Flynn in major trouble for speaking to Russia about sanctions

[Pavlov]

now lets discuss DHS doing their own hacking into several states during election.OK, what are you talking about?

[Chris]

What were you too busy doing that you missed Jeanette Manfra admitting this in June of 2017?

“Cyber-security officials testifying at the Senate hearing acknowledged for the first time the extent of the Russian effort to interfere with the election. Twenty-one states saw such intrusions last year, a senior official from the Department of Homeland Security, Jeanette Manfra, said. None of the intrusions affected the vote count itself, all the officials testified.”

http://time.com/4828306/russian-hacking-election-widespread-private-data/

:lol just admitted

mein neger

https://images.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.hotflick.net%2Fflicks%2F2001_T raining_Day%2F001TRD_Denzel_Washington_004.jpg&f=1

[koriwhat]

OK, what are you talking about?

discussion ends with you so i won't go down that path if you're involved. sorry pav.

[Pavlov]

discussion ends with you so i won't go down that path if you're involved. sorry pav.So you don't want to discuss it after all.

lol

[Pavlov]

mein neger

https://images.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.hotflick.net%2Fflicks%2F2001_T raining_Day%2F001TRD_Denzel_Washington_004.jpg&f=1:lmao

He just proved Russian interference in the election.

[djohn2oo8]

now lets discuss DHS doing their own hacking into several states during election.

Does it hurt to be that stupid? Or maybe you just have nothing up top.

[Chris]

:lmao

He just proved Russian interference in the election.

"None of the intrusions affected the vote count itself, all the officials testified.”

*Risitas

[Pavlov]

"None of the intrusions affected the vote count itself, all the officials testified.”:lmao shit on by your own side.

[Chris]

Also those 'intrusions' were already debunked as FBI using code to mask IP's as Russian. That was last year news :lol

[Pavlov]

Also those 'intrusions' were already debunked as FBI using code to mask IP's as Russian. That was last year news :lol:rollin Trump's DHS just gave an interview about it this week.

[djohn2oo8]

:rollin Trump's DHS just gave an interview about it this week.

:lmao Chris

[koriwhat]

So you don't want to discuss it after all.

lol

not with you. i literally don't want to discuss anything with you and your merry-go-round shtick.

lol

[koriwhat]

Does it hurt to be that stupid? Or maybe you just have nothing up top.

you're probably of the 1% that's a fucking idiot in your ethnicity. go eat some more pets.

[Pavlov]

not with you. i literally don't want to discuss anything with you and your merry-go-round shtick.

lolYou don't want to discuss anything with anyone here.

lol

[Pavlov]

you're probably of the 1% that's a fucking idiot in your ethnicity. go eat some more pets.Aw, a good ol' fashioned racist remark.

[pgardn]

Show me some proof. All you have is the Steele Dossier which has ZERO credibility :lol

You are an absolute idiot. You really are.
That dossier means absolutely nothing in what I stated.
Honest to God do you live beneath the surface of a scum filled pond that has a hole covered by a giant rock that sits directly ON YOUR HEAD?

[Chris]

:rollin Trump's DHS just gave an interview about it this week.


The hacking of state and local election databases in 2016 was more extensive than previously reported, including at least one (:lol) successful attempt to alter voter information, and the theft of thousands of voter records that contain private information like partial Social Security numbers, current and former officials tell TIME.

In one case, investigators found there had been a manipulation of voter data in a county database but the alterations were discovered and rectified, two sources familiar with the matter tell TIME. Investigators have not identified whether the hackers in that case were Russian agents.:lol

9Jz1TjCphXE

[Chris]

You are an absolute idiot. You really are.
That dossier means absolutely nothing in what I stated.
Honest to God do you live beneath the surface of a scum filled pond that has a hole covered by a giant rock that sits directly ON YOUR HEAD?

Show me some proof snowflake, or go back and f your mother some more. Makes nary a difference to me.

[pgardn]

not at all... and if anything, they didn't sway america to vote for djt. america was swayed due to the fact that HRC is a **** and should've never been touted as next in line.

I personally dont believe they swayed the election.
But if you don't think they interfered... don't talk to your clients.


This following is as honest as you giving Harlem a tattoo redo or whatever:
I just met a bicycle shop owner in a small strip center in a perfect location. Right by San Antonio's greenway trails. I came in alone, he was spinning rims to see how bent they were and I made a comment and he asked if I knew physics. I told him yes and he immediately grabbed my arm led me to his computer and started showing me flat earth utubes, earnestly trying to convince me. I said nothing but in the meantime customers walked in, had a bit of a listen, and promptly walked out.

Dont be that guy. I don't wish for more people on the welfare roles.

[pgardn]

Show me some proof snowflake, or go back and f your mother some more. Makes nary a difference to me.
Why don't you go back through this thread moron.
Im not here to do in-your-face obvious reading.

So Chris, why do you think the earth is flat?

[Chris]

Why don't you go back through this thread moron.
Im not here to do in-your-face obvious reading.

So Chris, why do you think the earth is flat?


Show me some proof snowflake, or go back and f your mother some more. Makes nary a difference to me.

[pgardn]

Show me some proof. All you have is the Steele Dossier which has ZERO credibility :lol

You are truly an idiot.
Read what others have already posted.
Im not your therapist.

But I do want to know why you think the earth is flat. I mean the evidence that show the Earth is round is very scant. When the astronauts went into space they saw a disc, so... I see where you are headed.

*this is what happens when you dump mental health care patients out on the streets; they find a computer*

[Pavlov]

You are truly an idiot.
Read what others have already posted.
Im not your therapist.

But I do want to know why you think the earth is flat. I mean the evidence that show the Earth is round is very scant. When the astronauts went into space they saw a disc, so... I see where you are headed.

*this is what happens when you dump mental health care patients out on the streets; they find a computer*lol chris

http://gif-finder.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/Brutal-Boxing-Knockout-in-Slow-Motion.gif

[koriwhat]

I personally dont believe they swayed the election.
But if you don't think they interfered... don't talk to your clients.


This following is as honest as you giving Harlem a tattoo redo or whatever:
I just met a bicycle shop owner in a small strip center in a perfect location. Right by San Antonio's greenway trails. I came in alone, he was spinning rims to see how bent they were and I made a comment and he asked if I knew physics. I told him yes and he immediately grabbed my arm led me to his computer and started showing me flat earth utubes, earnestly trying to convince me. I said nothing but in the meantime customers walked in, had a bit of a listen, and promptly walked out.

Dont be that guy. I don't wish for more people on the welfare roles.

you're an idiot man.

btw, i wouldn't put it past russia, china, nk, et all trying to interfere in our elections and for decades now. obama did the same world wide. go figure.

[pgardn]

you're an idiot man.

btw, i wouldn't put it past russia, china, nk, et all trying to interfere in our elections and for decades now. obama did the same world wide. go figure.

Since we have its ok.
Has anyone ever said, a pox on your tattoo needle?

[Chris]

You are truly an idiot.
Read what others have already posted.
Im not your therapist.

But I do want to know why you think the earth is flat. I mean the evidence that show the Earth is round is very scant. When the astronauts went into space they saw a disc, so... I see where you are headed.

*this is what happens when you dump mental health care patients out on the streets; they find a computer*

I'm asking YOU. Show me some proof, or go back & f your mother some more. It's pretty simple. Never claimed the Earth to be flat. Never said such. Stop trying to change the subject. That's called projection. This really isn't difficult if it's universal knowledge like you claim. Chop-chop.

[Chris]

you're an idiot man.

btw, i wouldn't put it past russia, china, nk, et all trying to interfere in our elections and for decades now. obama did the same world wide. go figure.

He's full of Schiff.

:cry read what other people said, I can't back anything I say up :cry

[koriwhat]

Since we have its ok.
Has anyone ever said, a pox on your tattoo needle?

what? talk english motherfucker! you asking if anyone had developed pox marks after healing a tattoo? nah.

[pgardn]

[QUOTE=Chris;9283009]He's full of Schiff.

:cry read what other people said, I can't back anything I say up :cry[/QUOTE

This only the public info signed off on by the Republican Senate.

https://www.intelligence.senate.gov/sites/default/files/documents/ICA_2017_01.pdf

If you want all the press reports via the best most reliable sources on the planet, go to the WSJ, the NY Times, the Washington Post. This, of course is a trap to solidify the fact that you don't know how to read sources and think for yourself. Is the minnow going to bite?

Now, since you don't believe the earth is flat, tell me how YOU personally came to the belief the Earth is round. No photos allowed Chris. Just your understanding. I want you to type this out in your own words. This is gonna be fun.

[pgardn]

what? talk english motherfucker! you asking if anyone had developed pox marks after healing a tattoo? nah.

God, you are an idiot as well.

[pgardn]

Look up, a pox on someone or something ya damn turnip that just fell off a truck.

And there is another for you to ponder.

jeeeeezzzzzz

We have some intellectuals on team Red....

[Chris]

[QUOTE=Chris;9283009]He's full of Schiff.

:cry read what other people said, I can't back anything I say up :cry[/QUOTE

This only the public info signed off on by the Republican Senate.

https://www.intelligence.senate.gov/sites/default/files/documents/ICA_2017_01.pdf

If you want all the press reports via the best most reliable sources on the planet, go to the WSJ, the NY Times, the Washington Post. This, of course is a trap to solidify the fact that you don't know how to read sources and think for yourself. Is the minnow going to bite?

Now, since you don't believe the earth is flat, tell me how YOU personally came to the belief the Earth is round. No photos allowed Chris. Just your understanding. I want you to type this out in your own words. This is gonna be fun.

Yeah all that says is Putin favored Trump publically over Hillary and RT was consistently negative in their coverage of Hillary and her emails. Dear God, the Russians are talking about Hillary!



Public Disclosures of Russian-Collected Data.
We assess with high confidence that the GRU used
the Guccifer 2.0 persona, DCLeaks.com, and
WikiLeaks to release US victim data obtained in
This report is a declassified version of a highly classified assessment; its conclusions are identical to those in the highly classified
assessment but this version does not include the full supporting information on key elements of the influence campaign.
3
cyber operations publicly and in exclusives to
media outlets.

GRU = Seth Rich. This is good stuff thanks for the link.

[Pavlov]

GRU = Seth Rich.:lmao

No.

[pgardn]

[QUOTE=pgardn;9283172]

Yeah all that says is Putin favored Trump publically over Hillary and RT was consistently negative in their coverage of Hillary and her emails. Dear God, the Russians are talking about Hillary!




GRU = Seth Rich. This is good stuff thanks for the link.


No Chris. That's not all that it says. You can't read.

Yeah. The Russians also put stuff out about Trump, race, almost anything controversial. It's very clever. It's cheap and dumbasses like yourself believe it when they get their little geeks to tweet it, put it on Facebook, etc...

Okay Chris.

What do you read that you find most believable because just like me and everyone else on here, we can't be present when events go down, and we don't have access to the people who investigate this stuff. But we can READ about it.

So

1. What are your go to reads for news?
2. What evidence do you have that has convinced you that the Earth is round?

The board awaits....

[pgardn]

lol chris

http://gif-finder.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/Brutal-Boxing-Knockout-in-Slow-Motion.gif

He wants more, we give him more.

[DarrinS]

Is this still a thing?

[Chris]

No Chris. That's not all that it says. You can't read.

What does it say? You still haven't said anything.


Yeah. The Russians also put stuff out about Trump, race, almost anything controversial. It's very clever. It's cheap and dumbasses like yourself believe it when they get their little geeks to tweet it, put it on Facebook, etc...

Yeah Russia has Media too. Fascinating stuff.


Okay Chris.

What do you read that you find most believable because just like me and everyone else on here, we can't be present when events go down, and we don't have access to the people who investigate this stuff. But we can READ about it.

So

1. What are your go to reads for news?
2. What evidence do you have that has convinced you that the Earth is round?

1. Don't have a preference. I avoid MSNBC/ABC/CNN.
2. Your Earth 'thingy' is really dumb. You should stop.

[Chris]

He wants more, we give him more.

You still haven't said anything. Asking Pavlov to help you is comical.

[pgardn]

Chris has no preference.
Fine.

1. Tell me what you read because you are not present when events occur. Nor do you have access to people who investigate. Or do you just dream it? Has to come from somewhere.
2. Hell no I'm not stopping with the Earth thing because I truly think you have no clue as to what the evidence is for a flat Earth or a round Earth
3. Chris. Do you believe you are made up of atoms?

Im asking this seemingly innocuous simople even weird stuff because I think you are really quite stupid. I really do.

[pgardn]

You still haven't said anything. Asking Pavlov to help you is comical.

He helped me with a picture?
Good Chris. Good boy.

And yes I have not said anything. But I have typed. Now you might reciprocate with something meaningful. But most likely, nope.

[Chris]

You're just another ham n' egger. Now go on - get.


1jaSoo9hPi4

[djohn2oo8]

Is this still a thing?

You didn't seem to be questioning lengths of investigations when Benghazi was investigated for over 2 years. Why so anxious?

[Pavlov]

Is this still a thing?You have 1014 posts in this thread.

[Reck]

Is this still a thing?

:lol

It's true, we haven't heard shit about Russia in months. Shit has fizzled out and it's all about obstruction now.

If Mueller doesn't deliver the goods by summer or at the very least the end of the year, Trump might as well finish out his one term.

Guy has less than 3 years in office now so meh.

[djohn2oo8]

:lol

It's true, we haven't heard shit about Russia in months. Shit has fizzled out and it's all about obstruction now.

If Mueller doesn't deliver the goods by summer or at the very least the end of the year, Trump might as well finish out his one term.

Guy has less than 3 years in office now so meh.

No it hasn't fizzled out. And no it's not all about obstruction. Because you haven't heard anything, just remember everytime a Mueller story comes out, the event has taken place weeks before it was reported. More plea deals are being made. And if Trump refuses the interview, which I hope he does, charges will be unsealed.

Also, Trump is tweeting about "Russia Russia Russia" almost everyday. He hears what's happening.

[pgardn]

You're just another ham n' egger. Now go on - get.


1jaSoo9hPi4


And hes done...

Not gonna put up what he reads. (If anything)
Has no idea or does not care to think about how people come to believe what they believe.

Do not attempt to reason a man out of something he did not reason himself into.

- Jonathan Swift

[pgardn]

No it hasn't fizzled out. And no it's not all about obstruction. Because you haven't heard anything, just remember everytime a Mueller story comes out, the event has taken place weeks before it was reported. More plea deals are being made. And if Trump refuses the interview, which I hope he does, charges will be unsealed.

Also, Trump is tweeting about "Russia Russia Russia" almost everyday. He hears what's happening.

This is a good point.

But Flynn has been caught just like the original title. So we are now on who else in the Trump admin is gonna get caught. And here is where I agree with Reck. It's easier to catch people lying and obstructing concerning some action than actually proving the accused even carried out the act in court, and the act is illegal, and dealing out the proper level of illegality.

Flynn lied about meetings. He lied to the FBI. Felony. Without a court hearing. Nicely done. But someone down the line is not gonna go down so easily IMO; Because it will personally hurt much more. Especially the younger Trump family/ friends, if it actually comes to them.

[TSA]

No it hasn't fizzled out. And no it's not all about obstruction. Because you haven't heard anything, just remember everytime a Mueller story comes out, the event has taken place weeks before it was reported. More plea deals are being made. And if Trump refuses the interview, which I hope he does, charges will be unsealed.

Also, Trump is tweeting about "Russia Russia Russia" almost everyday. He hears what's happening.

In a word, the Grassley-Graham memo is shocking. Yet, the press barely notices.

Rest assured: If a Republican administration had used unverifiable hearsay from a patently suspect agent of the Republican presidential candidate to gull the FISA court into granting a warrant to spy on an associate of the Democratic nominee’s campaign, it would be covered as the greatest political scandal in a half-century.

Instead, it was the other way around. The Grassley-Graham memo corroborates the claims in the Nunes memo: The Obama Justice Department and FBI used anonymously sourced, Clinton-campaign generated innuendo to convince the FISA court to issue surveillance warrants against Carter Page, and in doing so, they concealed the Clinton campaign’s role. Though the Trump campaign had cut ties with Page shortly before the first warrant was issued in October 2016, the warrant application was based on wild allegations of a corrupt conspiracy between the Trump campaign and the Kremlin. Moreover, the warrant meant the FBI could seize not only Page’s forward-going communications but any past emails and texts he may have stored — i.e., his Trump campaign communications.

With its verification by the Grassley-Graham memo, the Nunes memo now has about a thousand times more corroboration than the Steele dossier, the basis of the heinous allegations used by the Justice Department and FBI to get the FISA warrants.

What the Grassley-Graham memo tells us is that the Nunes memo, for all the hysteria about it, was tame. The Grassley-Graham memo tells us that we need not only a full-blown investigation of what possessed the Obama administration to submit such shoddy applications to the FISA court, but of how a judge — or perhaps as many as four judges — rationalized signing the warrants.

*

We need full disclosure — the warrants, the applications, the court proceedings. No more games.

Senators Charles Grassley of Iowa and Lindsey Graham of South Carolina are senior Republicans on the Judiciary Committee (which Grassley chairs, while Graham chairs a relevant subcommittee). As we’ve previously detailed (in a two-part series, here and here), they composed their memo in support of a criminal referral recommending that dossier author Christopher Steele be investigated for making false statements to the FBI (which is a felony). Initially, the senators’ memo was withheld, then it was released with extensive redactions because its contents were largely classified — covering submissions to the FISA court, the secret tribunal established by the 1978 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. But following the release of the Nunes memo — the memo prepared by Republican majority staff of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence led by Representative Devin Nunes (R., Calif.) — Senators Grassley and Graham stepped up their admirable efforts to get more information unsealed . . . so that the public can see it, even if the press prefers not to cover it.

Last Friday, the Nunes memo asserted that the FBI and Justice Department had significantly relied on the unverified Steele dossier to obtain FISA warrants on Page. In the week that followed, House Intelligence Committee Democrats and their media echo chamber bleated about how things had been taken out of context, with some suggesting that there was plenty of other evidence to establish probable cause that Page was acting as a Russian agent. (See my column last Sunday responding to claims by Representative Jerrold Nadler, here.) It was even implied that Nunes & Co. had deceptively reported committee testimony by the FBI’s then deputy director Andrew McCabe that the Steele dossier was essential to this probable-cause showing.

We’re not hearing much of that now. No wonder. Here’s the Grassley-Graham memo on the critical first FISA application, the basis for the warrant granted on October 21, 2016:

The bulk of the application consists of allegations against Page that were disclosed to the FBI by Mr. Steele and are also outlined in the Steele dossier. The application appears to contain no additional information corroborating the dossier allegations against Mr. Page, although it does cite to a news article that appears to be sourced to Mr. Steele’s dossier.

We’ll come to the news article — the stupefying circular attempt to corroborate Steele with Steele. For the moment, suffice it to say that the senators have confirmed the Nunes memo’s account, except with much more information than House Republicans were able to include. Information such as this:

When asked at the March 2017 briefing [of Judiciary Committee leaders] why the FBI relied on the dossier in the FISA applications absent meaningful corroboration — and in light of the highly political motives surrounding its creation — then-Director [James] Comey stated that the FBI included the dossier allegations about Carter Page in the FISA applications because Mr. Steele himself was considered reliable due to his past work with the Bureau. (Emphasis added.)

On this score, Grassley and Graham quote directly from the warrant applications: “Based on [Steele’s] previous reporting history with the FBI whereby [Steele] provided reliable information to the FBI, the FBI believes [Steele’s] reporting to be credible.” (Emphasis added.)

I cannot stress enough how irregular this is. It is why there is abundant reason to demand that the judge explain his or her rationale for granting the warrant.

As I outlined at greater length last week (here, in section C), in applying for a warrant, the government must establish the reliability of the informants who witnessed the alleged facts claimed to support a probable-cause finding. Steele was not one of those witnesses. He is not the source of the facts. He is the purveyor of the sources — anonymous Russians, much of whose alleged information is based on hearsay, sometimes multiple steps removed from direct knowledge. Steele has not been in Russia since his cover as a British spy was blown nearly 20 years ago. He has sources, who have sources, who have sources . . . and so on. None of his information is better than third-hand; most of it is more attenuated than that.

For purposes of justifying a warrant, it does not matter that, in a totally unrelated investigation (involving corruption at FIFA, the international soccer organization), the FBI judged that the hearsay information provided by Steele, then a British agent, checked out. In his anti-Trump research, Steele could not verify his sources. Furthermore, he was now a former foreign intelligence officer who was then working for private clients — which is the advocacy business, not the search-for-truth business.

A judge would need to know whether Steele’s sources were reliable, not whether Steele himself was reliable.
Let that sink in, then think about this contrast: No actual FBI agent, no matter how renowned, would be able to get a judicial warrant based solely on his own reliability as an investigator. Jim Comey, despite having a résumé geometrically more impressive than Steele’s, including Senate confirmations to some of federal law-enforcement’s loftiest positions, would not be given a warrant based on representations to the court that the FBI, the Justice Department, the president, and the Senate all attested to his impeccable reliability.

The only reliability that counts is the reliability of the factual informants, not of the investigator who purports to channel the informants. The judge wants to know why the court should believe the specific factual claims: Was the informant truly in a position to witness what is alleged, and if so, does the informant have a track record of providing verified information? The track record of the investigator who locates the sources is beside the point. A judge would need to know whether Steele’s sources were reliable, not whether Steele himself was reliable.

This is not esoterica. In the investigations biz, this is so basic that to call it “Warrants 101” doesn’t do it justice. If you don’t have witnesses with verifiable, first-hand knowledge, you don’t have anything. Without them, to borrow Director Comey’s notorious dictum, no reasonable prosecutor would bring a warrant application to a federal judge, and no reasonable judge would issue a warrant.

If there is no credible sourcing for the factual allegations in the warrant application, that is a probable-cause deficiency that could not have been cured by the reputation of the purveyor of the sources, no matter how sterling. That said, it is obvious that the less identifiable and reliable the informants are, the greater is the government’s obligation to be transparent in conveying the investigator’s potential biases. The Obama administration’s malfeasance on this point is breathtaking.

Graham and Grassley recount:

The FBI noted to a vaguely limited extent the political origins of the dossier. In footnote 8 [of the first warrant application, apparently repeated in the subsequent applications] the FBI stated that the dossier information was compiled pursuant to the direction of a law firm who had hired an “identified U.S. person” — now known as Glenn Simpson of Fusion GPS.

The fact that Fusion GPS’s ultimate client was the Clinton campaign was never disclosed in any of the warrant applications, which ran well beyond June 2017, when the last 90-day extension was granted. Patently, so much struggle and circumlocution went into crafting this “vaguely limited” footnote that we can only conclude the decision not to disclose the Clinton connection was the subject of much deliberation.

The Clinton campaign’s sponsorship was not publicly disclosed until October 2017. Before then, it is virtually certain that, to the extent the FISA court and Congress were told of the “political origins” of the dossier, these were benignly presented as bipartisan concerns about Donald Trump. That is, the Steele dossier phase of Fusion’s anti-Trump project was conflated with the earlier phase, when — as Simpson has testified — Fusion did documentary research on Trump during the Republican primaries for a conservative media outlet. It was not disclosed that, by the time Steele was hired to do the dossier, the project was backed exclusively by the Democratic party and the Clinton campaign.

Manifestly, that was a material fact. If a prosecutor withheld an arguably exculpatory fact of this degree of significance, it could get a conviction reversed. As some have observed, a public company would likely face a stock fraud prosecution for concealing a fact so patently material from its required SEC reports.

The Clinton-campaign tie should have been disclosed from the beginning. Now, consider what happened as the surveillance continued for the better part of a year.

In late October 2016, shortly after the first warrant was issued, the FBI terminated its relationship with Steele because he lied to the Bureau about his contacts with the media. But the Justice Department did not report this to the FISA court. Instead, when the first warrant expired in January 2017, the FBI and Justice Department sought its renewal by, again, relying on the credibility of the guy they’d booted for lying. In another lawyerly footnote, they told the FISA court that Steele had been terminated not because he lied but because he was guilty of “unauthorized disclosure of information to the press.”

But that was not the half of it. Steele’s agreement with the FBI was that he would not communicate with the press. He made that agreement and then communicated with the press anyway — which showed he was unreliable, notwithstanding the FBI’s continued insistence to the contrary. He hadn’t just flouted the agreement by speaking to the press, though; he had clearly lied about doing so.

By mid-September 2016, at Fusion’s direction and even before the first FISA warrant was issued, Steele had spoken with a plethora of Clinton-friendly press outlets. As a result, Yahoo News published a news story by Michael Isikoff on September 23, which reported precisely the information that Steele had given to the FBI about Page: that he’d supposedly met in Moscow with two top Russian operatives and discussed the lifting of sanctions against Russia.

How could the FBI and Justice Department not have known that Steele was the source for this story? Isikoff explicitly stated that his account of Page’s activities was set forth in “intelligence reports” that were in the possession of “U.S. officials.” Plainly, the FBI was privy to intelligence reports in the government’s possession — the purported “intelligence” reports Steele had provided as well as any others. Had there been another intel report from a different source who happened to provide the same exact information Steele had provided, not only would the FBI have known about it; the Bureau would have touted it to the FISA court as critical corroboration of Steele’s anonymous sources.

To the contrary, the FISA court was told: “The FBI does not believe that [Steele] directly provided this information to the press.” I’ve emphasized “directly” to highlight how curious this assertion is. Ostensibly, the Bureau seems to have been saying that Steele was not the source — meaning that there must have been another source, yet one the Bureau had not managed to identify even though this mystery source was described in intelligence reports accessible to the Bureau.

On the other hand, what does “directly” mean? By using that qualifier, was the Bureau conceding that Steele might have provided information to the press indirectly – i.e., through an intermediary? But that would make no sense: What would be the point of citing the Isikoff article as corroboration for Steele if Steele had been Isikoff’s source, even if indirectly?

It is not good, one way or the other. Either Steele lied to the FBI about speaking to the press, or the FBI consciously avoided learning that Steele had spoken to Isikoff and then speculated to the court that Steele was probably not Isikoff’s source. Either way, Steele’s credibility was a huge issue. That put in doubt the FBI’s vouching for his reliability, which in turn made disclosure of the Clinton campaign’s sponsorship of his dossier even more imperative.

Or how about this: Steele gave a published interview to Mother Jones in late October 2016, after promising not to speak to the media. In trying to soft-peddle the palpable unreliability Steele had thus exhibited, the FBI rationalized that he was acting not out of dishonesty but in a fit of pique over Director Comey’s pre-election announcement that the FBI had reopened the Clinton emails investigation.

This, of course, is the announcement that Clinton partisans blame for their candidate’s loss. So, according to the Bureau, Steele’s pro-Clinton partisanship induced him to such outrage over Comey’s announcement that he was moved to violate his agreement with the FBI. Wouldn’t you think it might then occur to the Bureau and the Justice Department that maybe, just maybe, they ought to let the court in on that teeny detail about the Clinton campaign’s being the sponsor of Steele’s dossier?

Nope. Instead they kept mum and they kept telling the court Steele was perfectly reliable.

In fact, they kept telling the FISA court he was reliable even after Steele himself admitted to a British court that his dossier wasn’t at all reliable.

What’s that? Am I kidding? No.

Truth is a defense to libel. Suffice it to say, it was not Steele’s defense.
Even though there was still no meaningful corroboration of Steele’s sources after months of investigation, even though Steele had lied to them, the FBI and Justice Department represented again and again, in April and June 2017, that the FISA court could confidently bank on Steele’s reliability. By early 2017, however, Steele was being sued for libel in Britain, among other places, by people accused of misconduct in the dossier.

Truth is a defense to libel. Suffice it to say, it was not Steele’s defense.

In May 2017, as I have detailed (here), Steele was required to respond to interrogatories. He emphasized that his dossier allegations were “raw intelligence” that was “unverified” and “warranted investigation.” He further described his reports as “limited intelligence” that described mere “indications” of “possible” coordination between Trump’s campaign and the Russian government. He was not in a position to vouch for the accuracy of what he’d been told, he explained; he passed it along because it needed further investigation.

Yet, far from reporting Steele’s retreat to the FISA court, Grassley and Graham report that the FBI and Justice Department continued vouching for the reliability of his allegations.

Beyond all that, we now learn through the senators’ memo, and some follow-up reporting, that two longtime Clinton cronies, Cody Shearer and Sidney Blumenthal, fed their own anti-Trump dossier to Steele, through a State Department official, Jonathan Winer. In the fall of 2016, Steele, while working on his Clinton-funded project, reported this Clinton-crony information to the FBI.

Still, the FBI and Justice Department elected not to tell the FISA court that the Clinton campaign was paying for Steele’s unverified, unverifiable anti-Trump research.

I spent many months assuring people that nothing like this could ever happen — that the FBI and Justice Department would not countenance the provision to the FISA court of uncorroborated allegations of heinous misconduct. When Trump enthusiasts accused them of rigging the process, I countered that they probably had not even used the Steele dossier. If the Justice Department had used it in writing a FISA warrant application, I insisted that the FBI would independently verify any important facts presented to the court, make any disclosures that ought in fairness be made so the judge could evaluate the credibility of the sources, and compellingly demonstrate probable cause before alleging that an American was a foreign agent.

I was wrong.

http://amp.nationalreview.com/article/456287/grassley-graham-memo-affirms-nunes-memo-fisa-steele-dossier?utm_source=PANTHEON_STRIPPED&utm_medium=PANTHEON_STRIPPED&__twitter_impression=true

[FuzzyLumpkins]

God, you are an idiot as well.

You just figuring this out. He's been dumb his whole life.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

This is a good point.

But Flynn has been caught just like the original title. So we are now on who else in the Trump admin is gonna get caught. And here is where I agree with Reck. It's easier to catch people lying and obstructing concerning some action than actually proving the accused even carried out the act in court, and the act is illegal, and dealing out the proper level of illegality.

Flynn lied about meetings. He lied to the FBI. Felony. Without a court hearing. Nicely done. But someone down the line is not gonna go down so easily IMO; Because it will personally hurt much more. Especially the younger Trump family/ friends, if it actually comes to them.

Kushner and Don Jr lied about their meetings with Russians multiple times. There is reason to believe that Trump masterminded the obfustication campaign. Currently the investigation is securing interviews with more up and ups from the campaign.

Nevermind all of the financial details that have been revealed about Trump's real estate transactions of the past 20 years. That is just what we know.

What does "hurt mroe" have to do with anything? ANd "go down more easily" is just some abstract nonsense you have concocted. Trump is trying to Roy Cohn the investigation as hard as he can but it continues on. That is about the extent of the resistance he can muster.

[djohn2oo8]

This is a good point.

But Flynn has been caught just like the original title. So we are now on who else in the Trump admin is gonna get caught. And here is where I agree with Reck. It's easier to catch people lying and obstructing concerning some action than actually proving the accused even carried out the act in court, and the act is illegal, and dealing out the proper level of illegality.

Flynn lied about meetings. He lied to the FBI. Felony. Without a court hearing. Nicely done. But someone down the line is not gonna go down so easily IMO; Because it will personally hurt much more. Especially the younger Trump family/ friends, if it actually comes to them.

I understand where you and Reck are coming from. We will just have to wait and see what the outcome is. One thing for certain, and the point Darrin and crew seem to be missing. Mueller has not cleared Trump yet.

[Pavlov]

So the Trumpistas who selectively hate leakers are upset more hasn't leaked from the Mueller investigation.

How selective of them.

[koriwhat]

Look up, a pox on someone or something ya damn turnip that just fell off a truck.

And there is another for you to ponder.

jeeeeezzzzzz

We have some intellectuals on team Red....

pox
päks/
noun
noun: pox; plural noun: poxes

any of several viral diseases producing a rash of pimples that become pus-filled and leave pockmarks on healing.
informal
syphilis.
noun: the pox
historical
smallpox.
noun: the pox


what don't i understand exactly? you want to know if anyone i have tattooed got a viral disease? guess my answer was sufficient enough for you to draw a conclusion from. good day.

btw, red team, blue team, idiots everywhere and especially those that think either is a team and not just some bs scheme to divide.

[koriwhat]

You just figuring this out. He's been dumb his whole life.

you're such a faggot. probably was one back in HS too. you talk all the shit you want behind a computer screen as well. we all know your type, a fucking pathetic loser who finds solace and confidence on the internet. being a pussy in real life must suck for you faggylumps.

[pgardn]

pox
päks/
noun
noun: pox; plural noun: poxes

any of several viral diseases producing a rash of pimples that become pus-filled and leave pockmarks on healing.
informal
syphilis.
noun: the pox
historical
smallpox.
noun: the pox


what don't i understand exactly? you want to know if anyone i have tattooed got a viral disease? guess my answer was sufficient enough for you to draw a conclusion from. good day.

btw, red team, blue team, idiots everywhere and especially those that think either is a team and not just some bs scheme to divide.

oh good lord...



pox on someone or somethingFig. A curse on someone or something! (Old. Now usually jocular.) A pox on you, you creep! I'vebeen trying to make this computer work all day. A pox on it!

[pgardn]

Kushner and Don Jr lied about their meetings with Russians multiple times. There is reason to believe that Trump masterminded the obfustication campaign. Currently the investigation is securing interviews with more up and ups from the campaign.

Nevermind all of the financial details that have been revealed about Trump's real estate transactions of the past 20 years. That is just what we know.

What does "hurt mroe" have to do with anything? ANd "go down more easily" is just some abstract nonsense you have concocted. Trump is trying to Roy Cohn the investigation as hard as he can but it continues on. That is about the extent of the resistance he can muster.

Flynn is an old fck. His son and Trump's relations involved are not. I don't think Flynn lays down for a felony as a young man. Get the Fuzz off me...

Mrs. Crutchfield.

If you continue to reach down my pants I will let the principal know about it.
Get off your high horse, I'm walking.
I also do not know what hurt mroe means Mrs. Crutchfield.

[koriwhat]

oh good lord...



pox on someone or somethingFig. A curse on someone or something! (Old. Now usually jocular.) A pox on you, you creep! I'vebeen trying to make this computer work all day. A pox on it!

it's not my fault your use of the word isn't the same as my use. oh good lord there's many words spelt the same with differing definitions. oh good lord...

[pgardn]

it's not my fault your use of the word isn't the same as my use. oh good lord there's many words spelt the same with differing definitions. oh good lord...

Its a saying you fool.
It is used currently in a jocular way.
But this attempt on my part was an obvious failure. I did not consider my audience properly.

You are acting like an incessant pin prick that won't go away. It's irritating.

Any better? ( In the parlance of our times so to speak)

[Pavlov]

oh good lord...



pox on someone or somethingFig. A curse on someone or something! (Old. Now usually jocular.) A pox on you, you creep! I'vebeen trying to make this computer work all day. A pox on it!


it's not my fault your use of the word isn't the same as my use. oh good lord there's many words spelt the same with differing definitions. oh good lord...https://media1.giphy.com/media/3o7ZeSeRmAjD7SXkUU/giphy.gif

[FuzzyLumpkins]

you're such a faggot. probably was one back in HS too. you talk all the shit you want behind a computer screen as well. we all know your type, a fucking pathetic loser who finds solace and confidence on the internet. being a pussy in real life must suck for you faggylumps.

:lol dumb-dumb got triggered.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Flynn is an old fck. His son and Trump's relations involved are not. I don't think Flynn lays down for a felony as a young man. Get the Fuzz off me...

Mrs. Crutchfield.

If you continue to reach down my pants I will let the principal know about it.
Get off your high horse, I'm walking.
I also do not know what hurt mroe means Mrs. Crutchfield.

Huh? I haven't posted a response to you in a long time. Settle down, Nancy.

In the meantime, "not go down easily" remains some nebulous unsupported notion. Trump has been in full attack mode for months now already. The investigation continues on.

Typo smack is adorable. If you cannot figure it out then you aren't as smart as I thought you were.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

it's not my fault your use of the word isn't the same as my use. oh good lord there's many words spelt the same with differing definitions. oh good lord...

:lol this is pretty small-minded, dumb-dumb. Are you really so ignorant you've never heard of small pox or the plague?

Protip: most words don't have a single meaning.

[Chris]

Yeah because everyone says pox these days. :lol

[koriwhat]

Its a saying you fool.
It is used currently in a jocular way.
But this attempt on my part was an obvious failure. I did not consider my audience properly.

You are acting like an incessant pin prick that won't go away. It's irritating.

Any better? ( In the parlance of our times so to speak)

"Has anyone ever said, a pox on your tattoo needle?"

trying to decipher your original question at first was a bit perplexing as one can see by simply reading it above. so with that said, i decided to use my brain and make sure my def of pox was the same as what i thought it was. i looked it up and sure enough it was the same so i posted said definition.

looking back at your original question i now see what you're trying to ask. read your original question aloud. see if it makes any sense whatsoever and then get all bent out of shape again if you'd like. maybe leave out the comma next time.

some of yall just like to argue for the sake of it and over the dumbest fucking shit ever.

[Chris]

"Has anyone ever said, a pox on your tattoo needle?"

trying to decipher your original question at first was a bit perplexing as one can see by simply reading it above. so with that said, i decided to use my brain and make sure my def of pox was the same as what i thought it was. i looked it up and sure enough it was the same so i posted said definition.

looking back at your original question i now see what you're trying to ask. read your original question aloud. see if it makes any sense whatsoever and then get all bent out of shape again if you'd like. maybe leave out the comma next time.

some of yall just like to argue for the sake of it and over the dumbest fucking shit ever.

He says a lot of stupid shit. Just sit back and laugh. :lol

[Pavlov]

Trumpistas trying to rationalize their ignorance again.

[koriwhat]

:lol dumb-dumb got triggered.

you still come across as a faggot, a wuss, a pussy, a wannabe hardass. you're a joke faggylumps. forever hiding in the shadows of the net where you try your hardest to be intellectual, head and shoulders above everyone else, and oh so important. you're a pussy.


:lol this is pretty small-minded, dumb-dumb. Are you really so ignorant you've never heard of small pox or the plague?

Protip: most words don't have a single meaning.

^^^ look at this faggot! you're the dipshit here faggylumps. go checkout the def i posted and ask me this same small-minded, dumb-dumb question of yours again.

Protip: you're still a faggot.

[koriwhat]

Trumpistas trying to rationalize their ignorance again.

you're a fag. yes or no?

[AaronY]

Such is life in spurstalk

[Pavlov]

you're a fag. yes or no?Tell the board about the homosexual man you dated so you can use that word now.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

you still come across as a faggot, a wuss, a pussy, a wannabe hardass. you're a joke faggylumps. forever hiding in the shadows of the net where you try your hardest to be intellectual, head and shoulders above everyone else, and oh so important. you're a pussy.



^^^ look at this faggot! you're the dipshit here faggylumps. go checkout the def i posted and ask me this same small-minded, dumb-dumb question of yours again.

Protip: you're still a faggot.

You're trying too hard, Joey. You should read a book and try not looking quite so semi-literate. Raging against me with your homophobia and faux machismo just makes you look that much more ignorant.

[koriwhat]

Tell the board about the homosexual man you dated so you can use that word now.

lmao good one pav... i never have and never will date a dude. never ever.

you're just mad because unlike my gay friends, you are a fag!

[koriwhat]

You're trying too hard, Joey. You should read a book and try not looking quite so semi-literate. Raging against me with your homophobia and faux machismo just makes you look that much more ignorant.

nah i just think it's funny how hard you try. you'll sit back and dish it all the while hiding behind a screenname, a fake backstory, etc... how's eden rock and living with your parents working out for you in your mid 30's?

[Pavlov]

lmao good one pav... i never have and never will date a dude. never ever.

you're just mad because unlike my gay friends, you are a fag!:lmao you're so desperate to convince people you aren't a bigot.

It's not working.

[koriwhat]

:lmao you're so desperate to convince people you aren't a bigot.

It's not working.

lmao once again... you're a barrel of laughs pav.

you're are so far left you're mentally insane! you, like those you associate with, want to make everyone out around them, who hold differing opinions, out to be one of many; bigot, misogynist, xenophobe, etc... it's what yall do to marginalize those who don't agree with you.

you have no clue pav. i know a ton of people who differ in age, race, gender, etc... but yeah, guess i'm a bigot, a racist, etc... you're just a fag!

[Pavlov]

lmao once again... you're a barrel of laughs pav.

you're are so far left you're mentally insane! you, like those you associate with, want to make everyone out around them, who hold differing opinions, out to be one of many; bigot, misogynist, xenophobe, etc... it's what yall do to marginalize those who don't agree with you.

you have no clue pav. i know a ton of people who differ in age, race, gender, etc... but yeah, guess i'm a bigot, a racist, etc... you're just a fag!koriwhat: "Some of my best friends are dog eating faggots. I dated them."

[koriwhat]

koriwhat: "Some of my best friends are dog eating faggots. I dated them."

lmao... you're pathetic pav. i long for a day when those who have lost their humor or never had it to begin with are wiped clean off this world of ours. your existence must be a very bitter one indeed.

[pgardn]

Huh? I haven't posted a response to you in a long time. Settle down, Nancy.

In the meantime, "not go down easily" remains some nebulous unsupported notion. Trump has been in full attack mode for months now already. The investigation continues on.

Typo smack is adorable. If you cannot figure it out then you aren't as smart as I thought you were.

My notion is they don't plea out as easily as Flynn. And frighteningly enough, it's also an opinion.


The typo "smack" fits my narrative of you in character playing Mrs. Crutchfield.
And if anyone thinks I'm smart, a pox on them. I don't even know what smart means.
But I do know willful ignorance. Chris & koriwhat wut?

[pgardn]

Such is life in spurstalk

This is like Avante's dream of a royal rumble.

[koriwhat]

But I do know willful ignorance. Chris & koriwhat wut?

willful ignorance is who you are. own it!

[Pavlov]

lmao... you're pathetic pav. i long for a day when those who have lost their humor or never had it to begin with are wiped clean off this world of ours. your existence must be a very bitter one indeed.And now you wish death upon those who disagree with you.

Again.

And you're trying to say I'm bitter?

lol

[pgardn]

willful ignorance is who you are. own it!

A pox on your willful ignorance.... buster.

The above is actually wishing you well.
But until today, you would have never known this.

[Pavlov]

A pox on your willful ignorance.... buster.

The above is actually wishing you well.
But until today, you would have never known this.:lmao dude thought you wanted his needles to get oozing sores.

[koriwhat]

And now you wish death upon those who disagree with you.

Again.

And you're trying to say I'm bitter?

lol

always the victim huh? go cry to someone else who actually gives a fuck about you and your feelings pav.


A pox on your willful ignorance.... buster.

The above is actually wishing you well.
But until today, you would have never known this.

whatever pg... i don't have anything against you really. just think us arguing over a word that has many def's is silly.

[koriwhat]

:lmao dude thought you wanted his needles to get oozing sores.

once again, wrong... mental retard!

[Pavlov]

always the victim huh? go cry to someone else who actually gives a fuck about you and your feelings pav.You're the one wishing death on posters all the time.

I wouldn't call myself a victim because you are perfectly impotent in that regard.


whatever pg... i don't have anything against you really. just think us arguing over a word that has many def's is silly.Then why are you still arguing over it?

[FuzzyLumpkins]

My notion is they don't plea out as easily as Flynn. And frighteningly enough, it's also an opinion.


The typo "smack" fits my narrative of you in character playing Mrs. Crutchfield.
And if anyone thinks I'm smart, a pox on them. I don't even know what smart means.
But I do know willful ignorance. Chris & koriwhat wut?

Who said anything about them pleaing out? They are likely to go the same route as the other two and just eat a GJ indictment.

[pgardn]

Who said anything about them pleaing out? They are likely to go the same route as the other two and just eat a GJ indictment.

I did.

We don't know anything really. Catching Bigger fish might require plea deals.
We seriously don't know. Meuller runs a very tight ship. The press is making all sorts of guesses. Legal experts are disagreeing on what every little move to interview means.

Everyone is reaching, cause Mueller ain't leakin.

- Muhammed Ali

ammended

[koriwhat]

I wouldn't call myself a victim...

you def play the part daily.

[pgardn]

:lmao dude thought you wanted his needles to get oozing sores.

Wow!

Thats a bizarre picture.
I did not pick that up.

[Pavlov]

It's certainly possible Flynn pleaded guilty to one of the lesser charges that could have been put to him in exchange for cooperation. That crazy ass Turkish kidnapping-for-cash plot could be a part of it.

[Pavlov]

you def play the part daily.How could anyone be a victim of you?

[koriwhat]

How could anyone be a victim of you?

and here we go... same ol' burnt out shtick of yours.

[Pavlov]

and here we go... same ol' burnt out shtick of yours.I never expect you to answer -- I expect to trigger another rant.

[koriwhat]

Wow!

Thats a bizarre picture.
I did not pick that up.

i would take anything pav says with a grain of salt. how he came up with that conclusion is beyond me. pav's a sissy boy nutjob liar with a victimhood mentality.

[koriwhat]

I never expect you to answer -- I expect to trigger another rant.

i expect your post count to slow down from here on out.

[koriwhat]

how's eden rock and living with your parents working out for you in your mid 30's?

twice now i have said a little this and that but haven't seen faggylumps retort or rebuttal. hmm... funny how this dude jumps on me 2 sec's after i post a reply to him but this one thing keeps shutting him up.

[Chris]

twice now i have said a little this and that but haven't seen faggylumps retort or rebuttal. hmm... funny how this dude jumps on me 2 sec's after i post a reply to him but this one thing keeps shutting him up.

Hit and runner. :jack

[RandomGuy]

lmao... you're pathetic pav. i long for a day when those who have lost their humor or never had it to begin with are wiped clean off this world of ours. your existence must be a very bitter one indeed.

So you want a final solution to the problem? Is that what you are saying?

[Chris]

Time to shut her down :tu


963116219233718272


gg, no re

[Pavlov]

Time to shut her down :tu


963116219233718272


gg, no reWhy are you so afraid of Mueller? If Trump's campaign did nothing wrong he has nothing to hide.

[boutons_deux]

"Shut it down"

:lol wishful thinking, pure fantasy.

Trash and his mafiya have been lying, hiding info, implicating themselves in a huge coverup

And Mueller and/or Schneiderman will get Trash, DJTjr, Kushner on money laundering, anyway.

[Chris]

Why are you so afraid of Mueller? If Trump's campaign did nothing wrong he has nothing to hide.

Why are you so afraid of the Mueller investigation getting shut down?

[FuzzyLumpkins]

twice now i have said a little this and that but haven't seen faggylumps retort or rebuttal. hmm... funny how this dude jumps on me 2 sec's after i post a reply to him but this one thing keeps shutting him up.

You still trying to figure out who I am, Joey. That's adorable. I already told you that my parents were dead.

:lol You're too stupid to widen your search parameters.

I also don't have a failing business that allows me to post here instead of working all day long day after day as you do. If you spent as much time promoting your business as you do trying to troll and whining about immigrants here you would make more than the poverty line.

[Chris]

"Shut it down"

:lol wishful thinking, pure fantasy.

Trash and his mafiya have been lying, hiding info, implicating themselves in a huge coverup

And Mueller and/or Schneiderman will get Trash, DJTjr, Kushner on money laundering, anyway.




All the evidence is pointing towards a shut down. Sessions and Trump are sitting back watching the dominos fall.

[Pavlov]

Why are you so afraid of the Mueller investigation getting shut down?I don't want a Republican investigation to be shut down.

You didn't answer the question.

Why are you so afraid of Mueller?

[Chris]

I don't want a Republican investigation to be shut down.

This is disingenuous.



Why are you so afraid of Mueller?

Never said such.

[Chris]

963173065868836864

https://media0.giphy.com/media/l3E6uhDAN3W7vylji/giphy.gif

[Blake]

Who cares what people look for in their free time?

You look for right wing 4th tier celebrity tweets in yours.

[Pavlov]

This is disingenuous.Nope. I genuinely don't want this Republican investigation shut down.


Never said such.Then why do you want it shut down? Let the Republican investigation run its course without interference.

[koriwhat]

You still trying to figure out who I am, Joey. That's adorable. I already told you that my parents were dead.

:lol You're too stupid to widen your search parameters.

I also don't have a failing business that allows me to post here instead of working all day long day after day as you do. If you spent as much time promoting your business as you do trying to troll and whining about immigrants here you would make more than the poverty line.

you're still a pussy with dead parents. go lay next to them 6ft under, please.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

you're still a pussy with dead parents. go lay next to them 6ft under, please.

Now you need to challenge me to a fight. That'll show me! :lol

It's interesting. You're bad enough at your work that no one will come in for business but you're not bad enough to be a novelty and draw attention. Story of your life, Joey.

[koriwhat]

Now you need to challenge me to a fight. That'll show me! :lol

It's interesting. You're bad enough at your work that no one will come in for business but you're not bad enough to be a novelty and draw attention. Story of your life, Joey.

i don't care to fight you at all faggylumps... i just think you're a pussy who hides behind his computer because it gives him the confidence to act the way you do here. you're a pussy. how can you even deny it? pussy!

[boutons_deux]

Through the Looking Glass

In recent weeks we have seen a flurry of Fox News hothouse scandals which blow up for a day before collapsing under the weight of their own ridiculousness.

Senators Grassley and Graham have sent a letter to former National Security Advisor Susan Rice asking her to explain an email which they clearly believe is highly suspicious.

The two released a letter (https://www.judiciary.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/2018-02-08%20CEG%20LG%20to%20Rice%20(Russia%20Investigatio n%20Email).pdf) with Rice’s email and a long list of pointed questions (https://www.judiciary.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/2018-02-08%20CEG%20LG%20to%20Rice%20(Russia%20Investigatio n%20Email).pdf) about when it was written, why and so forth.

What is notable is that according to the date stamp it was written on inauguration day, likely just before Rice left the White House for the last time.

It is really quite striking that this email raises suspicion about Rice or James Comey or former President Obama or frankly anyone else.

On its face, it seems clear (and it is remarkable that this is so) that weeks before President Trump’s inauguration,

the President, the FBI Director and others were wary that it might not be safe to share classified information about Russia with members of the Trump team or perhaps even Trump himself.

Even with all we’ve seen, that is remarkable.

Even more striking is that in the Fox/GOP looking glass this is actually incriminating or at least damning evidence against the Obama team.

https://talkingpointsmemo.com/edblog/through-the-looking-glass

then Trash gives the PDB to 14 WH assholes, some of whom didn't have (permanent) nat sec clearance.

[Chris]

Byron York: Comey told Congress FBI agents didn't think Michael Flynn lied

http://cdn.washingtonexaminer.biz/cache/1060x600-ee5fcd2af219def23b63a159ba13e7d0.jpg



In March 2017, then-FBI Director James Comey briefed a number of Capitol Hill lawmakers on the Trump-Russia investigation. One topic of intense interest was the case of Michael Flynn, the Trump White House national security adviser who resigned under pressure on February 13 after just 24 days in the job.

There were widespread reports that Flynn had lied to Vice President Mike Pence about telephone conversations that he, Flynn, had with Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak during the transition in late December, 2016. On January 24, 2017, two of Comey's FBI agents went to the White House to question Flynn, and there was a lot of speculation later that Flynn lied in that interview, which would be a serious crime.

"The January 24 interview potentially puts Flynn in legal jeopardy," the Washington Post reported in February. "Lying to the FBI is a felony offense."

There was also a lot of concern in Congress, at least among Republicans, about the leak of the wiretapped Flynn-Kislyak conversation. Such intelligence is classified at the highest level of secrecy, yet someone — Republicans suspected Obama appointees in the Justice Department and intelligence community — revealed it to the press.

So in March, lawmakers wanted Comey to tell them what was up. And what they heard from the director did not match what they were hearing in the media.

According to two sources familiar with the meetings, Comey told lawmakers that the FBI agents who interviewed Flynn did not believe that Flynn had lied to them, or that any inaccuracies in his answers were intentional. As a result, some of those in attendance came away with the impression that Flynn would not be charged with a crime pertaining to the January 24 interview.

Nine months later, with Comey gone and special counsel Robert Mueller in charge of the Trump-Russia investigation, Flynn pleaded guilty to one count of making false statements to the FBI in that January 24 questioning.

What happened? With Flynn awaiting sentencing — that was recently delayed until at least May — some lawmakers are trying to figure out what occurred between the time Comey told Congress the FBI did not believe Flynn lied and the time, several months later, when Flynn pleaded guilty to just that.

None of those congressional investigators has an answer; they're baffled by the turn of events. But they know they find the Flynn case troubling, from start to finish.

The questioning in that January 24 interview apparently revolved around the Flynn-Kislyak phone conversations. The first thing to remember is that it appears Flynn did nothing wrong in having those talks. As the incoming national security adviser, it was entirely reasonable that he discuss policy with representatives of other governments — and Flynn was getting calls from all around the world.

So even if Flynn discussed the hot issue of U.S. sanctions against Russia with Kislyak, that was OK. "I don't have a problem with that," former Bush national security adviser Stephen Hadley said in February 2017. "I don't see what would be wrong if [Flynn] simply said, look, don't retaliate, doesn't make sense, it hurts my country, it makes it harder for us as an incoming administration to reconsider Russia policy, which is something we said we'd do. So just hold your fire and let us have a shot at this."

Indeed, it appears the FBI did not think Flynn had done anything wrong in the calls. On January 23, the Washington Post reported that the FBI had reviewed the Flynn-Kislyak calls and "has not found any evidence of wrongdoing or illicit ties to the Russian government." (The calls had been intercepted by U.S. intelligence because the U.S. monitored the Russian ambassador's communications — something which Flynn, a former chief of the Defense Intelligence Agency, surely knew.)

Still, Flynn's conversation had the attention of the Obama Justice Department, and in particular of deputy attorney general Sally Yates, who reportedly believed Flynn might have violated the Logan Act, a 218 year-old law under which no one had ever been successfully prosecuted. (Two people were charged in the 19th century, but the cases were dropped.)

Despite the high level of classification, word of the Justice Department's concerns got to the press. On January 12, Washington Post columnist David Ignatius reported that Flynn and Kislyak had talked. "What did Flynn say, and did it undercut U.S. sanctions?" Ignatius asked. "The Logan Act (though never enforced) bars U.S. citizens from correspondence intending to influence a foreign government about 'disputes' with the United States. Was its spirit violated?"

Three days later, on January 15, Vice President-elect Mike Pence (remember, this was all happening before the Trump administration took office) denied that Flynn had discussed sanctions with the Russian ambassador. "They [Flynn and Kislyak] did not discuss anything having to do with the United States' decision to expel diplomats or impose censure against Russia," Pence told CBS.

On January 20, Donald Trump became president. On January 22, the Wall Street Journal reported that "U.S. counterintelligence agents have investigated communications" between Flynn and Kislyak. The investigation "aimed to determine the nature of Mr. Flynn's contact with Russian officials and whether such contacts may have violated laws."

On January 24, the Justice Department — the Obama holdover Yates had become the acting attorney general — sent two FBI agents to the White House to question Flynn, who talked to them without a lawyer present.

It has sometimes been asked why Flynn, a man long familiar with the ways of Washington, would talk to the FBI without a lawyer. There seems to be no clear answer. On the one hand, as national security adviser, Flynn had plenty of reasons to talk to the FBI, and he could have reasonably thought the meeting would be about a prosaic issue involved in getting the new Trump National Security Council up and running. On the other hand, the media was filled with talk about the investigation into his conversations with Kislyak, and he might just as reasonably have thought that's what the agents wanted to discuss. In any event, Flynn went ahead without an attorney present.

In addition, it appears the FBI did not tell White House officials, including the National Security Council's legal advisor or the White House counsel, that agents were coming to interview the national security adviser over a potentially criminal matter.

Two days later, on January 26, Yates and a high-ranking colleague went to the White House to tell counsel Don McGahn about the Flynn situation. "The first thing we did was to explain to Mr. McGahn that the underlying conduct that Gen. Flynn had engaged in was problematic in and of itself," Yates testified in a May 2017 appearance before a Senate Judiciary Committee subcommittee. That was an apparent reference to the Logan Act, although Yates never specifically said so. "We took him [McGahn] through in a fair amount of detail of the underlying conduct, what Gen. Flynn had done."

Yates then explained to McGahn her theory that Flynn might be vulnerable to blackmail. The idea was that Flynn had discussed sanctions with Kislyak, which of course the Russians knew. And then if Flynn lied to Pence, and Pence made a public statement based on what Flynn had told him, then the Russians might be able to blackmail Flynn because they, the Russians, knew Flynn had not told the vice president the truth.

It was a pretty far-fetched notion, but, along with the never-successfully-prosecuted Logan Act, it was apparently the basis upon which the FBI went inside the White House to do an unannounced interview of a key member of the new administration.

In their discussion, McGahn asked Yates: Even if one White House official lied to another, what's that to the Justice Department? "It was a whole lot more than one White House official lying to another," Yates testified. "First of all, it was the vice president of the United States and the vice president had then gone out and provided that information to the American people who had then been misled and the Russians knew all of this, making Mike Flynn compromised now."

Yates went to see McGahn twice, on January 26 and January 27. On February 13, Flynn resigned. That same day, the Washington Post reported that the Justice Department had pursued Flynn on the grounds of a potential Logan Act violation.

"Yates, then the deputy attorney general, considered Flynn's comments in the intercepted call to be 'highly significant' and 'potentially illegal,' according to an official familiar with her thinking," the Post reported. "Yates and other intelligence officials suspected that Flynn could be in violation of an obscure U.S. statute known as the Logan Act, which bars U.S. citizens from interfering in diplomatic disputes with another country."

On February 14, the New York Times reported that, "Obama advisers grew suspicious that perhaps there had been a secret deal between the incoming [Trump] team and Moscow, which could violate the rarely enforced, two-century-old Logan Act barring private citizens from negotiating with foreign powers in disputes with the United States." (The paper added that the Obama advisers asked the FBI if Flynn and Kislyak had discussed a quid pro quo, only to learn the answer was no.)

At that point, the public still did not know that the January 24 FBI interview of Flynn had taken place. That report came on February 17, when the Washington Post reported the interview in a story headlined, "Flynn told FBI he did not discuss sanctions." That was the piece that noted Flynn was in legal jeopardy, and that, "Lying to the FBI is a felony offense."

Congress, in the meantime, was in the dark about what was going on. Given the intense discussion of the Flynn case in the media, there was no doubt lawmakers were going to want to know what was happening in the Flynn matter, as well as other aspects of the Trump-Russia investigation. (At that point, the FBI had never even publicly acknowledged that there was an investigation into the Trump campaign and Russia.)

So Comey went to Capitol Hill in March to brief lawmakers privately. That is when he told them that the FBI agents who interviewed Flynn did not believe Flynn had lied, or that any inaccuracies in Flynn's answers were intentional. And that is when some lawmakers got the impression that Flynn would not be charged with any crime pertaining to the January 24 interview.

There was still the possibility Flynn could face legal trouble for something else, like failing to register his representation of Turkey. But as far as the question of a "1001 charge" — a charge of lying to investigators, known by its number in the federal code — some lawmakers took that as a sign that Flynn was out of the woods.

On the other hand, the FBI does not make prosecution decisions. (That was not true, of course, in the case of the Clinton email investigation, in which the attorney general effectively gave Comey the decision of whether or not to prosecute.) It could be that the FBI agents who did the questioning were overruled by Justice Department officials who came up with theories like Flynn's alleged violation of the Logan Act or his alleged vulnerability to blackmail.

In any event, much happened after the FBI director's March briefings of Congress. In May, the president fired Comey. The Justice Department, under Trump-appointed deputy attorney general Rod Rosenstein, chose Robert Mueller to be the Trump-Russia special counsel. Mueller gathered a number of prosecutors known for tough, take-no-prisoners tactics. And on December 1, Flynn pleaded guilty to lying to the FBI.

Yates went on to become a heroine of the Trump resistance (and at least one of Mueller's prosecutors) after she refused to enforce the president's travel ban executive order, and Trump summarily fired her. Her legacy lives on in United States v. Michael T. Flynn.

But to outside observers, mystery still surrounds the case. To some Republicans, it appears the Justice Department used a never-enforced law and a convoluted theory as a pretext to question Flynn — and then, when FBI questioners came away believing Flynn had not lied to them, forged ahead with a false-statements prosecution anyway. The Flynn matter is at the very heart of the Trump-Russia affair, and there is still a lot to learn about it.

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/byron-york-comey-told-congress-fbi-agents-didnt-think-michael-flynn-lied/article/2648896?platform=hootsuite

[boutons_deux]

Meet New FBI Deputy Director David Bowditch, Trump's Worst Nightmare. LOLZ! The Guy Is Unimpeachable (https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2018/1/30/1737174/-Meet-New-FBI-Deputy-Director-David-Bowditch-Trump-s-Worse-Nightmare-LOLZ-The-Guy-Is-Unimpeachable)

https://images.dailykos.com/images/502049/story_image/EBD3T2YLHA3OBOKI56BFLUD6UM.jpg?1517324067

The new FBI Deputy Director, David Bowditch, seems like a win for Trump until you look at his biography.

Bowditch is a career FBI man with nothing Trump or Republicans can use as a distraction.

He came up as a police officer, served as sniper in a SWAT team, investigated violent gangs and oversaw the LA field office.

That’s the Los Angeles field office, far from the NY field office.

He’s not Trump’s toady.

I know many on the Left are quick to slag Wray right now, but remember he is a Justice Dept veteran who worked for Comey.

This is the 2nd time he’s removed FBI staff who had become distractions and replaced them with someone much WORSE for Trump.

https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2018/1/30/1737174/-Meet-New-FBI-Deputy-Director-David-Bowditch-Trump-s-Worse-Nightmare-LOLZ-The-Guy-Is-Unimpeachable

[spurraider21]

Byron York: Comey told Congress FBI agents didn't think Michael Flynn lied
:lol dindu muffin

[Chris]

Time to shut her down.

[spurraider21]

Time to shut her down.
Flynn already admitted he was guilty of lying to the FBI :lmao

Trump even said he had to fire Flynn because he lied to the FBI :lmao

[FuzzyLumpkins]

i don't care to fight you at all faggylumps... i just think you're a pussy who hides behind his computer because it gives him the confidence to act the way you do here. you're a pussy. how can you even deny it? pussy!

Word of the day: introspection. And the point wasn't that I wanted to fight. It was in response to this over the top tough guy act you have going.

Is that really why you tell people who you are? Because you think that makes you brave? Of so. . . . . :lmao

I've seen internet faux machismo but you take the cake.

[koriwhat]

Word of the day: introspection. And the point wasn't that I wanted to fight. It was in response to this over the top tough guy act you have going.

Is that really why you tell people who you are? Because you think that makes you brave? Of so. . . . . :lmao

I've seen internet faux machismo but you take the cake.

what the fuck are you even babbling about? i'm no tough guy but i def know a pussy and you're def one. you're a bitch behind a computer. plain & simple, that makes you a pussy. keep on babbling if you'd like but you'll still be nothing but a pussy in real life and on the internet.

[djohn2oo8]

i'm no tough guy
No one accused you of being one.

[koriwhat]

No one accused you of being one.

You're just the same as faggylumps. Birds of a feather flock together.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

what the fuck are you even babbling about? i'm no tough guy but i def know a pussy and you're def one. you're a bitch behind a computer. plain & simple, that makes you a pussy. keep on babbling if you'd like but you'll still be nothing but a pussy in real life and on the internet.

I know that, Joey, but you sure are trying hard with all the machismo tough guy taunt attempts. I can understand your need to compensate. You sure need to.

[pgardn]

Flynn already admitted he was guilty of lying to the FBI :lmao

Trump even said he had to fire Flynn because he lied to the FBI :lmao

But, but, but....

The pressure was just tremendous.
This was a really nice guy. Comey said so.
Flynn initiated the Easter Egg dye contest in his neighborhood.
Take the entire picture into account mister.

[djohn2oo8]

963444646822244352
TSA's guys shitting on his head.

[djohn2oo8]

963434109602328577

[Pavlov]

963456647812337664

What a weak, feckless president you guys worship.

[boutons_deux]

963456647812337664

What a weak, feckless president you guys worship.

Trash is a Pootin asset, fully compromised, with Pootin having Trash's tiny balls in his hands. A situation for which Trash will do anything not to have exposed and proven.

But Mueller looms ...

[koriwhat]

I know that, Joey, but you sure are trying hard with all the machismo tough guy taunt attempts. I can understand your need to compensate. You sure need to.

the funniest thing of all is the fact that you sit there acting the way you do towards me because i hold differing political views. not because i mooched weed off of you 20 yrs ago because that's fiction to begin with. pull up your diapers you fucking child! you're still a pussy faggylumps whether you admit it or not. your actions here speak for themselves. you just want to be mr cool guy so bad.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

the funniest thing of all is the fact that you sit there acting the way you do towards me because i hold differing political views. not because i mooched weed off of you 20 yrs ago because that's fiction to begin with. pull up your diapers you fucking child! you're still a pussy faggylumps whether you admit it or not. your actions hear speak for themselves. you just want to be mr cool guy so bad.

I don't like Nazi's and white nationalists. You fit the bill. You might as well get used to it. I'm hardly the only one.

Before I just thought you were a dimwitted mooching white trash who hung out with Nazis. Now I know better.

[koriwhat]

I don't like Nazi's and white nationalists. You fit the bill. You might as well get used to it. I'm hardly the only one.

Before I just thought you were a dimwitted mooching white trash who hung out with Nazis. Now I know better.

let's get this straight for one minute faggylumps. my friend josh is a jew and i have known him since i was 3 yrs old, his brother and i hang out nearly 3 times a week, my fathers father was a jew, i worked for a jew for 6 yrs surrounded by jews daily. i have no problems with jews at all. it's meshugana to think otherwise.

nationalism is wrong huh? consider me wrong then because i love this country. sucks to be you!

as well, you can drop your bs HS story already because it's total and utter fan fiction. i knew i had at least 1 fan but too bad it's a huge gaping sloppy vagina as yourself faggylumps.

call me white trash if you'd like but i don't quite fit the bill.

you're pathetic faggylumps. if you were a man, with all the shit you say about me and to me, you'd come find me already but truth is you're a faggot little bitch. good day pussy!

[FuzzyLumpkins]

let's get this straight for one minute faggylumps. my friend josh is a jew and i have known him since i was 3 yrs old, his brother and i hang out nearly 3 times a week, my fathers father was a jew, i worked for a jew for 6 yrs surrounded by jews daily. i have no problems with jews at all. it's meshugana to think otherwise.

nationalism is wrong huh? consider me wrong then because i love this country. sucks to be you!

as well, you can drop your bs HS story already because it's total and utter fan fiction. i knew i had at least 1 fan but too bad it's a huge gaping sloppy vagina as yourself faggylumps.

call me white trash if you'd like but i don't quite fit the bill.

you're pathetic faggylumps. if you were a man, with all the shit you say about me and to me, you'd come find me already but truth is you're a faggot little bitch. good day pussy!

:lol are you really using the "my friend is a jew" as your defense? :lmao

Sweet ambrosia are you an ignoramus.

There is a difference between patriotism and white nationalism, Joey. I get that you are too ignorant to see it but its there just the same.

And actually you fit the white trash moniker to the t. You are poor, white, poorly educated -your own fault,- and grew up in said environment.

And I knew it was only a matter of time before you called for a personal confrontation. it is after all the go to dispute resolution of the lower classes.

Really all i get from your ranting is that such homophobic taunts work on you.

[spurraider21]

:lol i have a black friend

[koriwhat]

:lol are you really using the "my friend is a jew" as your defense? :lmao

Sweet ambrosia are you an ignoramus.

There is a difference between patriotism and white nationalism, Joey. I get that you are too ignorant to see it but its there just the same.

And actually you fit the white trash moniker to the t. You are poor, white, poorly educated -your own fault,- and grew up in said environment.

And I knew it was only a matter of time before you called for a personal confrontation. it is after all the go to dispute resolution of the lower classes.

Really all i get from your ranting is that such homophobic taunts work on you.


what i am trying to say is that anyone with such hatred towards someone as you have for me would not just sit behind their computer and spout their bs. you're not a man. you're a pussy. thanks for clarifying that faggylumps. whether you could kick my ass or not doesn't matter. you talk the talk but don't want to walk the walk and that right there makes you a pussy.

white nationalism... lmao! oh no the boogeyman is gonna get you! your hive mind is showing you fucking retard far left pussy.

[koriwhat]

:lol i have a black friend

good for you bitch boy

[AaronY]

:sleep

[koriwhat]

:sleep

exactly.. i agree.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

what i am trying to say is that anyone with such hatred towards someone as you have for me would not just sit behind their computer and spout their bs. you're not a man. you're a pussy. thanks for clarifying that faggylumps. whether you could kick my ass or not doesn't matter. you talk the talk but don't want to walk the walk and that right there makes you a pussy.

white nationalism... lmao! oh no the boogeyman is gonna get you! your hive mind is showing you fucking retard far left pussy.

Who said anything about hate? you're the one wishing violence and ranting like an angry person.

And who said anything about boogeymen? You spout the typical white nationalist talking points like immigrants and all gubmint bad y'hear! You are the cliche white trash nazi dimwit. Section 8 or the trailer it makes no difference.

I don't hate you. I would need to respect you for that. It's more along the lines of contempt and maybe pity. Not very much of the latter.

[koriwhat]

Who said anything about hate? you're the one wishing violence and ranting like an angry person.

And who said anything about boogeymen? You spout the typical white nationalist talking points like immigrants and all gubmint bad y'hear! You are the cliche white trash nazi dimwit. Section 8 or the trailer it makes no difference.

I don't hate you. I would need to respect you for that. It's more along the lines of contempt and maybe pity. Not very much of the latter.

you're so cool you big gaping oozing pussy you.

lets be real for a minute faggylumps... how exactly am i a nazi? lmao the boogeyman! prove your point and don't just repeat it ad nauseam til it sticks with the other far left retards here. prove it. this is exactly what you're not good at. you have yet to back up any of your claims about me.

so i mooched off you back 20 yrs ago? mooched weed? i've never mooched from anyone but i guess my word gets trumped by your word because you say so. prove it!

i'm white trash and a nazi right? because once again, you say so. prove it!

last but not least, i've never lived in section 8 housing nor do i today.

you're full of shit and that's it. you have the attitude that you're better than everyone with your nose in the air. you're a pussy faggylumps and you'll forever be a pussy. go eat dirt with your parents already.

[Chris]

Chuck


963550396353523713

[Chris]

963575047389663232

[TSA]

963456647812337664

What a weak, feckless president you guys worship.

You should always fact check the Fusion GPS mouthpiece Ken Dilanian

Lpw66-vUjAE

No need to direct what is already being done. Chumpdumper eating up the alt left fake news.

:cry release the Schiff memo

btw is Reed drunk or does he always talk like that? dumb fuck was also asking for NSA to speak publicly to highly classified operations

[monosylab1k]

Chuck


963550396353523713

:lmao Mueller already has 4 indictments and 2 guilty pleas.
“:cry What crime??? :cry”

[djohn2oo8]

:lmao Mueller already has 4 indictments and 2 guilty pleas.
“:cry What crime??? :cry”

Might wanna mark Gates down as a 3rd guilty plea incoming....

[TSA]

:lmao Mueller already has 4 indictments and 2 guilty pleas.
“:cry What crime??? :cry”

List the 2 process crimes and the 2 that have absolutely nothing to do with Trump not his campaign. Let’s have some fun.

[djohn2oo8]

List the 2 process crimes and the 2 that have absolutely nothing to do with Trump not his campaign. Let’s have some fun.

You said nobody would be indicted besides Susan Rice and Hillary.

[djohn2oo8]

Manafort - Former Chair of Trump campaign

":cry But he's got nothing to do with Trump or his campaign :cry"

[TSA]

You said nobody would be indicted besides Susan Rice and Hillary.

And you said Flynn was in major trouble for talking to the Russians about sanctions, he wasn’t. He never was. He never will be. I’m willing to bet he’ll be cleared of the bullshit non-factor process crime as well.

List the 2 process crimes and the 2 that have absolutely nothing to do with Trump or his campaign. Add the 3rd Gates crime that has zero to do with Trump as well. Let’s have some fun.

[TSA]

Nice to see you back in the thread OP :bobo ...thought you had given up hope like Reck

[djohn2oo8]

And you said Flynn was in major trouble for talking to the Russians about sanctions, he wasn’t. He never was. He never will be. I’m willing to bet he’ll be cleared of the bullshit non-factor process crime as well.

List the 2 process crimes and the 2 that have absolutely nothing to do with Trump or his campaign. Add the 3rd Gates crime that has zero to do with Trump as well. Let’s have some fun.

Cleared? You stupid dumbfuck. He pled GUILTY :lmao

[baseline bum]

Felonies good now

[djohn2oo8]

Felonies good now

:lol

[monosylab1k]

List the 2 process crimes and the 2 that have absolutely nothing to do with Trump not his campaign. Let’s have some fun.

His investigation is producing results, regardless of whether Trump is involved or not. It’s almost as if Mueller is out solely for justice, and isn’t just on a crazy vendetta to get your beloved Dear Leader.

[TSA]

Cleared? You stupid dumbfuck. He pled GUILTY :lmao

List the 2 process crimes and the 2 that have absolutely nothing to do with Trump or his campaign. Add the 3rd Gates crime that has zero to do with Trump as well. Let’s have some fun.

[TSA]

Felonies good nowspeeding tickets with more severe punishments

[TSA]

His investigation is producing results, regardless of whether Trump is involved or not. It’s almost as if Mueller is out solely for justice, and isn’t just on a crazy vendetta to get your beloved Dear Leader.

:rollin results

List the results. No one else has the balls to. Be very specific, I want each crime and the date it was committed.

mono you know I’m a man of my word and am good for a bet. I’ve offered this out with ZERO takers. I’m handing you Mueller and “results” in the pocket to start.

I get OIG convictions you get Mueller convictions. Most serious conviction wins.

You pick the prize.

[TSA]

Neither has the power to convict but you get the point.

[baseline bum]

speeding tickets with more severe punishments

Can he go to driving school for felons?

[monosylab1k]

:rollin results

List the results. No one else has the balls to. Be very specific, I want each crime and the date it was committed.

mono you know I’m a man of my word and am good for a bet. I’ve offered this out with ZERO takers. I’m handing you Mueller and “results” in the pocket to start.

I get OIG convictions you get Mueller convictions. Most serious conviction wins.

You pick the prize.

:lmao he got two fucking guilty pleas already. What rich ass white collar honky pleads guilty unless he knows without a doubt that he’s fucked?

[TSA]

:lmao he got two fucking guilty pleas already. What rich ass white collar honky pleads guilty unless he knows without a doubt that he’s fucked?

Don’t take the road of every other pussy before you that’s been offered the same bet...you’re better than that.


mono you know I’m a man of my word and am good for a bet. I’ve offered this out with ZERO takers. I’m handing you Mueller and “results” in the pocket to start.

I get OIG convictions you get Mueller convictions. Most serious conviction wins.

You pick the prize.

[Pavlov]

lol felony speeding tickets

TSA is once bitter bitch.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

you're so cool you big gaping oozing pussy you.

lets be real for a minute faggylumps... how exactly am i a nazi? lmao the boogeyman! prove your point and don't just repeat it ad nauseam til it sticks with the other far left retards here. prove it. this is exactly what you're not good at. you have yet to back up any of your claims about me.

so i mooched off you back 20 yrs ago? mooched weed? i've never mooched from anyone but i guess my word gets trumped by your word because you say so. prove it!

i'm white trash and a nazi right? because once again, you say so. prove it!

last but not least, i've never lived in section 8 housing nor do i today.

you're full of shit and that's it. you have the attitude that you're better than everyone with your nose in the air. you're a pussy faggylumps and you'll forever be a pussy. go eat dirt with your parents already.

Again, you would try to bum weed. I never said I gave you any. I would sell you some though.

And we've been through this before.

You're poor. You've always been poor. You're stupid. You're poorly educated. You rail against immigrants. You've tattooed your face and calves. You buy into the globalist conspiratard playbook.

You're white nationalist trash.

And that whole line about accusing someone else of thinking they're better than anyone is a hallmark of white trash from LA to Boston, Chicago to San Antonio. Such inferiority complexes are common of those from low socioeconomic backgrounds.

[djohn2oo8]

List the 2 process crimes and the 2 that have absolutely nothing to do with Trump or his campaign. Add the 3rd Gates crime that has zero to do with Trump as well. Let’s have some fun.

Trump's own National Security Adviser, you know the guy receiving classified briefings and committing treason while he did it had nothing to do with Trump or his campaign.

Trump's campaign manager had nothing to do with Trump.

Trump's deputy finance manager had nothing to do with Trump.

This is what this buffoon has come to :lol

[Reck]

And you said Flynn was in major trouble for talking to the Russians about sanctions, he wasn’t. He never was. He never will be. I’m willing to bet he’ll be cleared of the bullshit non-factor process crime as well.

List the 2 process crimes and the 2 that have absolutely nothing to do with Trump or his campaign. Add the 3rd Gates crime that has zero to do with Trump as well. Let’s have some fun.


Well now, this is a solid sign that none of what you just said will happen. You’re right up there with Hater and Lefty with jinxes.

Not to mention you’re a proven 3 time loser. :lol
willing to bet :lol

[boutons_deux]

Remember how Trash trashed Hillary as not to be trusted with classified info? emails!

While Trash passes PDB and very probably other info around to people incapable of being security-cleared by FBI, and very probably to people the FBI is not asked to clear.

[RandomGuy]

[ad hominem]

Meh.

[TSA]

Trump's own National Security Adviser, you know the guy receiving classified briefings and committing treason while he did it had nothing to do with Trump or his campaign.

Trump's campaign manager had nothing to do with Trump.

Trump's deputy finance manager had nothing to do with Trump.

This is what this buffoon has come to :lolnow Flynn committed treason? :rollin

Trump's campaign manager's crime had nothing to do with Trump and was years before he was on the campaign.

Trump's deputy finance manager's crime had nothing to do with Trump and was years before he was on the campaign.

[TSA]

Well now, this is a solid sign that none of what you just said will happen. You’re right up there with Hater and Lefty with jinxes.

Not to mention you’re a proven 3 time loser. :lol
willing to bet :lol

:lol proven welcher laughing at anyone's bet

[djohn2oo8]

now Flynn committed treason? :rollin

Trump's campaign manager's crime had nothing to do with Trump and was years before he was on the campaign.

Trump's deputy finance manager's crime had nothing to do with Trump and was years before he was on the campaign.
You said no one would be indicted. Period. Bitch :lol

[djohn2oo8]

TSA overlooking the fact, Trump told Comey he hoped he could let the investigation of Flynn go. Now why would he do that?

[Blake]

you're so cool you big gaping oozing pussy you.

lets be real for a minute faggylumps... how exactly am i a nazi? lmao the boogeyman! prove your point and don't just repeat it ad nauseam til it sticks with the other far left retards here. prove it. this is exactly what you're not good at. you have yet to back up any of your claims about me.

so i mooched off you back 20 yrs ago? mooched weed? i've never mooched from anyone but i guess my word gets trumped by your word because you say so. prove it!

i'm white trash and a nazi right? because once again, you say so. prove it!

last but not least, i've never lived in section 8 housing nor do i today.

you're full of shit and that's it. you have the attitude that you're better than everyone with your nose in the air. you're a pussy faggylumps and you'll forever be a pussy. go eat dirt with your parents already.

The I don't care meltdown

[RandomGuy]

US intel chiefs unanimous that Russia is targeting 2018 elections

https://www.cnn.com/2018/02/13/politics/intelligence-chiefs-russia-2018-elections-target/

They also say that Trump hasn't really told them that it is something they need to work against.

[RandomGuy]

"We expect Russia to continue using propaganda, social media, false-flag personas, sympathetic spokesmen and other means to influence, to try to build on its wide range of operations and exacerbate social and political fissures in the United States," Coats said at a hearing on worldwide threats. "There should be no doubt that Russia perceives its past efforts as successful and views the 2018 US midterm elections as a potential target for Russian influence operations."

[RandomGuy]

Intelligence chiefs to Senate: Nope, Trump doesn’t care about Russia
Deep State leaders (all appointed by Trump) tell the Senate Russia threat is real, but president can’t be bothered

uesday's televised annual Global Threat Hearing before the Senate Intelligence Committee seemed like a rare and special event. What used to be considered routine and ordinary in American political life -- open hearings with government officials testifying about the issues of the day -- felt like an exciting look into the secret workings of the Star Chamber. Considering that we are in the midst of one of the most significant presidential scandals in American history, concerning possible conspiracy with a foreign power and an active coverup, it's extremely odd that we have so little public congressional testimony about any of it. That's not the way our system is supposed to work.

https://www.salon.com/2018/02/14/intelligence-chiefs-to-senate-nope-trump-doesnt-care-about-russia/

[RandomGuy]

Your theory is shit. I’m glad you won’t be spamming it anymore.

I generally agree Russia's efforts had little overall effect, but it wasn't for a lack of trying. The question is, whether we should put up with active efforts of an intelligence agency of a foreign government to attack the very idea of democracy itself. Western liberal democracy is under threat from authoritarian regimes. That is important.

There is also the matter that the sitting president appears to be actively compromised by that same government.

But then, predicting what Trump will, or won't do is sort of a mugs game. He never fails to do the stupidest shit possible, just when you think he can't be dumber.

The thing about a good theory though, it that it both explains facts, and you can make testable predictions.

Fact 1:
Russia attempted to hack our electoral process through a multi-pronged attack.

Fact 2:
Donald "look how big my inauguration crowd was" Trump has done nothing but deny this even happened, and has gone so far as to take the extraordinary effort to delegitimize his own intelligence services when they something did happen. He has shown no willingness whatsoever to hold Russia to account for anything.

Fact 3:
Donald Trump has a pattern of criticizing anyone, and everyone at the drop of a hat. Allies, enemies, courts, free press, nothing has escaped his remarks and twitter feed, except for ONE/(two) thing(s), and that is Russia/Putin

Fact 4:
Russian efforts appeared designed to support Trump

Fact 5:
Trump directly called on Russia publicly to support his efforts to get elected.

Fact 6:
Donald Trump has gone out of his way to meet and talk with Putin privately in person, with no American witnesses. This is the only leader with which he has acted in this manner.

Fact 7:
Donald Trump, when forced to sign a bipartisan sanctions bill passed with a veto-proof majority of both houses of Congress, issued a signing statement saying most of it was unconstitutional, and that his administration would enforce it as little as possible.


Fact 8:
when Russia retaliated against sanctions by forcing the US embassy to cut staff, Trump thanked Putin for the action, making him look weak, something he has said one should never do, and is inconsistent with his past behavior in any other regard.

Theory:
Donald Trump has been compromised in some way. Either he directly owes them money, or they have evidence of some kind of him breaking the law or doing something he does not want others to know about.

This theory explains those facts, and is fully consistent with observed reality.

Prediction:
Donald Trump will take no action personally, nor will he criticize Russia or Putin in any way in regards to the Russian attack on our elections. He may allow his underlings to do some minor, inconsequential stuff, and if forced to do anything by Congress will drag his feet, if not outright attempt to veto any sanctions.


The way to falsify the theory:
1) Trump criticizes Putin/Russia (good)
2) Trump orders/takes action that materially harms Russian interests (definitive)

Bullshit conspiracy theories fail very often because either: they cannot be falsified, or they directly conflict with observed reality. This theory can be falsified, and does not conflict with what we know as fact.

Donald Trump is unpredictable except for Russia.

xylophone

[Reck]

:lol proven welcher laughing at anyone's bet

How's it feel to keep losing on those brilliant bets of yours? :lol Cuck

[TSA]

Intelligence chiefs to Senate: Nope, Trump doesn’t care about Russia
Deep State leaders (all appointed by Trump) tell the Senate Russia threat is real, but president can’t be bothered

uesday's televised annual Global Threat Hearing before the Senate Intelligence Committee seemed like a rare and special event. What used to be considered routine and ordinary in American political life -- open hearings with government officials testifying about the issues of the day -- felt like an exciting look into the secret workings of the Star Chamber. Considering that we are in the midst of one of the most significant presidential scandals in American history, concerning possible conspiracy with a foreign power and an active coverup, it's extremely odd that we have so little public congressional testimony about any of it. That's not the way our system is supposed to work.

https://www.salon.com/2018/02/14/intelligence-chiefs-to-senate-nope-trump-doesnt-care-about-russia/

Instead of relying on a Salon article you should watch it for yourself and be the judge of "nope, Trump doesn't care about Russia" as that is not what was conveyed.

Lpw66-vUjAE

[TSA]

How's it feel to keep losing on those brilliant bets of yours? :lol Cuck

Feels better to lose a bet and honor it than be like you and lose a bet and welch.

[djohn2oo8]

Instead of relying on a Salon article you should watch it for yourself and be the judge of "nope, Trump doesn't care about Russia" as that is not what was conveyed.

Lpw66-vUjAE
So why hasn't he signed those sanctions? Hmmm...

[Reck]

Feels better to lose a bet and honor it than be like you and lose a bet and welch.

Life time loser thinking it feels good to lose.

:lol TSA mentality
:lol 4channity
:lol Pizza lord

Can be surprise when you say it feels good losing when that's all you've done since birth.

[djohn2oo8]

963837803783213056
gonna be lots more resignations

[Reck]

963837803783213056
gonna be lots more resignations

Jared. :lol

Never gonna get a full clearance after his bestie just got handed down possible indictments.

[RandomGuy]

Instead of relying on a Salon article you should watch it for yourself and be the judge of "nope, Trump doesn't care about Russia" as that is not what was conveyed.

Lpw66-vUjAE

I did watch it. I got exactly that "Trump doesn't care" out of their testimony.

Trump goes off on twitter over every slight, or perceived attack on America, and is loud about it.

Russia does this... nothing.

What is your explanation for that? Why is Russia treated so differently?

[RandomGuy]

So why hasn't he signed those sanctions? Hmmm...

He signed them.

He just isn't really enforcing them, as predicted by my theory.

[TSA]

Trump's own National Security Adviser, you know the guy receiving classified briefings and committing treason while he did it had nothing to do with Trump or his campaign.


Not only did Flynn not commit treason but there is also a chance he gets cleared. First time I've heard Judge Sullivan filed an order directing Mueller to provide Flynn with any evidence in the special counsel’s possession that is favorable to Flynn.

New developments in Flynn's case raise questions about the circumstances under which he pled guilty to lying to the FBI.

Back in early December, Trump fans started throwing stuff at me for suggesting that we await more information about FBI agent Peter Strzok before demanding that he be drawn and quartered. Yes, it was clear that Strzok engaged in serious misconduct: The married G-man’s reported extramarital affair with his married FBI colleague Lisa Page was scandalous not only for the obvious reasons but as potential blackmail material against counterintelligence agents. Plus, Strzok appears to have been the main investigator in the Hillary Clinton emails case that the FBI and Justice Department bent over backwards not to prosecute; and there is reason to believe his rabidly anti-Trump text messages with his paramour crossed the line from arrogant political banter to unprofessional investigative decision-making. But there were dissonant notes, too, cutting against the neat ditty about a high-ranking government agent acting on a corrupt partisan agenda. For one thing, I was hearing from people with good national-security credentials that Strzok was a highly effective counterintelligence agent. And then there was Mike Flynn. The first revelations about Strzok’s texts came only days after General Flynn, who had fleetingly served as President Trump’s first national-security adviser, pled guilty in the Mueller investigation to a charge of lying to FBI investigators. Strzok had conducted the interview with Flynn. Combine that with the fact that he had been a principal in all the important FBI interviews in the Clinton caper, and the presumption crystalized: Political hack Strzok went kid-gloves on the Hillary Gang and scorched-earth on Trump World.

That’s not reality, though. Here’s how I recounted what actually happened in the December column: Strzok did not decide on his own to interview Flynn. We know the matter was being monitored at the highest level of the Justice Department, by then–acting attorney general Sally Yates and then–FBI director James Comey. Strzok and a colleague were assigned to interview Flynn. More importantly, Strzok apparently reported that he believed Flynn had been truthful. Shortly after the interview occurred, it was reported that the FBI had decided no action would be taken against Flynn. On March 2, Comey testified to a closed session of the House Intelligence Committee that, while Flynn may have had some honest failures of recollection during the interview, the agents who questioned him concluded that he did not lie. Far from setting Flynn up, it seems that Strzok would exculpate him. Flynn was prosecuted not because Strzok is an anti-Trump zealot, but apparently because Strzok’s finding that Flynn was truthful was negated by Mueller’s very aggressive prosecutors. Did they decide they knew better than the experienced investigators who were in the room observing Flynn’s demeanor as he answered their questions?

Of course, the point is moot now because Flynn has admitted his guilt. Still, I wonder whether Mueller’s team informed Flynn and his counsel, prior to Flynn’s guilty plea to lying to the FBI, that the interviewing agents believed he had not lied to the FBI. I still wonder what Mueller’s team told Flynn before the guilty plea. There are good reasons to do so. Flynn’s case is back in the news thanks to Byron York’s important Washington Examiner report yesterday. He retraces the history: Because Flynn was a Trump transition official and incoming national-security adviser, there was nothing at all inappropriate about his discussing Obama-imposed sanctions against Russia with Russian ambassador Sergey Kislyak.

Nevertheless, then–acting attorney general and Obama partisan Sally Yates seriously considered prosecuting Flynn under the absurd, never-invoked Logan Act. This misconception that Flynn had done something wrong led Yates and Comey to have Flynn interviewed as if he were a criminal suspect. Apparently unconcerned, Flynn agreed to be interviewed without counsel. Strzok came away from the session believing that Flynn had told the truth. Comey, Byron York reports, “told lawmakers that the FBI agents who interviewed Flynn did not believe that Flynn had lied to them, or that any inaccuracies in his answers were intentional.” Yet, ten months later, with Yates, Comey, and Strzok now out of the picture, Mueller decided to charge Flynn with lying to the FBI anyway. And Flynn decided to plead guilty — perhaps because he was guilty . . . or perhaps because he lacked the resources to sustain the legal fight . . . or perhaps because he feared Mueller’s team would otherwise prosecute his son. There are a few other oddities about the case.

After Flynn pled guilty, I argued that this showed Mueller did not have a collusion case. If he did, he would have forced Flynn to plead guilty to some kind of criminal conspiracy involving the Trump campaign and Russia, and had Flynn implicate his Trump World coconspirators in the course of allocuting in court. Instead, Flynn pled out to a mere process crime, giving Mueller a scalp but not much else. The judge who accepted Flynn’s guilty plea was Rudolph Contreras. Mysteriously, just days after taking Flynn’s plea, Judge Contreras recused himself from the case. The press has been remarkably uncurious about this development. No rationale for the recusal has been offered, no explanation for why, if Judge Contreras had some sort of conflict, the recusal came after the guilty plea, not before. We can note that Contreras is one of the eleven federal district judges assigned to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court. We do not know if Judge Contreras signed one or more of the FISA warrants the Justice Department sought for Trump campaign figures Carter Page and Paul Manafort (or even if signing a FISA warrant would constitute grounds for a conflict in Flynn’s case). We can note, however, that Contreras is one of just three FISA court judges who sits in the District of Columbia, where it is likely the Trump-Russia FISA warrants were sought.

When Judge Contreras pulled out, Flynn’s case was reassigned to Judge Emmet G. Sullivan. We now know that one of Judge Sullivan’s first actions on the case was to file an order directing Mueller to provide Flynn with any evidence in the special counsel’s possession that is favorable to Flynn, whether on the issue of guilt or of sentencing. Significantly, the order stresses that if Mueller has such evidence but believes it is not “material” and therefore that Flynn is not entitled to disclosure of it, Mueller must show the evidence to the court so that Judge Sullivan may decide whether to mandate its disclosure.

Now, it could be that this is just Judge Sullivan’s standard order on exculpatory information, filed in every case over which he presides. But it is noteworthy that Flynn had already pled guilty, and in the course of doing so had agreed to Mueller’s demand that he waive “the right to any further discovery or disclosures of information not already provided” — in addition to forfeiting many other trial and appellate rights. (See plea agreement, pages 6–7.) It certainly appears that Sullivan’s order supersedes the plea agreement and imposes on the special counsel the obligation to reveal any and all evidence suggesting that Flynn is innocent of the charge to which he has admitted guilt. Could this provide General Flynn with factual grounds of which he was previously unaware to seek to have his plea vacated? Would he have a viable legal basis to undo the plea agreement that he and his lawyer signed on November 30? We do not know at this point. All we can say is that Flynn’s sentencing has just been postponed until May.

Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/456379/michael-flynn-guilty-plea-questions-raised-about-fbi-robert-mueller-investigation

[spurraider21]

Not only did Flynn not commit treason but there is also a chance he gets cleared. First time I've heard Judge Sullivan filed an order directing Mueller to provide Flynn with any evidence in the special counsel’s possession that is favorable to Flynn.

New developments in Flynn's case raise questions about the circumstances under which he pled guilty to lying to the FBI.

Back in early December, Trump fans started throwing stuff at me for suggesting that we await more information about FBI agent Peter Strzok before demanding that he be drawn and quartered. Yes, it was clear that Strzok engaged in serious misconduct: The married G-man’s reported extramarital affair with his married FBI colleague Lisa Page was scandalous not only for the obvious reasons but as potential blackmail material against counterintelligence agents. Plus, Strzok appears to have been the main investigator in the Hillary Clinton emails case that the FBI and Justice Department bent over backwards not to prosecute; and there is reason to believe his rabidly anti-Trump text messages with his paramour crossed the line from arrogant political banter to unprofessional investigative decision-making. But there were dissonant notes, too, cutting against the neat ditty about a high-ranking government agent acting on a corrupt partisan agenda. For one thing, I was hearing from people with good national-security credentials that Strzok was a highly effective counterintelligence agent. And then there was Mike Flynn. The first revelations about Strzok’s texts came only days after General Flynn, who had fleetingly served as President Trump’s first national-security adviser, pled guilty in the Mueller investigation to a charge of lying to FBI investigators. Strzok had conducted the interview with Flynn. Combine that with the fact that he had been a principal in all the important FBI interviews in the Clinton caper, and the presumption crystalized: Political hack Strzok went kid-gloves on the Hillary Gang and scorched-earth on Trump World.

That’s not reality, though. Here’s how I recounted what actually happened in the December column: Strzok did not decide on his own to interview Flynn. We know the matter was being monitored at the highest level of the Justice Department, by then–acting attorney general Sally Yates and then–FBI director James Comey. Strzok and a colleague were assigned to interview Flynn. More importantly, Strzok apparently reported that he believed Flynn had been truthful. Shortly after the interview occurred, it was reported that the FBI had decided no action would be taken against Flynn. On March 2, Comey testified to a closed session of the House Intelligence Committee that, while Flynn may have had some honest failures of recollection during the interview, the agents who questioned him concluded that he did not lie. Far from setting Flynn up, it seems that Strzok would exculpate him. Flynn was prosecuted not because Strzok is an anti-Trump zealot, but apparently because Strzok’s finding that Flynn was truthful was negated by Mueller’s very aggressive prosecutors. Did they decide they knew better than the experienced investigators who were in the room observing Flynn’s demeanor as he answered their questions?

Of course, the point is moot now because Flynn has admitted his guilt. Still, I wonder whether Mueller’s team informed Flynn and his counsel, prior to Flynn’s guilty plea to lying to the FBI, that the interviewing agents believed he had not lied to the FBI. I still wonder what Mueller’s team told Flynn before the guilty plea. There are good reasons to do so. Flynn’s case is back in the news thanks to Byron York’s important Washington Examiner report yesterday. He retraces the history: Because Flynn was a Trump transition official and incoming national-security adviser, there was nothing at all inappropriate about his discussing Obama-imposed sanctions against Russia with Russian ambassador Sergey Kislyak.

Nevertheless, then–acting attorney general and Obama partisan Sally Yates seriously considered prosecuting Flynn under the absurd, never-invoked Logan Act. This misconception that Flynn had done something wrong led Yates and Comey to have Flynn interviewed as if he were a criminal suspect. Apparently unconcerned, Flynn agreed to be interviewed without counsel. Strzok came away from the session believing that Flynn had told the truth. Comey, Byron York reports, “told lawmakers that the FBI agents who interviewed Flynn did not believe that Flynn had lied to them, or that any inaccuracies in his answers were intentional.” Yet, ten months later, with Yates, Comey, and Strzok now out of the picture, Mueller decided to charge Flynn with lying to the FBI anyway. And Flynn decided to plead guilty — perhaps because he was guilty . . . or perhaps because he lacked the resources to sustain the legal fight . . . or perhaps because he feared Mueller’s team would otherwise prosecute his son. There are a few other oddities about the case.

After Flynn pled guilty, I argued that this showed Mueller did not have a collusion case. If he did, he would have forced Flynn to plead guilty to some kind of criminal conspiracy involving the Trump campaign and Russia, and had Flynn implicate his Trump World coconspirators in the course of allocuting in court. Instead, Flynn pled out to a mere process crime, giving Mueller a scalp but not much else. The judge who accepted Flynn’s guilty plea was Rudolph Contreras. Mysteriously, just days after taking Flynn’s plea, Judge Contreras recused himself from the case. The press has been remarkably uncurious about this development. No rationale for the recusal has been offered, no explanation for why, if Judge Contreras had some sort of conflict, the recusal came after the guilty plea, not before. We can note that Contreras is one of the eleven federal district judges assigned to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court. We do not know if Judge Contreras signed one or more of the FISA warrants the Justice Department sought for Trump campaign figures Carter Page and Paul Manafort (or even if signing a FISA warrant would constitute grounds for a conflict in Flynn’s case). We can note, however, that Contreras is one of just three FISA court judges who sits in the District of Columbia, where it is likely the Trump-Russia FISA warrants were sought.

When Judge Contreras pulled out, Flynn’s case was reassigned to Judge Emmet G. Sullivan. We now know that one of Judge Sullivan’s first actions on the case was to file an order directing Mueller to provide Flynn with any evidence in the special counsel’s possession that is favorable to Flynn, whether on the issue of guilt or of sentencing. Significantly, the order stresses that if Mueller has such evidence but believes it is not “material” and therefore that Flynn is not entitled to disclosure of it, Mueller must show the evidence to the court so that Judge Sullivan may decide whether to mandate its disclosure.

Now, it could be that this is just Judge Sullivan’s standard order on exculpatory information, filed in every case over which he presides. But it is noteworthy that Flynn had already pled guilty, and in the course of doing so had agreed to Mueller’s demand that he waive “the right to any further discovery or disclosures of information not already provided” — in addition to forfeiting many other trial and appellate rights. (See plea agreement, pages 6–7.) It certainly appears that Sullivan’s order supersedes the plea agreement and imposes on the special counsel the obligation to reveal any and all evidence suggesting that Flynn is innocent of the charge to which he has admitted guilt. Could this provide General Flynn with factual grounds of which he was previously unaware to seek to have his plea vacated? Would he have a viable legal basis to undo the plea agreement that he and his lawyer signed on November 30? We do not know at this point. All we can say is that Flynn’s sentencing has just been postponed until May.

Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/456379/michael-flynn-guilty-plea-questions-raised-about-fbi-robert-mueller-investigation
:lol

[spurraider21]

standard orders are not case specific... we get standard orders on a regular basis at hearings. they're basically handouts the court has prepared that they give to EVERY party after a certain type of hearing

[Pavlov]

Not only did Flynn not commit treason but there is also a chance he gets cleared. First time I've heard Judge Sullivan filed an order directing Mueller to provide Flynn with any evidence in the special counsel’s possession that is favorable to Flynn.

New developments in Flynn's case raise questions about the circumstances under which he pled guilty to lying to the FBI.

Back in early December, Trump fans started throwing stuff at me for suggesting that we await more information about FBI agent Peter Strzok before demanding that he be drawn and quartered. Yes, it was clear that Strzok engaged in serious misconduct: The married G-man’s reported extramarital affair with his married FBI colleague Lisa Page was scandalous not only for the obvious reasons but as potential blackmail material against counterintelligence agents. Plus, Strzok appears to have been the main investigator in the Hillary Clinton emails case that the FBI and Justice Department bent over backwards not to prosecute; and there is reason to believe his rabidly anti-Trump text messages with his paramour crossed the line from arrogant political banter to unprofessional investigative decision-making. But there were dissonant notes, too, cutting against the neat ditty about a high-ranking government agent acting on a corrupt partisan agenda. For one thing, I was hearing from people with good national-security credentials that Strzok was a highly effective counterintelligence agent. And then there was Mike Flynn. The first revelations about Strzok’s texts came only days after General Flynn, who had fleetingly served as President Trump’s first national-security adviser, pled guilty in the Mueller investigation to a charge of lying to FBI investigators. Strzok had conducted the interview with Flynn. Combine that with the fact that he had been a principal in all the important FBI interviews in the Clinton caper, and the presumption crystalized: Political hack Strzok went kid-gloves on the Hillary Gang and scorched-earth on Trump World.

That’s not reality, though. Here’s how I recounted what actually happened in the December column: Strzok did not decide on his own to interview Flynn. We know the matter was being monitored at the highest level of the Justice Department, by then–acting attorney general Sally Yates and then–FBI director James Comey. Strzok and a colleague were assigned to interview Flynn. More importantly, Strzok apparently reported that he believed Flynn had been truthful. Shortly after the interview occurred, it was reported that the FBI had decided no action would be taken against Flynn. On March 2, Comey testified to a closed session of the House Intelligence Committee that, while Flynn may have had some honest failures of recollection during the interview, the agents who questioned him concluded that he did not lie. Far from setting Flynn up, it seems that Strzok would exculpate him. Flynn was prosecuted not because Strzok is an anti-Trump zealot, but apparently because Strzok’s finding that Flynn was truthful was negated by Mueller’s very aggressive prosecutors. Did they decide they knew better than the experienced investigators who were in the room observing Flynn’s demeanor as he answered their questions?

Of course, the point is moot now because Flynn has admitted his guilt. Still, I wonder whether Mueller’s team informed Flynn and his counsel, prior to Flynn’s guilty plea to lying to the FBI, that the interviewing agents believed he had not lied to the FBI. I still wonder what Mueller’s team told Flynn before the guilty plea. There are good reasons to do so. Flynn’s case is back in the news thanks to Byron York’s important Washington Examiner report yesterday. He retraces the history: Because Flynn was a Trump transition official and incoming national-security adviser, there was nothing at all inappropriate about his discussing Obama-imposed sanctions against Russia with Russian ambassador Sergey Kislyak.

Nevertheless, then–acting attorney general and Obama partisan Sally Yates seriously considered prosecuting Flynn under the absurd, never-invoked Logan Act. This misconception that Flynn had done something wrong led Yates and Comey to have Flynn interviewed as if he were a criminal suspect. Apparently unconcerned, Flynn agreed to be interviewed without counsel. Strzok came away from the session believing that Flynn had told the truth. Comey, Byron York reports, “told lawmakers that the FBI agents who interviewed Flynn did not believe that Flynn had lied to them, or that any inaccuracies in his answers were intentional.” Yet, ten months later, with Yates, Comey, and Strzok now out of the picture, Mueller decided to charge Flynn with lying to the FBI anyway. And Flynn decided to plead guilty — perhaps because he was guilty . . . or perhaps because he lacked the resources to sustain the legal fight . . . or perhaps because he feared Mueller’s team would otherwise prosecute his son. There are a few other oddities about the case.

After Flynn pled guilty, I argued that this showed Mueller did not have a collusion case. If he did, he would have forced Flynn to plead guilty to some kind of criminal conspiracy involving the Trump campaign and Russia, and had Flynn implicate his Trump World coconspirators in the course of allocuting in court. Instead, Flynn pled out to a mere process crime, giving Mueller a scalp but not much else. The judge who accepted Flynn’s guilty plea was Rudolph Contreras. Mysteriously, just days after taking Flynn’s plea, Judge Contreras recused himself from the case. The press has been remarkably uncurious about this development. No rationale for the recusal has been offered, no explanation for why, if Judge Contreras had some sort of conflict, the recusal came after the guilty plea, not before. We can note that Contreras is one of the eleven federal district judges assigned to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court. We do not know if Judge Contreras signed one or more of the FISA warrants the Justice Department sought for Trump campaign figures Carter Page and Paul Manafort (or even if signing a FISA warrant would constitute grounds for a conflict in Flynn’s case). We can note, however, that Contreras is one of just three FISA court judges who sits in the District of Columbia, where it is likely the Trump-Russia FISA warrants were sought.

When Judge Contreras pulled out, Flynn’s case was reassigned to Judge Emmet G. Sullivan. We now know that one of Judge Sullivan’s first actions on the case was to file an order directing Mueller to provide Flynn with any evidence in the special counsel’s possession that is favorable to Flynn, whether on the issue of guilt or of sentencing. Significantly, the order stresses that if Mueller has such evidence but believes it is not “material” and therefore that Flynn is not entitled to disclosure of it, Mueller must show the evidence to the court so that Judge Sullivan may decide whether to mandate its disclosure.

Now, it could be that this is just Judge Sullivan’s standard order on exculpatory information, filed in every case over which he presides. But it is noteworthy that Flynn had already pled guilty, and in the course of doing so had agreed to Mueller’s demand that he waive “the right to any further discovery or disclosures of information not already provided” — in addition to forfeiting many other trial and appellate rights. (See plea agreement, pages 6–7.) It certainly appears that Sullivan’s order supersedes the plea agreement and imposes on the special counsel the obligation to reveal any and all evidence suggesting that Flynn is innocent of the charge to which he has admitted guilt. Could this provide General Flynn with factual grounds of which he was previously unaware to seek to have his plea vacated? Would he have a viable legal basis to undo the plea agreement that he and his lawyer signed on November 30? We do not know at this point. All we can say is that Flynn’s sentencing has just been postponed until May.

Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/456379/michael-flynn-guilty-plea-questions-raised-about-fbi-robert-mueller-investigationNow it may be what the judge normally does BUT IT COULD BE THE MOST BIGGEST CONSPIRACY EVER!

I'm still trying to figure out why Trumpistas want to defend Flynn so badly. I guess choosing that nut as security adviser is such a bad look that Flynn must be rehabilitated to make dear leader look like the genius they desperately want him to be.

[spurraider21]

Now it may be what the judge normally does BUT IT COULD BE THE MOST BIGGEST CONSPIRACY EVER!

I'm still trying to figure out why Trumpistas want to defend Flynn so badly. I guess choosing that nut as security adviser is such a bad look that Flynn must be rehabilitated to make dear leader look like the genius they desperately want him to be.
its a pretty elaborate conspiracy to undo what is basically just a process crime that is less severe than a speeding ticket

[Pavlov]

its a pretty elaborate conspiracy to undo what is basically just a process crime that is less severe than a speeding ticket:lol I've lost track of the sheer number of conspiracy lanes in which TSA swerves.

[boutons_deux]

its a pretty elaborate conspiracy to undo what is basically just a process crime that is less severe than a speeding ticket

Lying to FBI/Feds is less serious than a speeding ticket?

where the lie in question was colluding, cooperating with Pootin that Pootin not retaliate over US sanctions?

... that US sanctions would be revisited after Trash was sworn in?

Was Flynn even a sworn employee of US govt in Dec 16 authorized to be talking to a foreign adversary about US govt policy?

[spurraider21]

Lying to FBI/Feds is less serious than a speeding ticket?

where the lie in question was colluding, cooperating with Pootin that Pootin not retaliate over US sanctions?

... that US sanctions would be revisited after Trash was sworn in?

Was Flynn even a sworn employee of US govt in Dec 16 authorized to be talking to a foreign adversary about US govt policy?
Exhibit 4546 of boutons being a dipshit

[RandomGuy]

Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/456379/michael-flynn-guilty-plea-questions-raised-about-fbi-robert-mueller-investigation


Man did you hear about that guy on the board of directors for the National Review? He did that thing, which means this is bunkum.





Is that how the ad hominem thing works? You are so good at it, I am looking for some feedback.

[Reck]

Exhibit 4546 of boutons being a dipshit

However, it shows that even boots knows the difference and consequences between lying to the FBI and getting a speeding ticket. :lol TSA outdone by boots via being a toolbag.

[TSA]

its a pretty elaborate conspiracy to undo what is basically just a process crime that is less severe than a speeding ticket

963864789016485888

Just filed by Mueller today

[TSA]

The Unraveling

[spurraider21]

ok

[Pavlov]

What would be the new evidence proving Flynn did not lie to the FBI and on his FARA application?

[Reck]

What would be the new evidence proving Flynn did not lie to the FBI and on his FARA application?

You have to trust the man's word. He's a patriot you know.

[Chris]

963864789016485888

Just filed by Mueller today

Why Mueller can't be trusted


963603487828389889

[spurraider21]

864998445244743684

[Pavlov]

Why Mueller can't be trusted


963603487828389889Why are you afraid of Mueller, Chris?

[boutons_deux]

Christopher Steele is a hero – and Americans owe him their thanks

Christopher Steele, the former British spy whose claims about Donald Trump’s ties with Russia hold center stage in Washington right now,

drives Republicans crazy.

They have recommended (https://www.politico.com/story/2018/02/05/christopher-steele-dossier-criminal-probe-request-390793)that the Department of Justice open a criminal investigation into his work.

What is it about Steele that possesses them so?

Could it be that his findings from the summer of 2016 — when the world was still wondering why Trump kept saying such nice things about Russia’s Vladimir Putin — proved so extraordinarily prescient?

Steele had already sussed out (http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-39435786) the basic ingredients of the campaign.

In June 2016, he already knew about ties between the Kremlin and Trump aides (specifically Carter Page and Paul Manafort), and

he knew that Russian hackers had stolen documents from the Democratic National Committee that they planned to use against Hillary Clinton.

Former CIA agent John Sipher has noted (https://www.justsecurity.org/44697/steele-dossier-knowing/) that several of Steele’s early assertions “turned out to be stunningly accurate.”

Fox News, citing the thoroughly discredited Nunes memo, called (http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/02/02/fisa-memo-steele-fired-as-fbi-source-for-breaking-cardinal-rule-leaking-to-media.html) Steele “more blabbermouth than Bond,” and

“the spy who couldn’t keep his mouth shut.”

The criminal referral from Republican Sens. Charles E. Grassley (Iowa) and Lindsey O. Graham (S.C.) claimed (http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/02/05/clinton-associates-fed-information-to-trump-dossier-author-steele-memo-says.html)that Clinton associates were “feeding him” information when he was compiling his memo.

We know that he spent two decades as an officer in Britain’s Secret Intelligence Service (SIS, sometimes known as “MI6”),

where he enjoyed the highest esteem from his own bosses as well as his counterparts in the U.S. intelligence community.

We know that he spent long stints in Russia,

where he built up his knowledge of the country and language and cultivated a wide-ranging network of contacts.

At one point he ran the SIS Russia Desk.

We also know that Steele investigated the case of Alexander Litvinenko (https://www.amazon.com/Very-Expensive-Poison-Assassination-Litvinenko/dp/1101973994/ref=sr_1_cc_1?s=aps&ie=UTF8&qid=1518556171&sr=1-1-catcorr&keywords=A+very+expensive+poison), the Russian defector who was assassinated — allegedly by the Kremlin — with a deadly radioactive poison in London in 2006.

Steele knows only too well what happens to people who get in Putin’s way.

the world of Kremlin intrigue, where mysterious deaths (https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2017/05/02/dozens-russian-deaths-cast-suspicion-vladimir-putin/100480734/) are a common tool of statecraft.

This is the world that Christopher Steele had to plumb, at considerable personal risk to himself, to chart Trump’s illicit entanglements.

That the Republicans are so determined to destroy Steele’s reputation certainly isn’t making life easier for him.

Happily, he doesn’t have to do much to prevail against them. He merely has to endure.

The truth will find a way.

The members of Trump’s party who are smart enough to understand this must be terrified.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/democracy-post/wp/2018/02/14/christopher-steele-is-a-hero-and-americans-owe-him-their-thanks/?utm_term=.45aebd9bdf71

[boutons_deux]

the IRS didn't "suppress" any groups, not even the blatantly illegal, fraudulent "social welfare" orgs that were, are conduits for the oligarchy's dark money.

Chris and his sources are FULL OF SHIT

[TSA]

Why Mueller can't be trusted


963603487828389889

I'm of a differing opinion. I think Mueller has been in on it from the start and I think Trump and Mueller planned on loading the team up with Clinton stooges when they met the night before Mueller was appointed to Special Counsel. Give them the rope and let Horowitz hang them.

[Pavlov]

I'm of a differing opinion. I think Mueller has been in on it from the start and I think Trump and Mueller planned on loading the team up with Clinton stooges when they met the night before Mueller was appointed to Special Counsel. Give them the rope and let Horowitz hang them.Mueller signed up to make a mockery of his own investigation and the agency he led for 12 years?

lol

[Reck]

Mueller signed up to make a mockery of his own investigation and the agency he led for 12 years?

lol

:lmao

Jesus Christ, save that man.

[TSA]

ok

Judge Contreras was forcibly recused, then the sentencing is delayed, and today Mueller asks court to allow Flynn to see all evidence used against him. From your experience does this seem a pretty standard series of events? What do you think is going on?

[RandomGuy]

you're so cool you big gaping oozing pussy you.

lets be real for a minute faggylumps... how exactly am i a nazi? lmao the boogeyman! prove your point and don't just repeat it ad nauseam til it sticks with the other far left retards here. prove it. this is exactly what you're not good at. you have yet to back up any of your claims about me.

so i mooched off you back 20 yrs ago? mooched weed? i've never mooched from anyone but i guess my word gets trumped by your word because you say so. prove it!

i'm white trash and a nazi right? because once again, you say so. prove it!

last but not least, i've never lived in section 8 housing nor do i today.

you're full of shit and that's it. you have the attitude that you're better than everyone with your nose in the air. you're a pussy faggylumps and you'll forever be a pussy. go eat dirt with your parents already.

https://images.dailykos.com/images/485082/story_image/TMW2018-01-03color.png?1513446123

[TSA]

Mueller signed up to make a mockery of his own investigation and the agency he led for 12 years?

lol
Did you happen to miss the completely partisan makeup of his team? If he didn't do it on purpose he made a mockery of his own investigation unintentionally.

[djohn2oo8]

963880592751452161
That obstruction burger is massive Reck

[Pavlov]

Did you happen to miss the completely partisan makeup of his team? If he didn't do it on purpose he made a mockery of his own investigation unintentionally.From what I saw, it has both Democrats and Republicans on it.

You are free to list all members of his team and their political affiliations. Let's see the "completely partisan makeup of his team" you are claiming.

[clambake]

Judge Contreras was forcibly recused, then the sentencing is delayed, and today Mueller asks court to allow Flynn to see all evidence used against him. From your experience does this seem a pretty standard series of events? What do you think is going on?

its called discovery.

[djohn2oo8]

963883066203824128

[djohn2oo8]

963884438626209796

[Pavlov]

Judge Contreras was forcibly recused"Forcibly"?

Where's the link for that?

[djohn2oo8]

963893317292343296
Lordy bombs droppin all over!

[Chris]

I'm of a differing opinion. I think Mueller has been in on it from the start and I think Trump and Mueller planned on loading the team up with Clinton stooges when they met the night before Mueller was appointed to Special Counsel. Give them the rope and let Horowitz hang them.

I used to think that, but Mueller's conflicts of interest are overwhelming. If that was the game, Trump would have picked someone with a clean slate. Trump and Sessions have a plan, just not sure what it is.

[djohn2oo8]

963861215876435968

[Pavlov]

I used to think that, but Mueller's conflicts of interest are overwhelming. If that was the game, Trump would have picked someone with a clean slate. Trump and Sessions have a plan, just not sure what it is.I mean, they just have to be super geniuses that are in control of everything, right?

[djohn2oo8]

963881526571266049

[TSA]

From what I saw, it has both Democrats and Republicans on it.

You are free to list all members of his team and their political affiliations. Let's see the "completely partisan makeup of his team" you are claiming.

Already posted in this very thread. If you are looking for a 3 page debate on the makeup of his team you are barking up the wrong tree, I have no interest.

[djohn2oo8]

963881527632367616

[djohn2oo8]

963880592751452161
That obstruction burger is massive Reck

957109709470871553
Lordy McGahn Flipped!

[boutons_deux]

As dubya would say, "That was some weird shit"

Riding an Untamed Horse: Priebus Opens Up on Serving Trump

https://mobile.nytimes.com/2018/02/14/us/politics/riding-an-untamed-horse-priebus-opens-up-on-serving-trump.html?referer=https://t.co/2FJmtHCFZw

Thanks, Trash voters! (and esp to Hillary-trashing Comey)

[Reck]

963893317292343296
Lordy bombs droppin all over!

This beauty must be coming from either Priebus himself or Mueller on purpose to let him know Mueller is about to tap that orange ass.

[Pavlov]

Already posted in this very thread. If you are looking for a 3 page debate on the makeup of his team you are barking up the wrong tree, I have no interest.I'm not looking for a debate.

I am looking for a list of all the members of Mueller's team and their political affiliations, i.e., back up your claim.

[TSA]

"Forcibly"?

Where's the link for that?He didn't recuse himself

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-russia-flynn/judge-presiding-over-michael-flynn-criminal-case-is-recused-court-idUSKBN1E202V

[TSA]

I'm not looking for a debate.

I am looking for a list of all the members of Mueller's team and their political affiliations, i.e., back up your claim.

Great, already posted in this thread. Fetch.

[Chris]

Great, already posted in this thread. Fetch.

:lol Chop-chop.

[Pavlov]

He didn't recuse himself

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-russia-flynn/judge-presiding-over-michael-flynn-criminal-case-is-recused-court-idUSKBN1E202VMultiple sources say he recused himself.

[TSA]

Multiple sources say he recused himself.

Great, multiple sources say he didn't recuse himself. It doesn't really matter so no point going back and forth. What matters is he was recused after accepting Flynn's plea meaning there was already a conflict of interest when he accepted Flynn's plea.

[Chris]

Multiple sources say he recused himself.

It was widely known and posted that he was recused weeks ago. You just weren't paying attention with your 'lol Contreras' retorts.

[Pavlov]

Great, multiple sources say he didn't recuse himself. It doesn't really matter so no point going back and forth. What matters is he was recused after accepting Flynn's plea meaning there was already a conflict of interest when he accepted Flynn's plea.So you're saying he somehow forced Flynn to admit to multiple felony lies?

Grocers and flamethrower authors haven't been able to make a passable Mexican judge conspiracy here yet. Let me know when they do.

[Pavlov]

It was widely known and posted that he was recused weeks ago. You just weren't paying attention with your 'lol Contreras' retorts.Everyone knows he's off the case. We were discussing whether he recused himself.

You're kind of stupid. You know that, right?

[TSA]

963864789016485888

Just filed by Mueller today

Wonder if this has anything to do with these motions filed back in December

945861939728498688

945862212832210945

945862768166449152

[Chris]

Everyone knows he's off the case. We were discussing whether he recused himself.

You're kind of stupid. You know that, right?

It was widely known he was recused and he didn't recuse himself. You're very stupid. You know that, right?

[Pavlov]

What's the illegal evidence? Monitoring Kislyak?

:lol

[Chris]

963790781457797125

[TSA]

So you're saying he somehow forced Flynn to admit to multiple felony lies?How the fuck did you come to that conclusion? That's a stupid leap even for you.


Grocers and flamethrower authors haven't been able to make a passable Mexican judge conspiracy here yet. Let me know when they do.
It's been speculated that Contreras signed off on one of the FISA warrants as he sits on the FISC and is 1 of 3 in DC.

[Pavlov]

It was widely known he was recused and he didn't recuse himself. You're very stupid. You know that, right?Reports at the time say he recused himself and those reports remain unchanged.

You're free to prove he was forcibly recused, but you won't.

[Pavlov]

How the fuck did you come to that conclusion? That's a stupid leap even for you.Then explain your Contreras conspiracy here.

Fully.

[Reck]

963790781457797125

How nice of you to still be pedalling this conspiracy when the parents have said to not make this political or get invasive. But I guess your kind doesn't care about boundaries, Chris.

[Chris]

960926490807369729

Any updates on Bannon and God King Mueller?

[TSA]

What's the illegal evidence? Monitoring Kislyak?

:lol

Strzok could have lied on the 302's on Flynn. No attorney was present and it wasn't recorded. Flynn's legal team will now have access to the 302's.

[Chris]

How nice of you to still be pedalling this conspiracy when the parents have said to not make this political or get invasive. But I guess your kind doesn't care about boundaries, Chris.

Joe Rogan is talking about you here, and I bet you didn't watch. :lol Your response is classic tyvm :tu

[TSA]

Then explain your Contreras conspiracy here.

Fully.

As soon as you explain how you came to the conclusion that I was saying Contreras somehow forced Flynn to admit to multiple felonies.

[Pavlov]

Strzok could have lied on the 302's on Flynn. No attorney was present and it wasn't recorded. Flynn's legal team will now have access to the 302's.So Mueller had access to this and knew Flynn admitted to multiple instances of lying in the interview and FARA application falsely and took the false admission plea anyway?

This is the theory?

If not -- what is the theory?

[Pavlov]

As soon as you explain how you came to the conclusion that I was saying Contreras somehow forced Flynn to admit to multiple felonies.Your theories are often bullshit, so a theory that Contreras somehow influenced Flynn to falsely confess sounds like something you might get from a grocer or flamethrower novelist or anonymous MAGA cap model photoshop.

Now, fully explain your Contreras conspiracy theory.