saying, so the message clearly wasn’t received,” Brennan noted,

O’Brien insisted “there’s almost nothing we can sanction left of the Russians” and that

“we put so many sanctions on the Russians that, by the way, :lol but nothing really painful, just proforma crap

that the prior administration didn’t do.” :lol

“But the intelligence community is saying that the interference is also happening on President Trump’s watch,” Brennan followed up, “which is why

I’m specifically asking you, you know, what are you doing to stop it?”

https://www.mediaite.com/tv/cbs-brennan-repeatedly-confronts-natsec-adviser-obrien-on-foreign-interference-happening-on-president-trumps-watch-what-are-you-doing-to-stop-it/ (https://www.mediaite.com/tv/cbs-brennan-repeatedly-confronts-natsec-adviser-obrien-on-foreign-interference-happening-on-president-trumps-watch-what-are-you-doing-to-stop-it/)

==============

Trump eliminates job of national cybersecurity coordinator

Top congressional Democrats immediately introduced a bill to restore the position of cyber czar.

May 15, 2018,

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/white-house/trump-eliminates-job-national-cybersecurity-coordinator-n874511

==============

Under Trump, the Fight Against Cybercrime Has Waned

https://www.wired.com/story/under-trump-the-fight-against-cybercrime-has-waned/

[DarrinS]

Imagine thinking this is about protecting Michael Flynn’s reputation and at the same time still being this uninterested that the FBI/DOJ lied to Congress and the FISA court to illegally spy on a presidential campaign. Imagine being this uninterested that the FBI/DOJ continued the investigation into a sitting President knowing for years there was no conspiracy with Russia.


The people you are arguing with really believed the Russiagate bullshit for the past 3 years (and probably still do).

Sad

[Winehole23]

The people you are arguing with really believed the Russiagate bullshit for the past 3 years (and probably still do).

SadWhy did so many plead guilty if they did nothing wrong?

[ChumpDumper]

The people you are arguing with really believed the Russiagate bullshit for the past 3 years (and probably still do).

SadThe person you are agreeing with believes in pizzagate, QAnon and the the Seth Rich assassination theory.

[Spurminator]

The person you are agreeing with believes in pizzagate, QAnon and the the Seth Rich assassination theory.

Darrin has never distanced from those conspiracy theories and never will.

[DarrinS]

Darrin has never distanced from those conspiracy theories and never will.

Use the search tool and find a SINGLE post of mine about those theories.

Go

[DMC]

It's amazing that so many people close Trump pled out to federal crimes over "nothing.". The ones who took their chances were convicted.

So many guilty people in the pay of an innocent man, don't you ever wonder?

Innocence is only about lack of evidence to the contrary, especially with politicians. No one is really innocent, at least no one who's ever held public office.

[Spurminator]

Use the search tool and find a SINGLE post of mine about those theories.

Go

I don't have to. I 100% believe you've avoided offering an opinion on any of those wacko theories at the risk of offending your ideological tribemates.

If Pizzagate was a liberal conspiracy theory you'd bring it up almost daily like you do with Russiagate.

[ChumpDumper]

Use the search tool and find a SINGLE post of mine about those theories.

GoYou definitely haven't expressed any disbelief in them.

[DarrinS]

I don't have to. I 100% believe you've avoided offering an opinion on any of those wacko theories at the risk of offending your ideological tribemates.

If Pizzagate was a liberal conspiracy theory you'd bring it up almost daily like you do with Russiagate.

Did you just admit Russiagate was a liberal conspiracy theory?

:lol

[Winehole23]

Innocence is only about lack of evidence to the contrary, especially with politicians. No one is really innocent, at least no one who's ever held public office.I would go further than that. No one is innocent.

I wasn't so much declaring Donald Trump innocent as lampooning guys like TSA and DarrinS who think he's an undeserving victim of the ministrations of the justice system.

[Spurminator]

Did you just admit Russiagate was a liberal conspiracy theory?

:lol

No I didn't. I've given my opinion of parts of the Russia collusion investigation plenty of times. You still haven't said you think Pizzagate is bullshit, even though I've basically set it up twice for you to do so.

[DarrinS]

No I didn't. I've given my opinion of parts of the Russia collusion investigation plenty of times. You still haven't said you think Pizzagate is bullshit, even though I've basically set it up twice for you to do so.

I think Pizzagate is bullshit.

There you go.