Flynn in major trouble for speaking to Russia about sanctions

[Pavlov]

If they knew about it, why release it after the election instead of before?
WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT THE DOSSIER, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE DOSSIER!

[spurraider21]

lets revisit all this stuff about Flynn's imminent plea withdrawal because mueller didnt disclose exonerating evidence!!


Not in the clear yet but looks to be getting closer day by day.

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

General Flynn Should WITHDRAW His Guilty Plea. His New Judge Is A Government Misconduct Expert


Extraordinary manipulation by powerful people led to the creation of Robert Mueller’s continuing investigation and prosecution of General Michael Flynn. Notably, the recent postponement of General Flynn’s sentencing provides an opportunity for more evidence to be revealed that will provide massive ammunition for a motion to withdraw Flynn’s guilty plea and dismiss the charges against him.

It was Judge Rudolph Contreras who accepted General Flynn’s guilty plea, but he suddenly was recused from the case. The likely reason is that Judge Contreras served on the special court that allowed the Federal Bureau of Investigation to surveil the Trump campaign based on the dubious FISA application. Judge Contreras may have approved one of those four warrants.

The judge assigned to Flynn’s case now is Emmet G. Sullivan. Judge Sullivan immediately issued what is called a “Brady” order requiring Mueller to provide Flynn all information that is favorable to the defense whether with respect to guilt or punishment. Just today, Mueller’s team filed an agreed motion to provide discovery to General Flynn under a protective order so that it can be reviewed by counsel but not disclosed otherwise.

This development is huge. Prosecutors almost never provide this kind of information to a defendant before he enters a plea — much less after he has done so. This is one of myriad problems in our justice system. As Judge Jed Rakoff wrote several years ago, people who are innocent enter guilty pleas every day. They simply can no longer withstand the unimaginable stress of a criminal investigation. They and their families suffer sheer exhaustion in every form — financial, physical, mental, and emotional. Add in a little prosecutorial duress — like the threat of indicting your son — and, presto, there’s a guilty plea.

Judge Sullivan is the perfect judge to decide General Flynn’s motion. The judicial hero of my book, Emmet Sullivan held federal prosecutors in contempt for failing to disclose evidence, dismissed the corrupted prosecution of Alaska Senator Ted Stevens and appointed a special prosecutor to investigate the Department of Justice.

That independent counsel, Henry Schuelke, issued a scathing report finding systematic, intentional and pervasive misconduct in the Department of (In)Justice. He identified the prosecution’s deliberate concealment of evidence favorable to the defense. That is why Judge Sullivan both issues such Brady orders in each of his cases and encourages every other judge in the country to do the same.

Emmet G. Sullivan is one judge who is ready, willing and able to hold Mr. Mueller accountable to the law and who has the wherewithal to dismiss the case against General Flynn — for egregious government misconduct — if Mueller doesn’t move to dismiss it himself.

Judge Sullivan’s experience can only help General Flynn as more evidence appears every day to reveal that Flynn should not have been prosecuted. James Comey testified to Congress that the agents who interviewed Flynn — including the hopelessly compromised Peter Strzok — thought Flynn was telling the truth. The entire FISA warrant application becomes more problematic by the day.

Within the next six weeks, we will probably have the bombshell report of Michael Horowitz, the Inspector General for the Department of Justice. He is the one who discovered the Strzok-Page emails, and he has been investigating the FBI and DOJ in their Clinton cover-up for the last year.

Since Flynn entered his guilty plea, we’ve learned that information Mr. Comey leaked deliberately to “trigger” Robert Mueller’s entire investigation was classified. Also, FBI agents Peter Strzok, Lisa Page and Deputy Director Andrew McCabe were working on an “insurance policy” to protect the country against a Trump presidency. It seems plausible that this “insurance policy” included the appointment of a special prosecutor.

Indeed, the bases for throwing out everything Robert Mueller has touched grow exponentially as more truth finds sunlight.

Watching guilty pleas evaporate is nothing new for Mr. Mueller’s favored lieutenant Andrew Weissmann. Along with his Enron Task Force comrade Leslie Caldwell, Weissmann terrorized Arthur Andersen partner David Duncan into pleading guilty.

Weissmann and Caldwell made Duncan testify at length against Arthur Andersen when they destroyed the company and 85,000 jobs only to be reversed by a unanimous Supreme Court three years later. Turns out, the “crime” they “convinced” Mr. Duncan to plead guilty to was not a crime at all. The court allowed Duncan to withdraw his plea. And, that was not the only Weissmann-induced plea to be withdrawn either. Just ask Christopher Calger.

Judge Sullivan is the country’s premiere jurist experienced in the abuses of our Department of Justice. He knows a cover-up when he sees one. Until the Department is cleaned out with Clorox and firehoses, along with its “friends” at the FBI, Judge Sullivan is the best person to confront the egregious government misconduct that has led to and been perpetrated by the Mueller-Weissmann “investigation” and to right the injustices that have arisen from it. Stay tuned for the fireworks.
====================

Sidney Powell, former federal prosecutor and veteran of 500 federal appeals, is the author of LICENSED TO LIE: Exposing Corruption in the Department of Justice. She is a Senior Fellow of the London Center for Policy Research and Senior Policy Advisor for America First.

http://dailycaller.com/2018/02/16/general-flynn-should-withdraw-his-guilty-plea-his-new-judge-is-a-government-misconduct-expert/


You have some catching up to do. Mueller agreed to have the court provide all evidence used against him. His previous plea with the judge who was recused May now be void.


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.


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
remember all that?

from the court's actual docket..

https://www.washingtonpost.com/resizer/Fb6UW6U0n2Rd3J05AN2eoj0NeAw=/1484x0/arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/IWQGGAPVFI4KDDESNR6B6TISMU.jpg

lol standing order that we KNOW is this judge's common practice in every case

but but wait! remember when they revised it in february to add more details! ermagerd!!

https://www.washingtonpost.com/resizer/2ph0MT-d0ZBDZ7OTYKOIjmCNW3M=/1484x0/arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/ORPJ3VYBRE3EFI7POG3BDPXKZE.jpg

oh wait, they just updated it because they inadvertently used an older version

[djohn2oo8]

^ :lmao

[spurraider21]

but but wait, why would they make this order AFTER there's already been a guilty plea??!? makes no sense! he's totally getting exonerated!!

:lmao "the order is entered regardless of the posture of the case when it is assigned to the court" :lmao

[Pavlov]

but but wait, why would they make this order AFTER there's already been a guilty plea??!? makes no sense! he's totally getting exonerated!!

:lmao "the order is entered regardless of the posture of the case when it is assigned to the court" :lmaoLook, Mike Flynn is king spook and king spook doesn't just plead guilty to a felony without a spooky strategy to reverse the conviction. It's totally easier than, you know, going to trial where the prosecution has to prove your guilt.

[spurraider21]

lol TSA furiously googling for sundance articles to address this

[Chris]

Russian Billionaire: Fusion GPS Funded By George Soros & Mystery Silicon Valley Elites


Does Fusion GPS receive funding from progressive billionaire George Soros and secretive Silicon Valley elites? One of Russia’s richest men says the answer is ‘yes.’



In the comedy movie “Wag the Dog,” a fictitious U.S. president is on the cusp of losing an election over a real scandal. So a political spin doctor and Hollywood producer hired by his campaign instead distract the public by manufacturing “the appearance of a war” with Albania. The spin doctor explains: “It’s not a war, it’s a pageant. We need a theme, a song — some visuals.” The producer ascribes Albania a false motive against the United States: “They want to destroy our way of life!” The story line keeps changing to explain away emerging, inconvenient realities.

The ever-changing “Russia narrative” in American politics is today’s “Wag the Dog” scenario. Technology and the disintegration of evidence-based journalism permit a surprisingly small number of individuals to destroy bilateral or multilateral relations. Their motivation in shifting from an inconvenient reality into their desired reality is power and military-industrial commercial interests.

When I attended the Munich Security Conference in February, the extraordinary, coordinated message of a panel of U.S. senators was summarized by moderator Victoria Nuland, former assistant secretary of state under President Barack Obama, as: “Deep State-proud loyalists giv[ing] broad reassurance about continuity.” One of the panelists, Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), said: “What the Breitbart crowd would call the ‘Deep State’ is what many of us would call ‘knowledgeable professionals.’” The panel’s uniform message was essentially: Ignore Donald Trump and increase your defense budget to 2 percent, because the generals who are ‘operationalizing policy’ remain in charge.

When you owe the world $18 trillion, the only way to get them to “pay 2 percent for defense” is to manufacture a boogeyman. Russian novelist and pacifist Leo Tolstoy observed: “There is no war which was not hatched by the governments, the governments alone, independent of the interests of the people.”

What has been inelegantly termed the “Deep State” is really this: shadow power exercised by a small number of individuals from media, business, government and the intelligence community, foisting provocative and cynically false manipulations on the public. Out of these manipulations, an agenda of these architects’ own design is born.

Unfortunately, I am personally familiar with this group. Before they moved to their current, bigger ambitions of reversing the U.S. presidential election results, they scurrilously attacked me and others from the shadows for two decades. The various story lines and roles they have created for me don’t survive close scrutiny and are internally inconsistent, yet they simply follow the “Wag the Dog” playbook: We don’t need it to prove to be true. We need it to distract them.

President Theodore Roosevelt once cautioned: “Behind the ostensible government sits enthroned an invisible government owing no allegiance and acknowledging no responsibility to the people. To destroy this invisible government, to befoul the unholy alliance between corrupt business and corrupt politics, is the first task.”

The distractions no longer can mask these “unholy alliances.” The wife of a central architect of the Department of Justice’s “Russia narrative” secretly worked for the dossier-peddling Fusion GPS. Fusion GPS founder Glenn Simpson attempted — according to his own congressional admissions — to influence the 2016 U.S. presidential election and its aftermath, to attack Russia and to “embarrass” me and cause trouble for the company I founded.

This inconvenient disclosure necessitated a new story line. Former Democratic National Committee chairwoman and CNN commentator Donna Brazile attacked the memo prepared by House Intelligence Committee chairman Devin Nunes (R-Calif.) on television as “the weaponization of classified information.” It is ironic that someone who once ran the organization that allegedly rigged the primary nomination process and who was fired from CNN for allegedly rigging a presidential debate is now producing “Russian-rigging” stories.

World War II hero and former U.S. Sen. Daniel Inouye (D-Hawaii) once observed, in a different context: “There exists a shadowy government with … its own fundraising mechanism.” Wagging the dog costs money. So, who is the “funding mechanism” of this “shadowy government?”

Fusion GPS’s Simpson, in a New York Times op-ed describing his own Judiciary Committee testimony, claimed a neoconservative website “and the Clinton campaign” were “the Republican and Democratic funders of our Trump research.” The Judiciary Committee’s Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) then unilaterally released, over the objection of committee chairman Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), Simpson’s testimony to “set the record straight.” Fusion GPS “commended Senator Feinstein for her courage.”

Yet on March 16, 2017, Daniel Jones — himself a team member of Fusion GPS, self-described former FBI agent and, as we now know from the media, an ex-Feinstein staffer — met with my lawyer, Adam Waldman, and described Fusion as a “shadow media organization helping the government,” funded by a “group of Silicon Valley billionaires and George Soros.” My lawyer testified these facts to the Senate Intelligence Committee on Nov. 3. Mr. Soros is, not coincidentally, also the funder of two “ethics watchdog” NGOs (Democracy 21 and CREW) attacking Rep. Nunes’ committee memo.

A former Obama State Department official, Nuland, has been recently outed as another shadow player, reviewing and disseminating Fusion’s dossier, and reportedly, hundreds of other dossiers over a period of years. “Deep State-proud loyalists” apparently was a Freudian slip, not a joke.

Invented narratives — not “of the people, by the people, for the people,” but rather just from a couple of people, cloaked in the very same hypocritical rhetoric of “freedom” and “democracy” that those are actively undermining — impede internationally shared efforts on the world’s most pressing, real issues, like global health, climate change and the future of energy. My own “Mother Russia” has many problems and challenges, and my country is still in transition from the Soviet regime — a transition some clearly wish us to remain in indefinitely.

But we need to stop this old movie.

Oleg Deripaska is the founder of UC Rusal, the world’s leading producer of aluminum using clean, renewable hydropower.

http://dailycaller.com/2018/03/08/the-ever-changing-russia-narrative-in-american-politics-is-cynically-false-public-manipulation/

[spurraider21]

lol chris burying that shit with soros *ding*

[Pavlov]

Russian Billionaire: Fusion GPS Funded By George Soros & Mystery Silicon Valley Elites


Does Fusion GPS receive funding from progressive billionaire George Soros and secretive Silicon Valley elites? One of Russia’s richest men says the answer is ‘yes.’:lmao Deripaska

Well, the Russian oligarch says the Russian oligarchs are pure and holy creatures. I guess we have to believe him.

[Chris]

REPORT: Susan Rice Told NSC Officials To ‘Stand Down’ In Response To Russian Meddling Attempts



Former national security advisor Susan Rice issued a stand down order to national security council officials developing aggressive options to respond to Russian meddling in the 2016 presidential election, a new excerpt from Russian Roulette: The Inside Story of Putin’s War on America and the Election of Donald Trump reveals.

NSC officials were reportedly alarmed by Russia’s attempts to meddle in the 2016 presidential election, including the hacking of Democratic National Committee officials’ emails, and those belonging to Hillary Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta.

Michael Daniel, an NSC official responsible for the Russia portfolio, told to the book’s authors of multiple plans to strike fear in Russian President Vladimir Putin with the aim of ending Russia’s election meddling. These plans included surreptitiously releasing personal information about Putin’s family, which revealed corruption in Putin’s political party, and even crafting a large cybersecurity exercise as a public threat to Russia.

Daniel additionally told the authors that when Rice caught wind of his planning, she called him and berated him.

One day in late August, national security adviser Susan Rice called Daniel into her office and demanded he cease and desist from working on the cyber options he was developing. “Don’t get ahead of us,” she warned him. The White House was not prepared to endorse any of these ideas. Daniel and his team in the White House cyber response group were given strict orders: “Stand down.” She told Daniel to “knock it off,” he recalled.
Obama officials have since lamented “we sort of choked” in response to the Russian meddling in the 2016 presidential election. The former president instead took it upon himself to warn Putin in person during a face-to-face meeting in September 2016 to “knock it off” in terms of election meddling with a an explicit warning of consequences if it continued.

http://dailycaller.com/2018/03/09/report-susan-rice-obama-stand-down-russian-election-meddling/

[Pavlov]

lol chris burying that shit with soros *ding*By posting an column from a guy who is suing Manafort and Gates for $25 million.

:lmao

[Pavlov]

REPORT: Susan Rice Told NSC Officials To ‘Stand Down’ In Response To Russian Meddling AttemptsAre you saying they should have done more to stop the Russian meddling, Chris?

Yes or no.

[TSA]

lets revisit all this stuff about Flynn's imminent plea withdrawal because mueller didnt disclose exonerating evidence!!








remember all that?

from the court's actual docket..

https://www.washingtonpost.com/resizer/Fb6UW6U0n2Rd3J05AN2eoj0NeAw=/1484x0/arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/IWQGGAPVFI4KDDESNR6B6TISMU.jpg

lol standing order that we KNOW is this judge's common practice in every case

but but wait! remember when they revised it in february to add more details! ermagerd!!

https://www.washingtonpost.com/resizer/2ph0MT-d0ZBDZ7OTYKOIjmCNW3M=/1484x0/arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/ORPJ3VYBRE3EFI7POG3BDPXKZE.jpg

oh wait, they just updated it because they inadvertently used an older version

Why was Contreras recused after accepting Flynn's guilty plea?

Why was Flynn's sentencing date pushed back?

[RandomGuy]

Great, so they all knew about the dossier and didn't release it before the election because?


Goalpost move. You claimed they didn’t know about the dossier.

Not a goalpost move, you dumbass. You never actually satisfied the initial request to back up your original stupid fucking assertion. He granted you a point for the sake of argument and asked you to flesh out your stupid fucking theory, granting your underlying stupid fucking assertion.

He can't move the goalposts, when you never provided satisfactory evidence of the original assertion in the first place. He is, if anything, allowing you to try and kick the football again after falling on your face, Charlie Brown.

http://cdn2.sbnation.com/imported_assets/799633/FAILKICKOFF.gif

[RandomGuy]

:lmao Deripaska

Well, the Russian oligarch says the Russian oligarchs are pure and holy creatures. I guess we have to believe him.

I'm pretty sure he asked twice about how nice they are, and they said they were nice both times. :rollin

[Pavlov]

Why was Contreras recused after accepting Flynn's guilty plea?

Why was Flynn's sentencing date pushed back?Goalposts moves.

We're not talking about that.

[djohn2oo8]

It's been a bad last few pages for ole T.

[TSA]

:lmao Deripaska

Well, the Russian oligarch says the Russian oligarchs are pure and holy creatures. I guess we have to believe him.

Why was Deripaska's lobbyist texting Senator Warner telling him that Christopher Steele wanted to talk to him?

[TSA]

Goalposts moves.

We're not talking about that.

Thank you spurraider21

[RandomGuy]

Why was Contreras recused after accepting Flynn's guilty plea?

Why was Flynn's sentencing date pushed back?

This IS goalpost moving.

Description: Demanding from an opponent that he or she address more and more points after the initial counter-argument has been satisfied refusing to conceded or accept the opponent’s argument.

Logical Form:

Issue A has been raised, and adequately answered.

Issue B is then raised, and adequately answered.

.....

Issue Z is then raised, and adequately answered.

(despite all issues adequately answered, the opponent refuses to conceded or accept the argument.
https://www.logicallyfallacious.com/tools/lp/Bo/LogicalFallacies/129/Moving_the_Goalposts

[TSA]

Not a goalpost move, you dumbass. You never actually satisfied the initial request to back up your original stupid fucking assertion. He granted you a point for the sake of argument and asked you to flesh out your stupid fucking theory, granting your underlying stupid fucking assertion.

He can't move the goalposts, when you never provided satisfactory evidence of the original assertion in the first place. He is, if anything, allowing you to try and kick the football again after falling on your face, Charlie Brown.

http://cdn2.sbnation.com/imported_assets/799633/FAILKICKOFF.gif

Another dumb as shit person that believes Hillary and the campaign heads didn't know about the Steele dossier.

[Pavlov]

Why was Deripaska's lobbyist texting Senator Warner telling him that Christopher Steele wanted to talk to him?That implies Waldman is currently working for Deripaska.

Let's first quantify the Waldman's work for Deripaska.

When did he lobby for Deripaska?

Is he currently lobbying for Deripaska?

[Pavlov]

Thank you spurraider21Um, you just tried that gambit when I didn't even move the goalposts.

[Pavlov]

Another dumb as shit person that believes Hillary and the campaign heads didn't know about the Steele dossier.We can always tell you don't believe your own bullshit when you refuse to elaborate after making a bullshit claim.

[RandomGuy]

Another dumb as shit person that believes Hillary and the campaign heads didn't know about the Steele dossier.

You are right. I don't believe the dumb shit you can't/won't prove is true.

I am happy to cede that a presidential candidate knows their campaign runs oppo research. You have yet to say why that is a big deal, just like you can't tell me why I should give a shit about the Uranium thing.

Wonder why that is.

[Pavlov]

That implies Waldman is currently working for Deripaska.

Let's first quantify the Waldman's work for Deripaska.

When did he lobby for Deripaska?

Is he currently lobbying for Deripaska?I personally don't know. I've only read the Fox account that said he started in 2009.

EDIT: looks like he's still working for him. Now what is your conspiracy theory here, TSA?

[TSA]

That implies Waldman is currently working for Deripaska.

Let's first quantify the Waldman's work for Deripaska.

When did he lobby for Deripaska?

Is he currently lobbying for Deripaska?

Started in 2009. Don't know or care if he is currently lobbying for Deripaska. Deripaska was his client when the texts were exchanged.

Why was Deripaska's lobbyist texting Senator Warner telling him that Christopher Steele wanted to talk to him?
Why was Warner concerned about leaving a paper trail of their contacts?

[Pavlov]

Started in 2009. Don't know or care if he is currently lobbying for Deripaska. Deripaska was his client when the texts were exchanged.

Why was Deripaska's lobbyist texting Senator Warner telling him that Christopher Steele wanted to talk to him?He probably knows Steele.


Why was Warner concerned about leaving a paper trail of their contacts?Republican leaks.

What is your conspiracy here, TSA?

[TSA]

You are right. I don't believe the dumb shit you can't/won't prove is true.

I am happy to cede that a presidential candidate knows their campaign runs oppo research. You have yet to say why that is a big deal, just like you can't tell me why I should give a shit about the Uranium thing.

Wonder why that is.

Why did the presidential campaign hide the payments for the opposition research?

[djohn2oo8]

Jeez. He is on his knees now.

[djohn2oo8]

Why did the presidential campaign hide the payments for the opposition research?
Why was a presidential campaign meeting with an adversary for stolen information?

[Pavlov]

Why did the presidential campaign hide the payments for the opposition research?Define "hide" and post your conspiracy theory.

[Spurminator]

Hillary Clinton’s campaign chairman, John Podesta, recently denied to Senate Intelligence Committee investigators that he knew who had funded the infamous Steele dossier on Donald Trump.

But when he issued that denial, Podesta happened to be sitting next to the man who did pay for the salacious document: Marc Elias, the general counsel for the Clinton campaign and Democratic National Committee.

Elias was in the Senate meeting in his capacity as Podesta’s personal attorney, CNN reported on Thursday. But the lawyer, a partner at the firm Perkins Coie, apparently did not reveal during the interview that he was involved in the dossier, which was commissioned by opposition research firm Fusion GPS and written by former British spy Christopher Steele.

The Senate interview with Podesta was conducted before it was revealed that the Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee jointly funded the dossier. The Washington Post reported that Elias, a longtime Democratic party “fixer,” paid Fusion GPS through Perkins Coie.

http://dailycaller.com/2017/10/26/john-podesta-whose-lawyer-paid-for-dossier-told-senate-he-didnt-know-who-funded-it/


Hillary Clinton's former campaign manager Robby Mook said on Friday evening that he did not know who funded the controversial, unverified dossier about President Trump, despite revelations that the law firm representing the campaign sponsored the document.

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/358741-former-clinton-campaign-manager-says-he-was-unaware-of-dossier


A spokesman for Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-Fla.), who was forced out as DNC chairwoman at the party’s national convention in 2016, also denied knowing about the arrangement.

“She was not aware of anything related to this research arrangement,” spokesman David Damron said.

http://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/357240-dnc-wasserman-schultz-say-they-were-unaware-of-dossier-payments


Anyone who believes these three is a dumb as shit.

So your proof (as someone who regularly posts Donald Trump tweets, gets his information from 4chan and ar15.com, and generally assumes the same position verbatim as Russian troll farms) is an appeal to the lack of credibility among the sources.

Okaylol

This is a Spurtacularly bad take.

[spurraider21]

Why was Contreras recused after accepting Flynn's guilty plea?

Why was Flynn's sentencing date pushed back?
a) this is absolutely a goal post move. my point was entirely about the bombshell reports of judge sullivan's standing order to turn over exculpatory evidence and how that was supposed to mean the guilty plea was going to be void or some shit like that :lol... you haven't addressed what i posted at all with these questions

b) we dont know why contreras recused himself. the reason was never disclosed, nor would it be in the ordinary course of business


Judge Emmet Sullivan was randomly assigned to take over the case after Judge Rudolph Contreras recused himself.

A court spokeswoman confirmed to POLITICO that the reassignment was due to Contreras' recusal, but said the court generally does not disclose the reason that a judge begged off the case.

https://www.politico.com/story/2017/12/07/michael-flynn-judge-sentencing-287001

c) they also pushed back the papodopolous sentencing hearing (https://www.cnn.com/2018/01/17/politics/mueller-papadopoulos/index.html)

this is all we really know

958828112032206849


Such a delay in sentencing, according to a former high-ranking Justice Department official, is common in federal investigations.

“This is very, very common for a cooperating defendant,” the former official, James Trusty who served under both the Bush and Obama administrations, told Fox News. “They don’t want to tell the judge to sentence Flynn until they can tell the judge that he helped in the case.”

Trusty said that if Flynn were ever asked to testify in a trial, he would be “a better witness” if still facing the prospect of sentencing.

Flynn could be sentenced to federal prison for up to five years for making false statements to the FBI.

“It’s a routine play that federal sentencing gets put off until you’re done cooperating,” Trusty said, adding that thisdoes not give any insight into the “pace” of Mueller’s probe, but rather the “existence of it.”

“They are basically saying ‘we may use Flynn for more information,’ but who knows where they think he fits in the grand scheme of the investigation,” Trusty said. “They obviously think he still has some potential, affirmative work to do.”

(http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/02/01/mueller-team-seeks-delay-in-flynn-sentencing.html)

[boutons_deux]

Trash and peepee in Vegas kompromat

https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2018/3/8/1747433/-New-details-about-Trump-s-visit-to-a-raunchy-Vegas-club-provide-hints-the-pee-pee-tape-might-be-real

[TSA]

Why was a presidential campaign meeting with an adversary for stolen information?It wasn’t.

Why did the presidential campaign hide the payments for the opposition research?

[TSA]

Define "hide" and post your conspiracy theory.

Hide= having Perkins Coie pay Fusion GPS so the campaign wouldn’t have to disclose where the payment went and for what reason.

Why did the presidential campaign hide the payments for the opposition research?

[djohn2oo8]

It wasn’t.

Why did the presidential campaign hide the payments for the opposition research?

It did. Or else they wouldn't have lied about adoptions :lol

[Pavlov]

Hide= having Perkins Coie pay Fusion GPS so the campaign wouldn’t have to disclose where the payment went and for what reason.

Why did the presidential campaign hide the payments for the opposition research?Yeah, that doesn't really meet the definition of "hide."

The payments to Perkins-Coie for opposition research were reported. If you have instances of every subcontractor payment's being reported by a campaign, by all means post it.

It's your claim that they should have as a matter of course -- prove it.

Also, post your dossier conspiracy.

[djohn2oo8]

972204165337370625
Dumbest motherfucks on the planet :lol

Mueller doesn't need the interview to take him. Dis gonna end ugly for cheeto jesus.

[Spurminator]

It wasn’t.

:lol

Amazing.

[RandomGuy]

Did Russia Tell Trump To Bitch Constantly About The 2016 Election Being #RIGGED? We Are Just Asking Questions!


On Thursday, Mother Jones released an excerpt from a new book by its reporter David Corn, along with Yahoo News reporter Michael Isikoff, about the whole damn story of Russian interference in the 2016 election to elect Donald Trump, based on what we know so far and their own exclusive reporting. It was JUICY, because it was all about how Trump loves pee so much, or more specifically, it was about what really happened during Trump’s 2013 Moscow Miss Universe pageant. Today, MoJo released the second excerpt, and it is totally different from the first! For one thing, there’s hardly any Trump pee in it! But listen, that doesn’t mean it’s boring.

...

Therefore, their greatest concern was that Russia would cause general election-day chaos and mayhem, against the backdrop of a Russo-Republican candidate named Donald J. Trump who was CONSTANTLY bitching and moaning that the election would be #RIGGED.

Reading this, we started to wonder:
Is it possible Russia somehow signaled Trump to bitch about election rigging early and often, on the assumption that Hillary Clinton was ultimately going to win anyway, regardless of how successful their various hacking operations were?

Would that have been a triumph for Russia, part of the damage it hoped to inflict on an incoming President Hillary Clinton, to have millions of low information Trump voters absolutely convinced the Deep State had stolen their votes and given them to the blacks the Messicans Hillary?


We are just curious.


On the other hand, Trump did stare at a TV camera in late summer of 2016 and beg Russia to find Hillary’s mythical 33,000 missing emails, in an act of in-your-face collusion. Based on that behavior, we are JUST WONDERING AND WILDLY SPECULATING over whether one of the Russian agent cut-outs in Trump’s campaign told him he should really talk a lot about election rigging, so that when/if Hillary won, it would still be MISSION ACCOMPLISHED for the Kremlin. Putin was trying to sow chaos and distrust, after all.

You don’t know, could have happened.

And if Russia was able to do bad things to state election systems — “delete every 10th name” in a voter registration database or “flip two digits in a voter’s ID number,” as Corn and Isikoff write — it could throw Election Day into pandemonium, against the backdrop of a Donald Trump pre-emptively whining his fucking orange dick off about election rigging, and a right-wing tinfoil hat industrial complex ready and willing to exacerbate the chaos.

Seriously, does anyone think Alex Jones and Sean Hannity wouldn’t have fucked that chicken to death, then given it to Donald Trump for post-death fucking? Please.


Read more at https://wonkette.com/631011/did-russia-tell-trump-to-bitch-constantly-about-the-2016-election-being-rigged-we-are-just-asking-questions#WIsz7ARXsiQCvlz5.99

[Chris]

Mueller doesn't need the interview to take him.

:lmao

[Pavlov]

972204165337370625
Dumbest motherfucks on the planet :lol

Mueller doesn't need the interview to take him. Dis gonna end ugly for cheeto jesus.Why do they want it to end?

Mueller is going to bring down Clinton once and for all -- no reason to stop him.

[RandomGuy]

Anybody care to ask what RT and Sputnick were saying about the election before Trump won... and what they quit talking about immediately after Trump won?

hint: it rhymes with fligged...

[dabom]

972204165337370625
Dumbest motherfucks on the planet :lol

Mueller doesn't need the interview to take him. Dis gonna end ugly for cheeto jesus.

:lol

[TSA]

:lol

Amazing.

What stolen information did try to receive?

[TSA]

Yeah, that doesn't really meet the definition of "hide."

The payments to Perkins-Coie for opposition research were reported. If you have instances of every subcontractor payment's being reported by a campaign, by all means post it.

It's your claim that they should have as a matter of course -- prove it.

Also, post your dossier conspiracy.

Were the payments to Perkins Coie listed as opposition research yes or no?

[spurraider21]

TSA i know you're putting out fires all over the place... but still waiting on your response re: flynn plea withdrawal

[Pavlov]

Were the payments to Perkins Coie listed as opposition research yes or no?I don't know TBH. I'm sure you'll tell me and I'm sure you will provide evidence that every other law firm ever tasked with oppo research was noted in every spending report.

I'll wait for that.

Also, post your dossier conspiracy theory.

[Chris]

I don't know TBH.

For once you are honest. This is your white flag.

[Pavlov]

TSA i know you're putting out fires all over the place... but still waiting on your response re: flynn plea withdrawalYou already got his answer.

https://i.imgur.com/2w1xbiS.gif

[Chris]

972154742171426816

[Pavlov]

For once you are honest. This is your white flag.No, it's my saying I don't know.

It's up to TSA to prove his case that the reporting was illegal or ever unusual.

[TSA]

TSA i know you're putting out fires all over the place... but still waiting on your response re: flynn plea withdrawal

Flynn hasn’t been sentenced. You’ll have an answer when he gets his day in court.

[Pavlov]

972154742171426816Probably wondering why people still can't spell his name.

[TSA]

No, it's my saying I don't know.

It's up to TSA to prove his case that the reporting was illegal or ever unusual.

The FEC hasn’t ruled on the complaint. You’ll have your answer when they do.

[spurraider21]

TSA (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=7640) i know you're putting out fires all over the place... but still waiting on your response re: flynn plea withdrawal


Flynn hasn’t been sentenced. You’ll have an answer when he gets his day in court.
https://media1.tenor.com/images/c924b622b71a51d0c4aa21760c69b9f3/tenor.gif?itemid=9264828

[Pavlov]

Flynn hasn’t been sentenced. You’ll have an answer when he gets his day in court.He had his day in court when he pleaded guilty. That's the very definition of one's day in court.

[spurraider21]

do you agree that Sullivan's order to provide exculpatory evidence (and follow-up to that in february) is just standard operating procedure, and that on its own, does nothing to prove that flynn's plea withdrawal is in play?

[Pavlov]

The FEC hasn’t ruled on the complaint. You’ll have your answer when they do.All you have to do is show it's illegal or unusual. Since you are so certain it is at least one of those, you can't outsource your burden of proof.

[Spurminator]

What stolen information did try to receive?

:lol

In less than an hour your criteria for knowledge has gone from: "If you don't think they knew, you're stupid"
to
"Donald Trump Jr. accepted a meeting from a Russian oligarch promising sensitive info and documents about the Clintons, but obviously he didn't know it was collected by illegitimate means."

[TSA]

do you agree that Sullivan's order to provide exculpatory evidence (and follow-up to that in february) is just standard operating procedure, and that on its own, does nothing to prove that flynn's plea withdrawal is in play?

I agree that it’s Sullivan’s standard operating procedure. That doesn’t take Flynn’s plea withdrawal out of play if McCarthy is correct in his assessment.

[TSA]

:lol

In less than an hour your criteria for knowledge has gone from: "If you don't think they knew, you're stupid"
to
"Donald Trump Jr. accepted a meeting from a Russian oligarch promising sensitive info and documents about the Clintons, but obviously he didn't know it was collected by illegitimate means."

The dirt he was promised was never said to have been stolen.

[Spurminator]

The dirt he was promised was never said to have been stolen.

And that's good enough for you.

But when the question is "How do you know Hillary Clinton knew Steele was working for the campaign?" your argument is "If you don't think she knew, you're stupid."

You're hopeless. Take a break.

[Spurminator]

Prove Donald Jr. didn't know it was stolen.

(See how that doesn't work?)

[RandomGuy]

Flynn hasn’t been sentenced. You’ll have an answer when he gets his day in court.


He had his day in court when he pleaded guilty. That's the very definition of one's day in court.

:rollin

Comedy gold. TSA tripping on his dick never gets old.

[spurraider21]

I agree that it’s Sullivan’s standard operating procedure. That doesn’t take Flynn’s plea withdrawal out of play if McCarthy is correct in his assessment.
correct as to what?


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 (https://www.lawfareblog.com/michael-flynn-plea-agreement-documents), 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.
its a lot of speculation. he also thinks its noteworthy that this happened after the guilty plea, even though the court explains IN THE DOCKET that "the order is entered regardless of the posture of the case when it is assigned to the court"

he also acts like the postponed sentencing is significant when it comes to Flynn, even though papadopolous also had his postponed with no crazy conspiracy behind that one, and we've heard officials explain why postponing sentencing makes sense for cooperating witnesses

mccarthy's "assessment" has more questions than answers.

[RandomGuy]

Yeah, that doesn't really meet the definition of "hide."

The payments to Perkins-Coie for opposition research were reported. If you have instances of every subcontractor payment's being reported by a campaign, by all means post it.

It's your claim that they should have as a matter of course -- prove it.

Also, post your dossier conspiracy.

You gotta give him some small credit for working the talking points as best he can. Even he knows they are bullshit by now, but is too stubborn to admit it.

Spicer would be proud.

[spurraider21]

and just from a common sense standpoint, if you plead guilty for lying to the FBI, what fucking "exculpatory evidence" could there be to prove your innocence? that you never actually made those statements? that they weren't actually false?

:lol i mean really... it just makes no sense to consider that angle. much more likely that this is all standard operating procedure, and all we've heard from the court confirms that

[Pavlov]

You gotta give him some small credit for working the talking points as best he can. Even he knows they are bullshit by now, but is too stubborn to admit it.

Spicer would be proud.Everything makes sense when you read the New Yorker article. TSAdan prefers to wander around in the haze of his conspiracy fever dream.

[TSA]

correct as to what?


its a lot of speculation. he also thinks its noteworthy that this happened after the guilty plea, even though the court explains IN THE DOCKET that "the order is entered regardless of the posture of the case when it is assigned to the court"

he also acts like the postponed sentencing is significant when it comes to Flynn, even though papadopolous also had his postponed with no crazy conspiracy behind that one, and we've heard officials explain why postponing sentencing makes sense for cooperating witnesses

mccarthy's "assessment" has more questions than answers.

No one said it proved the withdrawal was still in play but you.

"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?"

[Pavlov]

No one said it proved the withdrawal was still in play but you.

"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?"What do you mean when you say Flynn could have his day in court?

[TSA]

and just from a common sense standpoint, if you plead guilty for lying to the FBI, what fucking "exculpatory evidence" could there be to prove your innocence? that you never actually made those statements? that they weren't actually false?

:lol i mean really... it just makes no sense to consider that angle. much more likely that this is all standard operating procedure, and all we've heard from the court confirms that

If 302's were changed after the interview that would be exculpatory evidence that would prove his innocence. You constantly need to be reminded that 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. What changed in the 9 months after his interview?

[djohn2oo8]

972227137154486273
:lmao

[Reck]

972227137154486273
:lmao

They took turns on that nigga.

[Chris]

Nunberg is putting on a show, and you idiots are eating it right up. :lol

[clambake]

Nunberg is putting on a show, and you idiots are eating it right up. :lol

i love his show. he called sarah huckabee a fat slob, lol.

[Chris]

i love his show. he called sarah huckabee a fat slob, lol.

You're an anarchist, so it's no surprise you're drawn to a rabble-rouser.

[Chris]

972236847404462081

[Reck]

Nunberg is putting on a show, and you idiots are eating it right up. :lol

Chris, you are actually picking up your shield for this guy? :lol

Guy even admitted to being on antidepressants. He's a headcase who went on TV last week drunk to crap all over your god Trump.

[Chris]

Chris, you are actually picking up your shield for this guy? :lol

Guy even admitted to being on antidepressants. He's a headcase who went on TV last week drunk to crap all over your god Trump.

Yeah, everyone knows that happened Reck. I know really bad acting when I see it. He's got you guys convinced Mueller has the big boom coming. :lol CNN relies on your gullibility.

[Chris]

972243381840523265

[RandomGuy]

Everything makes sense when you read the New Yorker article. TSAdan prefers to wander around in the haze of his conspiracy fever dream.

Which article? The one about Q or....?

[RandomGuy]

972227137154486273
:lmao


:rollin

You can bet your sweet ass that the judge made no uncertain words about talking about the case to the media. I would LOVE to see the transcript of that.

[RandomGuy]

Nunez derp derp derp Nunes derp tweet derp [farting noises]

Only you could take sentient flatulence seriously.

[RandomGuy]

Yeah, everyone knows that happened Reck. I know really bad acting when I see it. He's got you guys convinced Mueller has the big boom coming. :lol CNN relies on your gullibility.

Inexorable.

[Chris]

Only you could take sentient flatulence seriously.

I saw this on Southpark. You might have the Ass Burgers breh.

[spurraider21]

No one said it proved the withdrawal was still in play but you.
:rollin

[TSA]

:rollin

That came out wrong. You were the only person thinking anyone said it proved the withdrawal was still in play.

[clambake]

so, trumps lawyers want to talk to mueller?



tick tock

[spurraider21]

That came out wrong. You were the only person thinking anyone said it proved the withdrawal was still in play.
:rollin

[clambake]

You're an anarchist, so it's no surprise you're drawn to a rabble-rouser.

when the choices are hillary or trump, you damn right I'm an anarchist.

[boutons_deux]

so, trumps lawyers want to talk to mueller?

They want Mueller to Make It Stop

[spurraider21]

great, so all the innuendo you drew from Sullivan's order was just bullshit. because you certainly weren't implying that it didnt mean a plea withdrawal was in play

[spurraider21]

It's Sullivan time :tu you heard it here first :tu

rcJpGj_ymGU


In Unexpected Twist, Judge In Flynn Case Asks Mueller For "Exculpatory Evidence"


MUELLER MADNESS: Judge’s Decision RAISES NEW QUESTIONS over Flynn’s Plea Deal
:lol but tsa said...

That came out wrong. You were the only person thinking anyone said it proved the withdrawal was still in play.

[Chris]

when the choices are hillary or trump, you damn right I'm an anarchist.

Just curious, why do you hate Trump?

[TSA]

:lol but tsa said...

"judge's decision raises questions"

You are trying too hard.

[clambake]

Just curious, why do you hate Trump?

he's dirty. i think mueller is following money. and there is massive debt hanging over him. i think he "accepts" dirty money.

tick tock

[spurraider21]

"judge's decision raises questions"

You are trying too hard.
except it doesn't raise any fucking questions

a) "the order is entered regardless of the posture of the case when it is assigned to the court"

b) "the court has entered a standing order in every criminal case requiring the government to produce . . ."

https://www.washingtonpost.com/resizer/2ph0MT-d0ZBDZ7OTYKOIjmCNW3M=/1484x0/arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/ORPJ3VYBRE3EFI7POG3BDPXKZE.jpg

[TSA]

except it doesn't raise any fucking questions

a) "the order is entered regardless of the posture of the case when it is assigned to the court"

b)
https://www.washingtonpost.com/resizer/2ph0MT-d0ZBDZ7OTYKOIjmCNW3M=/1484x0/arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/ORPJ3VYBRE3EFI7POG3BDPXKZE.jpg

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?

[spurraider21]

you rely on horseshit analysis from hackjobs like mccarthy and grocery store managers

[spurraider21]

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?


No one said it proved the withdrawal was still in play but you.

pick a lane. are you saying this order does put plea withdrawal in play or are you saying it doesn't.

[TSA]

you rely on horseshit analysis from hackjobs like mccarthy and grocery store managers

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?

[TSA]

pick a lane. are you saying this order does put plea withdrawal in play or are you saying it doesn't.

I'm not claiming to know the answer. Can you answer both questions knowing you are 100% correct?

[clambake]

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?

where did you lift that one?

[spurraider21]

I'm not claiming to know the answer.
yes, these all sound like somebody who doesn't know the answer


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.


You have some catching up to do. Mueller agreed to have the court provide all evidence used against him. His previous plea with the judge who was recused May now be void.


Not in the clear yet but looks to be getting closer day by day.

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

General Flynn Should WITHDRAW His Guilty Plea. His New Judge Is A Government Misconduct Expert

lol


Can you answer both questions knowing you are 100% correct?
here's what i can say knowing that i am 100% correct

a) that judge sullivan's order doesn't move the needle at all, and all your pimping to the contrary is either ignorant or dishonest. i'm willing to give you the benefit of the doubt if you own up to it now.

b) to date, the only basis for your 302 theory is mike. fucking. cernovich. fellow pizzagate nutjob conspiracy theorist who blamed antifa for sutherland springs.

edit: sarah carter is pimping that too

[TSA]

yes, these all sound like somebody who doesn't know the answer







lol


chance he gets cleared.
may now be void.





here's what i can say knowing that i am 100% correct

a) that judge sullivan's order doesn't move the needle at all, and all your pimping to the contrary is either ignorant or dishonest. i'm willing to give you the benefit of the doubt if you own up to it now.

b) to date, the only basis for your 302 theory is mike. fucking. cernovich. fellow pizzagate nutjob conspiracy theorist who blamed antifa for sutherland springs.

edit: sarah carter is pimping that too

Can you answer the 2 questions knowing you are 100% correct yes or no?

What changed in the 9 months after Comey said the agents who interviewed Flynn did not think he lied to them?

[spurraider21]

chance he gets cleared.
may now be void.
you posted an article titled: GENERAL FLYNN SHOULD WITHDRAW HIS GUILTY PLEA



Can you answer the 2 questions knowing you are 100% correct yes or no?
your two questions are moving the goalposts. the point i made today was specifically about sullivan's order, and dispelling the myth that somehow his order was connected to some avenue for a plea withdrawal


What changed in the 9 months after Comey said the agents who interviewed Flynn did not think he lied to them?
i have no clue what happened ever since some anonymous sources revealed what comey allegedly said. when there is no other information available, anonymous sources are the best we have, particularly when cited to by generally reliable publications. but there's plenty on the record about this. even your boy POTUS seems to be aware that flynn lied

937007006526959618

and here's the big catch. if flynn didn't lie, why did he plead guilty to lying?

[Spurminator]

Brilliant move by Trump.

[Chris]

and here's the big catch. if flynn didn't lie, why did he plead guilty to lying?

...because perjury traps are common. FBI was convinced he didn't lie or didn't mean to lie. Prosecution came after Mueller's prosecutors smelled blood in the water. This was all done to validate and perpetuate Russia collusion.

[TSA]

your two questions are moving the goalposts. the point i made today was specifically about sullivan's order, and dispelling the myth that somehow his order was connected to some avenue for a plea withdrawal


The two questions are completely relevant to Sullivan’s order and the fact that you can’t answer them with 100% certainty shows you have not dispelled the myth that Flynn may be able to withdraw his plea.

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?

Can you answer the 2 questions knowing you are 100% correct yes or no?

[spurraider21]

...because perjury traps are common. FBI was convinced he didn't lie or didn't mean to lie. Prosecution came after Mueller's prosecutors smelled blood in the water. This was all done to validate and perpetuate Russia collusion.
flynn's conviction isn't really about collusion during the election process. its based on a meeting he took with kislyak after the election but prior to inauguration

[TSA]

flynn's conviction isn't really about collusion during the election process. its based on a meeting he took with kislyak after the election but prior to inauguration

Which conviction is about collusion during the election process?

[Pavlov]

Which conviction is about collusion during the election process?
https://i.imgur.com/9KXQJ52.gif

[spurraider21]

The two questions are completely relevant to Sullivan’s order and the fact that you can’t answer them with 100% certainty shows you have not dispelled the myth that Flynn may be able to withdraw his plea.
my point in this entire conversation has been that sullivan's order does not move the needle and doesn't raise any red flags.

i proved in a previous post that

a) sullivan ALWAYS gives that order. in every case he has
b) it was pointed out that its fishy since the order came after the plea deal... but again, the court confirmed that they always give that order, regardless of where they are in the case
c) it was pointed out here that the revised order in february, with new footnotes, meant something must be up. but the court confirmed that they were just updating their standing order because they inadvertently used the older one

all that to show that Sullivan's order would not raise any red flags. this was the point i made a few pages ago when i rehashed this old topic. if you continue pushing this angle, you are being dishonest. wouldn't surprise me.


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?

Can you answer the 2 questions knowing you are 100% correct yes or no?
if there was actual 302 tampering that would somehow exonerate flynn, then that would exonerate him regardless of sullivan's order. while obviously not the norm, people have convictions overturned while serving their sentences.

[TSA]

my point in this entire conversation has been that sullivan's order does not move the needle and doesn't raise any red flags.

i proved in a previous post that

a) sullivan ALWAYS gives that order. in every case he has
b) it was pointed out that its fishy since the order came after the plea deal... but again, the court confirmed that they always give that order, regardless of where they are in the case
c) it was pointed out here that the revised order in february, with new footnotes, meant something must be up. but the court confirmed that they were just updating their standing order because they inadvertently used the older one

all that to show that Sullivan's order would not raise any red flags. this was the point i made a few pages ago when i rehashed this old topic. if you continue pushing this angle, you are being dishonest. wouldn't surprise me.


if there was actual 302 tampering that would somehow exonerate flynn, then that would exonerate him regardless of sullivan's order. while obviously not the norm, people have convictions overturned while serving their sentences.You aren’t dispelling any myths by avoiding the question.


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?

Can you answer the 2 questions knowing you are 100% correct yes or no?

[spurraider21]

You aren’t dispelling any myths by avoiding the question.
your questions are moving the goalposts.

the myth i dispelled is that:

a) sullivan's act of issuing that order is indicative of the existence of exculpatory evidence

do you think this is true yes or no

b) issuing such an order after the plea deal is fishy and lends credibility to the theory that something is afoot

do you think this is true yes or no

c) revising the order effective february to add new case law/footnotes means that sullivan is really pressing on this, and it indicates that something is afoot

do you think this is true yes or no


If you answer no to all these questions, then yes, I dispelled that myth. If you answer yes to any of these questions, let me know how you've reached that conclusion.


You then brought up the fact that sentencing had been continued as a sign that something is afoot. It was demonstrated to you that there are very obvious reasons why you would not sentence a cooperating witness, and that papadopolous also had his sentencing similarly postponed. Unless you show something to the contrary, then that myth has been dispelled.


As to your two questions:

is it possible that some magic exculpatory evidence exists? Sure. That's possible for just about any conviction. People have convictions overturned not only after guilty pleas, but even after sentencing, or while serving their sentence.

but there isn't much to suggest that exculpatory evidence does exist. sullivan's orders aren't indicative of that.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

I didnt give you an exact date because no one outside Hillarys inner circle knows the exact date. You knew that when you asked your stupid question.

If you honestly think she never knew then you are as gullible and stupid as fuzzy blumpkin.

Given what went on with her emails, you cannot believe that she would not know who the head of a subcontractor that the firm her campaign had contracted to do opposition research was?

I doubt you put much thought into it because you are essentially parroting Hannity talking points.

[CosmicCowboy]

Given what went on with her emails, you cannot believe that she would not know who the head of a subcontractor that the firm her campaign had contracted to do opposition research was?

I doubt you put much thought into it because you are essentially parroting Hannity talking points.

You watch Hannity? Funny. I don't. Guys almost a bigger tool than you are.

[CosmicCowboy]

Given what went on with her emails, you cannot believe that she would not know who the head of a subcontractor that the firm her campaign had contracted to do opposition research was?

I doubt you put much thought into it because you are essentially parroting Hannity talking points.

You watch Hannity? Funny. I don't. Guys almost a bigger tool than you are.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

You watch Hannity? Funny. I don't. Guys almost a bigger tool than you are.

Then you really show a penchant for not thinking for yourself. You parrot his talking points. You are getting it from somewhere. Think about it, fattie.

[TSA]

your questions are moving the goalposts.

the myth i dispelled is that:

a) sullivan's act of issuing that order is indicative of the existence of exculpatory evidence

do you think this is true yes or no

b) issuing such an order after the plea deal is fishy and lends credibility to the theory that something is afoot

do you think this is true yes or no

c) revising the order effective february to add new case law/footnotes means that sullivan is really pressing on this, and it indicates that something is afoot

do you think this is true yes or no


If you answer no to all these questions, then yes, I dispelled that myth. If you answer yes to any of these questions, let me know how you've reached that conclusion.


You then brought up the fact that sentencing had been continued as a sign that something is afoot. It was demonstrated to you that there are very obvious reasons why you would not sentence a cooperating witness, and that papadopolous also had his sentencing similarly postponed. Unless you show something to the contrary, then that myth has been dispelled.


As to your two questions:

is it possible that some magic exculpatory evidence exists? Sure. That's possible for just about any conviction. People have convictions overturned not only after guilty pleas, but even after sentencing, or while serving their sentence.

but there isn't much to suggest that exculpatory evidence does exist. sullivan's orders aren't indicative of thatYou need to re-read McCarthy’s article because his questions weren’t about finding exculpatory evidence to clear Flynn but about Flynn not having the same access to evidence under Contreras as he does under Sullivan

Because Sullivan’s orders came after Flynn plead guilty under Contreras...

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?

[Chris]

After the IG report comes out we will know who has been working with Horowitz who has been cleared to investigate all areas including FISA abuse. Then we will see the first wave of arrests and subpoenas for agents who haven't resigned yet through Sessions or Rosenstein.

[djohn2oo8]

972396683408674822
Hmm kinda falls in with the thread title. What a stupid fucker :lol

[hater]

No collusion

Economy kicking ass

And Shillary passed out on her kitchen counter

Happy Saturday brothas :lol

[djohn2oo8]

No collusion

Economy kicking ass

And Shillary passed out on her kitchen counter

Happy Saturday brothas :lol

Trump not cleared. Hillary cleared. Happy Saturday brotha.

[djohn2oo8]

972252998729682946
lol lookin scurred.

[AaronY]

Lol!
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DX5M6qGWsAA7vsQ?format=jpg

:rollin

[djohn2oo8]

972252998729682946
lol lookin scurred.
972506150607491072
:lmao

[TSA]

972506150607491072
:lmao

One of these days you’ll start reading more than the headline of the article you link to :lol

Nunberg, who stole the spotlight earlier this week with a spate of apparently drunken media appearances, also said he doesn’t think the Russia investigation “leads to the president,” despite his earlier suggestions that Trump had “done something” during the election.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/ex-trump-aide-sam-nunberg-theres-a-lot-to-warrant-russia-probe

[djohn2oo8]

972554144883138560
:lmao

[djohn2oo8]

Nunberg spent more than six hours in a courthouse with special counsel*Robert Mueller’s*team and the grand jury, answering questions about the Trump campaign and its ties to Russia.

“I was there a long time, and they have a lot of questions,” Nunberg told ABC News’*Tara Palmeri, in his first interview since testifying. Such as: “Did I ever hear Russia spoken in the office?”

“And then they asked why did President Trump support Putin in Syria,” he added.

[djohn2oo8]

Nunberg spent more than six hours in a courthouse with special counsel*Robert Mueller’s*team and the grand jury, answering questions about the Trump campaign and its ties to Russia.

“I was there a long time, and they have a lot of questions,” Nunberg told ABC News’*Tara Palmeri, in his first interview since testifying. Such as: “Did I ever hear Russia spoken in the office?”

“And then they asked why did President Trump support Putin in Syria,” he added.

https://i2.wp.com/gifrific.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/Robin-Lopez-Suns-Bench-Shock-Reaction.gif?ssl=1

[boutons_deux]

Trash talking to Slick Willy's impeachment lawyer :lol

[TSA]

https://i2.wp.com/gifrific.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/Robin-Lopez-Suns-Bench-Shock-Reaction.gif?ssl=1

Was this supposed to be from a different account or are you just so pathetic that you have to quote reaction gif’s to your own posts?

[djohn2oo8]

Trash talking to Slick Willy's impeachment lawyer :lol

972585524056809472
:lmao

[djohn2oo8]

972586699695054848
lol

[Chris]

972506447937458176

[clambake]

tick tock

[djohn2oo8]

972506447937458176

CROFL. Good luck.

[dabom]

972585524056809472
:lmao

Boom.

[Chris]

"to help deal with" :lol Mueller's probe isn't going anywhere but up his own ass.

[Pavlov]

972506447937458176What convinced him?

[Chris]

“The same process of weaponizing foreign-intelligence collection for domestic political purposes that the Obama administration road-tested during the Iran-deal fight was used to manufacture Russiagate and get it to market”

http://www.tabletmag.com/jewish-news-and-politics/256899/left-right-russiagate

[TSA]

http://www.tabletmag.com/jewish-news-and-politics/256899/left-right-russiagate

must read article

[TSA]

Another must read

FISA’S LICENSE TO HOP

How the FISA warrant on Carter Page enabled Obama Administration surveillance of the entire Trump team, and why civil libertarians should be worried

http://www.tabletmag.com/jewish-news-and-politics/256333/fisas-license-to-hop?utm_content=buffereaf2d&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer

[djohn2oo8]

What convinced him?

Another case where Chris provides no evidence.

[djohn2oo8]

Apparently TSA still thinks Obama wiretapped Trump. Doubling down on so much stupid should hurt his brain.

[TSA]

Another case where Chris provides no evidence.

Says the OP of an 800 Page thread with no evidence provided showing Trump colluded with Russia to sway the election. :rollin

[TSA]

Apparently TSA still thinks Obama wiretapped Trump. Doubling down on so much stupid should hurt his brain.

“In the case of a subject like Carter Page, that means investigators who obtain a warrant in October 2016 can hunt through his communications going back several years before that date—and can use their “license to hop” to probe the first and second order of correspondents linked to him at any point during that period in the same fashion. (As mentioned at links above—here and here—analysts working national-security surveillance without a targeted warrant can routinely go back for an 18-month haul.) Links from the past can then be exploited going forward.

What this means in practice is that, under a single warrant, anyone Page had a text or phone call with in the Trump campaign during the brief months of his association with it in 2016, was fair game, as a direct connection, all the way through the end of the last warrant-extension period on Page in October 2017. The second-hop connections of those initial contacts—meaning everyone that those people had contact with—are also fair game. In other words, it’s likely that almost everyone on the Trump campaign staff was included in the universe of first- and second-order contacts of Carter Page. The entirety of their correspondence is therefore also covered by the initial warrant, regardless of whether or not they ever met or corresponded with Carter Page, or whether that correspondence referred to him in any way, directly or indirectly.”


Was Trump under surveillance yes or no?

[boutons_deux]

Trash moves embassy to jerusalem, now jews trying to mess with mueller to protect trash

neither christians nor jews give a shit about civil law, only about their so-called worshipped holy texts

[boutons_deux]

flynn Didn't lie?

tsa, chris, etc are fucking traitors, G F Y

[djohn2oo8]

“In the case of a subject like Carter Page, that means investigators who obtain a warrant in October 2016 can hunt through his communications going back several years before that date—and can use their “license to hop” to probe the first and second order of correspondents linked to him at any point during that period in the same fashion. (As mentioned at links above—here and here—analysts working national-security surveillance without a targeted warrant can routinely go back for an 18-month haul.) Links from the past can then be exploited going forward.

What this means in practice is that, under a single warrant, anyone Page had a text or phone call with in the Trump campaign during the brief months of his association with it in 2016, was fair game, as a direct connection, all the way through the end of the last warrant-extension period on Page in October 2017. The second-hop connections of those initial contacts—meaning everyone that those people had contact with—are also fair game. In other words, it’s likely that almost everyone on the Trump campaign staff was included in the universe of first- and second-order contacts of Carter Page. The entirety of their correspondence is therefore also covered by the initial warrant, regardless of whether or not they ever met or corresponded with Carter Page, or whether that correspondence referred to him in any way, directly or indirectly.”


Was Trump under surveillance yes or no?

Not by Obama. And Russians were under surveillance? in which Trump's dumbass associates and campaign members were caught doing shady shit with them.

[Chris]

“In the case of a subject like Carter Page, that means investigators who obtain a warrant in October 2016 can hunt through his communications going back several years before that date—and can use their “license to hop” to probe the first and second order of correspondents linked to him at any point during that period in the same fashion. (As mentioned at links above—here and here—analysts working national-security surveillance without a targeted warrant can routinely go back for an 18-month haul.) Links from the past can then be exploited going forward.

What this means in practice is that, under a single warrant, anyone Page had a text or phone call with in the Trump campaign during the brief months of his association with it in 2016, was fair game, as a direct connection, all the way through the end of the last warrant-extension period on Page in October 2017. The second-hop connections of those initial contacts—meaning everyone that those people had contact with—are also fair game. In other words, it’s likely that almost everyone on the Trump campaign staff was included in the universe of first- and second-order contacts of Carter Page. The entirety of their correspondence is therefore also covered by the initial warrant, regardless of whether or not they ever met or corresponded with Carter Page, or whether that correspondence referred to him in any way, directly or indirectly.”

:tu

[djohn2oo8]

:tu

For what? None of it has been deemed illegal by any court :lol

[TSA]

Not by Obama.Who was the President when Trump was under surveillance?

[Chris]

First 'wave' of arrests will probably include or limited to:

1. Sid Blumenthal
2. Bruce/Nelly Ohr
3. Peter Stzrok
4. Lisa Page
5. Cody Shearer

[Pavlov]

“In the case of a subject like Carter Page, that means investigators who obtain a warrant in October 2016 can hunt through his communications going back several years before that date—and can use their “license to hop” to probe the first and second order of correspondents linked to him at any point during that period in the same fashion. (As mentioned at links above—here and here—analysts working national-security surveillance without a targeted warrant can routinely go back for an 18-month haul.) Links from the past can then be exploited going forward.

What this means in practice is that, under a single warrant, anyone Page had a text or phone call with in the Trump campaign during the brief months of his association with it in 2016, was fair game, as a direct connection, all the way through the end of the last warrant-extension period on Page in October 2017. The second-hop connections of those initial contacts—meaning everyone that those people had contact with—are also fair game. In other words, it’s likely that almost everyone on the Trump campaign staff was included in the universe of first- and second-order contacts of Carter Page. The entirety of their correspondence is therefore also covered by the initial warrant, regardless of whether or not they ever met or corresponded with Carter Page, or whether that correspondence referred to him in any way, directly or indirectly.”


Was Trump under surveillance yes or no?Must've been something really good if Rosenstien and the Republican-appointed judges kept the warrant going for a full year.

[Pavlov]

Who was the President when Trump was under surveillance?If you're talking about the Page warrant, Obama and Dennison.

[TSA]

First 'wave' of arrests will probably include or limited to:

1. Sid Blumenthal
2. Bruce/Nelly Ohr
3. Peter Stzrok
4. Lisa Page
5. Cody Shearer
What time did Sid wake up today?
How often do the Ohr’s have sex?
What color shirt is Strzok wearing right now?
Did Lisa Page have braces yes or no?
What was Cody’s first girlfriend’s name?
What

[Chris]

What time did Sid wake up today?
How often do the Ohr’s have sex?
What color shirt is Strzok wearing right now?
Did Lisa Page have braces yes or no?
What was Cody’s first girlfriend’s name?
What

:lol

[Chris]

Carter Page shitting on Mueller's probe :lol


972686507806003200

[Pavlov]

Carter Page shitting on Mueller's probe :lol


972686507806003200

https://media.tenor.com/images/924fe2c6bdce07d5637e6e045539da92/tenor.gif

:lol

[Chris]

https://media.tenor.com/images/924fe2c6bdce07d5637e6e045539da92/tenor.gif

:lol

Pavlov never gets thirsty.

[Pavlov]

Pavlov never gets thirsty.I never get FISA warrants on me for a solid year either.

[Chris]

I never get FISA warrants on me for a solid year either.

That FISA warrant thing is about to backfire though. Carter Page will have the last laugh along with me and TSA. :lol

[Pavlov]

That FISA warrant thing is about to backfire though. Carter Page will have the last laugh along with me and TSA. :lolWhy did Rosenstein and all the Republican-appointed judges renew the warrant, Chris?

Explain your conspiracy.

[Chris]

Why did Rosenstein and all the Republican-appointed judges renew the warrant, Chris?

They were probably duped (just like you!) into thinking there might actually be Russian collusion. Just because there is an (R) next to their name doesn't mean they aren't in on the take. Mueller is a pretty good example of that. Think.

[Pavlov]

They were probably duped (just like you!) into thinking there might actually be Russian collusion. Just because there is an (R) next to their name doesn't mean they aren't in on the take. Mueller is a pretty good example of that. Think.How would they be duped, Chris? Please answer based on your extensive knowledge of FISA warrant renewals which must be superior to that of the Deputy Attorney General of the United States and multiple federal judges.

Thanks in advance.

[spurraider21]

aren't the "hops" just for metadata collection?

[djohn2oo8]

Who was the President when Trump was under surveillance?
You lost your account because you could not functionally understand a President cannot order a wiretap. Again, don't try it.

[djohn2oo8]

Gotta say. Delicious to see Chris and TSA trying to spin Trump hiring an impeachment type of lawyer for his defense.

[Reck]

Carter Page shitting on Mueller's probe :lol


972686507806003200

But that's not true. Unanimously, everyone including your beloved Gowdy said the Nunes memo was shit and did not impact the Mueller probe even a little bit.

Page is learning though. Not giving the other network more fodder so he goes to Fox. :lol

[Chris]

But that's not true. Unanimously, everyone including your beloved Gowdy said the Nunes memo was shit and did not impact the Mueller probe even a little bit.

Page is learning though. Not giving the other network more fodder so he goes to Fox. :lol

Gowdy giving the Left blue balls was pretty hilarious. His recommendation of a 2nd special counsel should dispel any notion that he thought the Nunes memo was unrelated to the Mueller probe. Gowdy was simply giving Mueller the benefit of the doubt, which was pretty classy imo (I addressed it as such at the time as well) The Nunes memo is relevant as is the impending IG report. Page knows that MSNBC and CNN will chop up anything he tries to say and focus on anything negative. At least with Fox he gets a fair shot.

[Chris]

How would they be duped, Chris? Please answer based on your extensive knowledge of FISA warrant renewals which must be superior to that of the Deputy Attorney General of the United States and multiple federal judges.

Thanks in advance.

You can have the renewal then which (according to you) was totally legit and justified. I'll take the FISA investigation happening right now via Jeff Sessions/Horowitz. Your main argument this entire thread has been: "but Republicans!" (Mueller,Rosenstein, and your esteemed federal judges in all their glory). Looking forward to that IG report from the "Obama guy".

[Chris]

Gotta say. Delicious to see Chris and TSA trying to spin Trump hiring an impeachment type of lawyer for his defense.

Trump has nothing to fear. What's delicious is your naivety. You're as crazy as Mad Maxine Waters if you think Trump is going to get impeached. :lol

[Reck]

Gowdy giving the Left blue balls was pretty hilarious. His recommendation of a 2nd special counsel should dispel any notion that he thought the Nunes memo was unrelated to the Mueller probe. Gowdy was simply giving Mueller the benefit of the doubt, which was pretty classy imo (I addressed it as such at the time as well) The Nunes memo is relevant as is the impending IG report. Page knows that MSNBC and CNN will chop up anything he tries to say and focus on anything negative. At least with Fox he gets a fair shot.

Nah, what happened was that Gowdy was honest for once in his life since he's "retiring." Then Trump and the leadership didn't like that so he had to tow the line again if he wants a future anywhere else.

This is how the game is played. And you are being played, Chrissy.

[Chris]

Nah, what happened was that Gowdy was honest for once in his life since he's "retiring." Then Trump and the leadership didn't like that so he had to tow the line again if he wants a future anywhere else.

This is how the game is played. And you are being played, Chrissy.

You gotta stop reading them tabloids. He's not retiring...just going back to Justice. He knows Congress is incapable of doing anything until they instill term limits. Don't be surprised to see him run in 2024. Those are the facts. Anything else is ridiculous conjecture: "honest for once in his life" "Trump and leadership don't like that" Give me a break. :lol

[monosylab1k]

That FISA warrant thing is about to backfire though. Carter Page will have the last laugh along with me and TSA. :lol

You wanna ELE bet me on that one? Take a peek at TSA’s user title and oft-bumped new thread before agreeing.

[Chris]

You wanna ELE bet me on that one? Take a peek at TSA’s user title and oft-bumped new thread before agreeing.

I don't gamble.

[monosylab1k]

I don't gamble.

:lmao it’s not gambling if you’re confident in your position.
:lmao admitting you’re talking out of your ass.

[Chris]

:lmao it’s not gambling if you’re confident in your position.
:lmao admitting you’re talking out of your ass.

What? :lol The FISA abuse is not really debatable and is being investigated. This isn't something that's up in the air. It's inevitable. Be thankful I don't take you up on the bet.

[spurraider21]

Lol. Every congressional response to this investigation is to investigate the investigation.

Leaks!
unmasking!
wiretaps!
strzok!
fisa!

:lmao secret society :lmao

[Pavlov]

You can have the renewal then which (according to you) was totally legit and justified. I'll take the FISA investigation happening right now via Jeff Sessions/Horowitz. Your main argument this entire thread has been: "but Republicans!" (Mueller,Rosenstein, and your esteemed federal judges in all their glory). Looking forward to that IG report from the "Obama guy".So you think Rosenstein and all the judges who approved and renewed the warrant on Page are corrupt and evil?

:lol White Chris.

[djohn2oo8]

So you think Rosenstein and all the judges who approved and renewed the warrant on Page are corrupt and evil?

:lol White Chris.
:lmao

[monosylab1k]

I’m a pussy.

[djohn2oo8]

If I remember correctly, Chris said we should allow due process for Roy Moore. But somehow these Republican judges have something to do with Obama, according to Chris, so now he does not believe in due process. Kind of seems as if Chris hates a negro President more than he hates a pedophile....

[Chris]

:lol White Chris.

This is your white flag.

[Chris]

If I remember correctly, Chris said we should allow due process for Roy Moore. But somehow these Republican judges have something to do with Obama, according to Chris, so now he does not believe in due process. Kind of seems as if Chris hates a negro President more than he hates a pedophile....

You're dumb.

[Pavlov]

This is your white flag.Are you not white, Chris?

[djohn2oo8]

You're dumb.

Hell of a denial there, Christopher.

[Chris]

Hell of a denial there, Christopher.

Has nothing to do with a negro president or pedophiles. You brought both of them up to smear me. You also put words in my mouth. Dumb.

[djohn2oo8]

Has nothing to do with a negro president or pedophiles. You brought both of them up to smear me. You also put words in my mouth. Dumb.
Seems like you have no problem smearing others. And you still didn't quite deny it.

[djohn2oo8]

Does due process apply to everyone Chris?

[Chris]

Does due process apply to everyone Chris?

Who is being robbed of their due process?

[djohn2oo8]

Who is being robbed of their due process?

That's not what I asked. Does due process apply to everyone? Simple yes or no.

[Chris]

That's not what I asked. Does due process apply to everyone? Simple yes or no.

Obviously, that's a no.

Your turn.


Who is being robbed of their due process?

[djohn2oo8]

Obviously, that's a no.

Your turn.
You said Roy Moore deserved due process but Hillary didn't. Which means don't believe it should be entitled to everyone.

[Chris]

Ratcliffe talks about the renewal process here.


972955392388067328

[Chris]

You said Roy Moore deserved due process but Hillary didn't. Which means don't believe it should be entitled to everyone.

What does Roy Moore have to do with anything.

Also

Who is being robbed of their due process?

[djohn2oo8]

What does Roy Moore have to do with anything.

Also

Who is being robbed of their due process?
Because you said he deserved due process, and at the same time said Hillary "is above the law". That's very inconsistent with actually believing in due process. You're a fake.

[djohn2oo8]

Oh, and you said federal judges are corrupt. That's not showing that you respect the rule of law.

[Chris]

Because you said he deserved due process, and at the same time said Hillary "is above the law". That's very inconsistent with actually believing in due process. You're a fake.

From Trump to federal judges to Roy Moore to pedophiles to Hillary. You're all over the place. :lol Just admit your due process thingy is dumb and we can move on.

[djohn2oo8]

From Trump to federal judges to Roy Moore to pedophiles to Hillary. You're all over the place. :lol Just admit your due process thingy is dumb and we can move on.
You never explained how you can claim someone is above the law, and then also say you believe in due process. You're a fake. It's okay.

[Chris]

CIA Director Mike Pompeo: No indication Russian meddling changed 2016 election outcome



CIA Director Mike Pompeo said Sunday there’s no doubt the Kremlin meddled in the 2016 election but there’s also no evidence that it made any difference.

Did Russia influence the election? “The intelligence community has been clear that’s not our role to discuss that, but there’s not been a single indication that any vote was changed, the ballots were tampered with, or that there was any outcome determined by the intelligence community,” Mr. Pompeo said on “Fox News Sunday.”

He categorically refuted Russian President Vladimir Putin’s latest assertion that the Russians indicted by special counsel Robert Mueller didn’t represent the Kremlin, saying, “That’s false.”

“The Russians attempted to interfere with the United States elections in 2016,” Mr. Pompeo said. “They also did so before that. There’s a long history of Russian efforts to influence the United States and conduct influence operations against the United States, and it was Russians who actually engaged in this, not somebody from outside of the country or disconnected from Russia.”

He declined to comment on the investigations into whether the Trump presidential campaign colluded with Russia, saying, “The CIA and the White House have cooperated with those investigations. I don’t have anything to add to that discussion.”

Mr. Putin said last week that Russia has developed two new nuclear weapons with first-strike capability, but Mr. Pompeo appeared skeptical.

www.washingtontimes.com/news/2018/mar/11/mike-pompeo-cia-director-says-no-indication-russia/

[djohn2oo8]

It's quite a shame to see "Americans" defending Russia.

[djohn2oo8]

921924863664717824
That time the CIA had to publicly correct Pompeo because he is also a traitor. jeez.

[djohn2oo8]

972989424505106432
But why would he need to if a nothingburger? :lmao

[Chris]

dodgerjohn digging up old tweets from last year...SAD!

[djohn2oo8]

dodgerjohn digging up old tweets from last year...SAD!

Alread had to correct their own Director. Sad!

[Chris]

972989424505106432
But why would he need to if a nothingburger? :lmao

We can call this a Nunberger :lol

[djohn2oo8]

Ol Nunberg dun seen Jesus.

[Reck]

CIA Director Mike Pompeo: No indication Russian meddling changed 2016 election outcome

This guy keeps flip flopping on this issue.


"So, on that note, is this being taken seriously, the Russian interference in our democratic process?"


"Yes. And I wish it had been taken this seriously previously."



https://www.cbsnews.com/news/cia-director-mike-pompeo-trump-admin-takes-russian-election-interference-seriously/

[djohn2oo8]

We can call this a Nunberger :lol

Sorry Chris. A subpoena ain't a nothingburger.

[Chris]

This guy keeps flip flopping on this issue.



https://www.cbsnews.com/news/cia-director-mike-pompeo-trump-admin-takes-russian-election-interference-seriously/

CIA Director Reck. Pretty sure he knows better than your beloved CNN.

[Chris]

Sorry Chris. A subpoena ain't a nothingburger.

Sam Nunberg is a bad actor. Mueller and his prosecutors are grasping at straws and splitting hairs.

[florige]

972989424505106432
But why would he need to if a nothingburger? :lmao


Wow! They must have something on him pretty damning for Nunberg to had made that remark.

[Pavlov]

Sam Nunberg is a bad actor. Mueller and his prosecutors are grasping at straws and splitting hairs.Special Counsel Chris. Pretty sure he knows better than you.

[djohn2oo8]

Special Counsel Chris. Pretty sure he knows better than you.

Yeah. Hell Chris thought Nunes could bring indictments. Lordy!

[Reck]

CIA Director Reck. Pretty sure he knows better than your beloved CNN.

The quotes weren't from CNN. :lol

[Reck]

973046307530117121

Well well. If Steele ends up with a bullet to teh back of the head and it says he committed "suicide" we know who done it.

[Pavlov]

973046307530117121

Well well. If Steele ends up with a bullet to teh back of the head and it says he committed "suicide" we know who done it.Yeah....










SUSAN RICE!

[djohn2oo8]

973185816326483973
Two things here

1. Mueller already has this info
2. This is the definition of blackmail.

[djohn2oo8]

973161704401063938
All this damn corruption

[CosmicCowboy]

Next thing you know they will be renting out the Lincoln Bedroom.

[Pavlov]

CC with the 20 year old ding.

Also Venezuela good now.

[hater]

:lmao taking spy wars to mainstream media

What a disgrace :lol

[Pavlov]

:lol hater

Which side are you on this morning?

[Pavlov]

lol Russian oligarchs melting down all over the place.

973204465762426880

[hater]

Probably a KGB agent working for Putin

Mueller is on it :lmao

[hater]

Someone call 1-800-MUELLER-TIME

:lmao

[Pavlov]

Why would anyone call Mueller about that Russian melting down, hater?

[Pavlov]

Both sides are going to scramble to make this fit their narratives:

973228323701690368

This shit is crazy.

[hater]

“Theres Russian Trolls... in your neighboorhood”
“Who you gonna call?”
“Rob Mueller!!!”

Deedoo deedooo deedooo deedooo

:lmao

[hater]

“i aint afraid of no troll”
“I hear it likes Trump”
“I aint afraid of no troll”
“Yeah yeah yeah yah”
“Who you gonna call?”
“Rob Mueller!”


:lmao

[TSA]

Both sides are going to scramble to make this fit their narratives:

973228323701690368

This shit is crazy.

You weren't kidding about crazy. Holy shit.

[TSA]

Let’s stop for a second and take that in. On the first page of the dossier, Steele claims to have gotten senior Russian officials and their trusted friends to chit-chat about a secret plan crafted for five years by no less than Putin himself. Given the relative trivialities that can get one beaten to death in a Russian prison, these senior officials would seem to have exhibited an extraordinarily cavalier attitude toward their own health and well-being.

Is it plausible? One skeptic is an American journalist with a decade’s experience working in Moscow. He points out the obvious: It can be dangerous to be a reporter in Russia and difficult to get sources with real information to share it. People asking questions of top officials and their associates don’t go unnoticed in Putin’s surveillance state, whether it’s someone on the phone from England or just a nosy local. “Nobody Steele could have sent or talked to could have done so without it immediately coming to the attention of Russian internal security,” says the journalist.

From the earliest days of the dossier inquiry, Russian security services would have had at least a couple of options: (1) They could have shut Steele down immediately, or (2) they could have taken the opportunity to feed him stories contrived to cause the most chaos and damage to the United States. The journalist says, “Whatever is in the dossier is there because Russia wanted it in the dossier.” Unless, he adds, Steele just made things up and never had any serious Russian sources for the material in the first place.

http://www.weeklystandard.com/a-doozy-of-a-dossier/article/2011865

rest at link, good read.

[Pavlov]

Let’s stop for a second and take that in. On the first page of the dossier, Steele claims to have gotten senior Russian officials and their trusted friends to chit-chat about a secret plan crafted for five years by no less than Putin himself. Given the relative trivialities that can get one beaten to death in a Russian prison, these senior officials would seem to have exhibited an extraordinarily cavalier attitude toward their own health and well-being.

Is it plausible? One skeptic is an American journalist with a decade’s experience working in Moscow. He points out the obvious: It can be dangerous to be a reporter in Russia and difficult to get sources with real information to share it. People asking questions of top officials and their associates don’t go unnoticed in Putin’s surveillance state, whether it’s someone on the phone from England or just a nosy local. “Nobody Steele could have sent or talked to could have done so without it immediately coming to the attention of Russian internal security,” says the journalist.

From the earliest days of the dossier inquiry, Russian security services would have had at least a couple of options: (1) They could have shut Steele down immediately, or (2) they could have taken the opportunity to feed him stories contrived to cause the most chaos and damage to the United States. The journalist says, “Whatever is in the dossier is there because Russia wanted it in the dossier.” Unless, he adds, Steele just made things up and never had any serious Russian sources for the material in the first place.

http://www.weeklystandard.com/a-doozy-of-a-dossier/article/2011865

rest at link, good read.Nothing in it can be true! It just can't be!

[djohn2oo8]

973280278419509248
So everyone in Trump's inner circle has committed perjury. Nice.

[Pavlov]

973280278419509248
So everyone in Trump's inner circle has committed perjury. Nice.So many adoptions....

[Chris]

973318839889997825


Former DNI James Clapper Allegedly Leaked to CNN, investigation revealed


House Intelligence Committee finds no evidence of Trump Russia collusion



Former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper allegedly leaked information to CNN in early last year regarding the classified briefing given to then President-Elect Donald Trump and President Barrack Obama on the salacious dossier and its contents claiming the Russians had compromising information on the president-elect, according to government sources, who noted the evidence of the leak was collected during the House Intelligence Committee’s Russia investigation.

Clapper, who was one of four senior Obama administration officials to attend the briefing with the presidents, also stated his “profound dismay at the leaks” in an official statement issued in January, 2017 and warned that the leaks were “extremely corrosive and damaging” to national security, according to the press release.

Texas Republican Mike Conaway, R-Texas, announced Monday in a press release, that the committee found no evidence of Russian collusion with the Trump campaign. The Republican members released only a portion of the committee’s findings in the late afternoon. The full report will undergo a full review to ensure that it does not reveal or damage national security before its public release that could happen within the next several weeks, congressional sources added. The committee interviewed its final witness former Trump campaign manager Corey Lewandowski last week and had accessed all documents related to its probe, a congressional source told this reporter.

“We’ve interviewed all the folks we needed too,” Conaway told Fox New Monday. “We could find no evidence of collusion between either campaign and the Russians.”

Conaway added, that the committee found evidence of Russian interference in the 2016 election.

“Near the start of the HPSCI investigation into Russian active measures during the 2016 election, the Committee majority and minority agreed to four parameters for this investigation, covering Russian active measures directed against the 2016 election and against our European allies, the U.S. Government’s response to those attacks, links between Russians and the Trump and Clinton campaigns, and leaks of classified information,” Conaway stated.

“After conducting 73 witness interviews, holding nine hearings and briefings, and reviewing over 300,000 documents, we are confident that we have thoroughly investigated the agreed-upon parameters, and developed reliable initial findings and recommendations,” he said. “We will now be moving into the next phase of this investigation, working with the minority on a report to give the American people answers to the questions they’ve been asking for over a year.”

Conaway said that with the2018 primary elections already underway, “just 238 days until the mid-term elections in November, it’s important that we give the American people the information they need to arm themselves against Russian attempts to influence our elections.”

But according to government sources Clapper, who is not mentioned in the report released Monday, had spoken to CNN at roughly the same time Jake Tapper broke the first story on CNN regarding the briefing conducted by senior Obama officials with then President-elect Trump and President Obama regarding the dossier.Tapper’s story which was published in January 2017, created a snowball effect of allegations in the media that Trump’s campaign had allegedly colluded with the Russians in the 2016 election and that Russia had compromising material on Trump, sources with knowledge of the investigation concluded.

Clapper was one of four senior Obama administration officials to brief Obama and Trump on the dossier in December 2016. FBI Director James Comey, former CIA Director John Brennan and National Security Administration Director Mike Rogers were also present at the December briefings.

Neither Clapper or Tapper could not be immediately reached for comment.

The dossier, which was compiled by former British spy Christopher Steele, at the behest of embattled research firm Fusion GPS, was already being shopped around by Steele to journalists in Washington as early as the summer of 2016, according to reports. At the time, journalists who had heard of the dossier were reluctant to publish the findings because of its unverified content.

“[Clapper] gave the dossier legs and news agencies began to publish its contents because it had now become official news…”



But it was when CNN published the first report that Trump and Obama had been briefed the dossier’s findings that other news agencies began to report on it. The committee found evidence that Clapper, who is now a contributor at CNN, contacted CNN shortly before the story was published by Tapper, Evan Perez, and Jim Sciutto. The story detailed the briefings given to Trump by the senior officials on the contents of the dossier and “gave the dossier legs and news agencies began to publish its contents because it had now become official news,” one congressional source told this reporter. Shortly after CNN published the report, Buzzfeed made the decision to post the entire 35-page dossier and referenced the CNN report in its decision to publish it, according to the website.

On Jan. 11, Clapper issued a press release stating that the leaks in the media regarding the briefing on the dossier were “extremely corrosive and damaging to national security.”

“I expressed my profound dismay at the leaks that have been appearing in the press, and we both agreed that they are extremely corrosive and damaging to our national security,” he stated. “We also discussed the private security company document, which was widely circulated in recent months among the media, members of Congress and Congressional staff even before the IC became aware of it. I emphasized that this document is not a U.S. Intelligence Community product and that I do not believe the leaks came from within the IC.”

“The IC has not made any judgment that the information in this document is reliable, and we did not rely upon it in any way for our conclusions,” Clapper stated. “However, part of our obligation is to ensure that policymakers are provided with the fullest possible picture of any matters that might affect national security.”


CNN was the first to report that the Russians allegedly had “compromising personal and financial information about Mr. Trump.”

CNN also reported that the findings were compiled by a credible former British spy and that the FBI was investigating the allegations. The official sources also told CNN that one reason they wanted to brief Trump on the unverified information is that it had been circulating among the media.

At a Senate Intelligence hearing on June 8, 2017, after Comey was fired, the former FBI director revealed told Sen. Susan Collin’s under questioning that when he spoke to Trump on Jan. 6, 2017 he wanted the president to know “I was briefing him about the salacious and unverified material. It was in a context of that that he had a strong and defensive reaction about that not being true. My reading of it was it was important for me to assure him we were not person investigating him.”

House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes, R-CA, had battled both Democrats and the Department of Justice for past year during to obtain documents for the Russia phase of the investigation. The Democrats on the House Intelligence Committee are expected to release their own findings later this month that will state that more investigations are needed into alleged collusion with the Russian, according to reports.

[Chris]

The verdict is in :tu lol djohn2oo8

973322327084666880

[Chris]

Quiet up in here :lol


K8E_zMLCRNg

[spurraider21]

wow, partisan congressional committee findings

[Reck]

The verdict is in :tu lol djohn2oo8 (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=14870)

973322327084666880

:lmao Verdict is in
:lol House "investigation"
:lol Nunes memo
:lol No evidence Russia didn't meddle
:lol Indictments everywhere

[TSA]

The verdict is in :tu lol djohn2oo8

973322327084666880

https://intelligence.house.gov/uploadedfiles/hpsci_russia_investigation_one_page_summary.pdf

:bobo

[TSA]

wow, partisan congressional committee findings

House dem report will say the same except then call for more investigations.

[Reck]

House dem report will say the same except then call for more investigations.

How do you know this?

Of course it won't say the same because the Russians did meddle. This report is saying no Russian meddling happened period which is just looney stuff. There is plenty evidence the Russians stuck their beak in.

[clambake]

tick tock