how bout no he’s wrong
nah, i'm one of those who believe having crooks investigate anything but themselves is hilarious. you have the same crooks who started spygate doing the investigation into russia. sounds legit to me.btw, i don't care about dem or repub; both ing suck and are wings of the same bird. i'm not here to salute the russian flag nor am i here to buy the bs you and those like you have been suckered into like "Russia! Russia! Russia!"
Are they even looking for it?
???
how specifically? I just don't see it.
Are you saying that story was based on something other than the information received by that reporter from Wolfe in his March leak, TSA?Nothing in that story spoke of Page and the FISA warrant.
https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article...-a-russian-spy
Keep trying to spin it though
Yes or no.
You make good points. In normal times I would agree 100% and admit to being overzealous.
In normal times.
These are not normal times. A foreign gov't attacked our 2016 Democratic elections. If one of the pillars of a Democracy are free and fair elections chosen by the people - and everyone agrees on that -then these are not normal times and one could even argue that after a cyberattack we may be in a state of modern warfare. No artillery or mass casualties but a war of technology being weaponized - and the attack was successful enough that Russia had a lot to do with who was placed in office.
The sitting president and his team are highly suspect in this attack and may even be conspirators in this attack. Post-attack they have been enablers and conspirators and in my opinion have sold out the country.
It will be proven completely in the not too distant future. For now- public information suggests more than enough evidence has been released that confirms conspiracy to defraud the USA.
The buzzfeed story? No, not at all.
Does the buzzfeed story report on the existence of the Page FISA?
Yes or no.
Does the WaPo article report on the existence of the Page FISA?
Yes or no.
That is what the evidence would seem to indicate, yes.
That wont' stop conspira s from thinking Trump is some brilliant strategist with a secret "winning" plan to "get Hillary".
So how did the reporter know Page was MALE-1 in the court filing, TSA?
Explain your theory.
Are you saying the WaPo story was based on information Ali Watkins was provided by Wolfe?
You’re so confused you don’t even realize I’m not arguing your position on the buzzfeed story.
I know it was based on what Ali Watkins received from Wolfe.
No.
I'm saying information from the FISA warrant was already public and confirmed by Page. Knowing that, and knowing the emphasis placed on finding leaks by the Trump administration, your conclusion is high ranking FBI and DOJ officials immediately decided to leak information they knew had already been leaked.
And texted openly about it on devices subject to review or monitoring at any time.
Sounds airtight.
So even you know the FISA warrant was leaked and information from it published before the text messages were sent.You’re so confused you don’t even realize I’m not arguing your position on the buzzfeed story.
I know it was based on what Ali Watkins received from Wolfe.
I mean at least you had the Podestas talking in pedo pizza code.
You have career FBI agents saying "Hey, let's talk about our illegal caper!" in texts.
Like, if they were texting openly about actually leaking something, it doesn't seem natural to call it a "media leak strategy." Why not just call it the "leak" or even the "FISA leak"?
It's like a a couple of burglars planning to rob a 7-Eleven but discussing it as their "convenience store robbery plan."
Again, entirely possible they did leak something at some time. But the explanation in the Post article is a lot more plausible than the Tucker/Hannity/Trump version.
The hits keeps on coming for TSA.
Where are you going to get your orders from now, TSA?
4chan obviously
Reddit ban? Trump is finished.
ruh roh
Damning New Strzok Text to Page: “The Times is Angry With Us About the WP Scoop”
A series of text messages released Wednesday reveal that former FBI Special Agent Peter Strzok was in contact with reporters at the New York Times and Washington Post regarding stories they published about the FBI’s investigation into alleged collusion between Russia and President Trump’s campaign during the spring of 2017, according to a series of texts obtained by SaraACarter.com.
The text messages suggest that Strzok, along with his paramour, former FBI Attorney Lisa Page, had been in contact with reporters from both newspapers. Strzok specifically mentioned two-time Pulitzer Prize-winning New York Times writer Michael Schmidt his text message to Page.
Strzok wrote, “Also, apparently Times is angry with us about the WP (Washington Post) scoop and earlier discussion we had about the Schmidt piece that had so many inaccuracies. Too much to detail here, but I told Mike (redacted) and Andy they need to understand we were absolutely dealing in good faith with them,” Strzok texted to Page on April 14, 2017. “The FISA one, coupled with the Guardian piece from yesterday.” (The New York Times did not respond immediately for comment. The Washington Post also did not respond immediately for comment.)
According to several U.S. officials who spoke to this news outlet, “Mike” mentioned in Strzok’s text message is Mike Kortan, the former FBI assistant director for public affairs who retired in February. “Andy” was in reference to former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe. McCabe was fired earlier this year after it was revealed in DOJ Inspector General Michael Horowitz’s report that said he lied to investigators and leaked information to the media.
These series of text messages appear to go against recent statements made by Strzok’s attorney, Aitan Goelman…
These series of text messages appear to contradict statements made by Strzok’s attorney, Aitan Goelman, after it was revealed earlier this week that Strzok and Page discussed a “media leak strategy” in some of their text messages. Goelman insisted, “the term ‘media leak strategy’ in Mr. Strzok’s text refers to a Department-wide initiative to detect and stop leaks to the media.”
Goelman’s statement came after President Trump tweeted about the newly revealed text messages and North Carolina Rep. Mark Meadows sent a letter to Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein asking him to investigate the text from Strzok regarding the “media leak strategy.”
In light of the recent Strzok and Page text messages, Meadows has also asked Rosenstein to provide the committee with the opportunity “to review text messages, emails, and written communication form FBI and DOJ officials Stu Evans, Mike Kortan, and Joe Pientka between June 2016 to June 2017,” first reported here.
Meadows stated in the letter, “to be clear, we are not suggesting wrongdoing on the part of Evans, Kortan, and Pientka- and, in fact, previously reviewed do ents suggest that some of these individuals may share the committees’ same concerns.”
On April 11, 2017, The Washington Post broke a story led “FBI Obtained FISA warrant to monitor former Trump advisor Carter Page,” which contained detailed information that the FBI had obtained a secret court order to monitor Page, a short-term Trump campaign volunteer, in October 2016. The story, written by Ellen Nakashima, Devlin Barrett and Adam Entous referred to unnamed U.S. law enforcement and other U.S. officials who told The Washington Post that the FBI and Department of Justice obtained the warrant on Page after “convincing a Foreign Intelligence Surveillance court judge that there was probable cause to believe Page was acting as an agent of a foreign power.”
However, in April 2017, former FBI Director James Comey had signed the third renewal on Page, according to reports. In June, Rosenstein would sign off on the fourth FISA warrant renewal application to allow the FBI to continue monitoring all of Page’s communications, which ended in September 2017, after the renewal expired.
“It may cons ute a waiver of any reason for secrecy provisions that are part of a warrant application,” said criminal and civil rights attorney, David Schoen. “Under the rules of the FISA court, their disclosure to a third party should have been revealed to the FISA court. It’s a material fact that should be disclosed under the FISA court rules and besides all that it would certainly violate FBI rules. The question is why was he doing that? Why was he leaking it?”
Schoen believes there is no reason the FISAs should not to be declassified considering they were willing to leak the information to the Washington Post.
The Washington Post story also suggested that the FISA warrant on Page “is the clearest evidence so far that the FBI had reason to believe during the 2016 presidential campaign that a Trump associate was in touch with Russian agents.”
Page, who has denied any wrongdoing and has never been taken into custody for the claims made by the FBI, said his life was turned upside down when his name was leaked to the media. He said he has also received death threats and his reputation was tarnished after former British spy Christopher Steele leaked parts of his unverified anti-Trump dossier to the media.
“Like I’ve said all along this is a complete joke,” Page told SaraACarter.com. “It’s not about me, they are just trying to undercut the Trump administration’s accomplishments.”
https://saraacarter.com/damning-new-...-the-wp-scoop/
This is essentially a Schmittian argument. That a state of emergency requires the suspension of regular cons utional order and that therefore bulletin board posters are enemies of the republic and should be prosecuted as traiitors.
Piffle.
There'll be a chance to vote DJT out in two years, what's the rush?
also, face it, Spurs Homer: HRC lost against the second most unpopular presidential candidate ever, and she got beaten in states she took for granted.
It's more than partly on HRC. She ran a ty campaign, talked less about the issues than anyone since they started measuring it, and failed to connect with voters emotionally.
Maybe she should have held a few more press conferences. Her opponent sure got a lot of free media exposure. It was a mistake for HRC to hunker down and avoid the press.
...media has done a poor job describing how Russia influenced the election..
Nearly 600 Russian troll accounts tweeted about ObamaCare: report
Source: the hill
Read more: http://thehill.com/policy/healthcare...amacare-reportNearly 600 Russian-linked troll accounts posted conservative, anti-ObamaCare messages to Twitter from 2014 through this past May, The Wall Street Journal reports.
According to research from Clemson University, the Internet Research Agency (IRA) tweeted nearly 10,000 messages about health policy and ObamaCare.
Eighty percent of those tweets had conservative-leaning political messages, often disparaging the health-care law, a Journal analysis found.
The IRA is a “troll farm” based in St. Petersburg that seeks to sow division among the electorate. The company was indicted by special counsel Robert Mueller in February over its alleged attempts to meddle in the 2016 election.
Health care is playing a major role in the mid-term elections, and experts said the tweets are an example of how Russia is continuing to use social media to its advantage in a campaign for influence over U.S. elections.
These troll farms are so unreliable.
you are a totally reliable troll
1) I am not a HRC fan or supporter but I will acknowledge that - in any universe - she was the lesser of two yuuge evils.
2) Your reasons for her loss - might be true - had they all occurred in a vacuum - they did not.
3) Russia (and the conspirators in the Trump team) had a lot to do with how those things played out, how their own strategy (Trump team) was informed by the Russian hackers and the Russian data analytics, etc - which led to how they actually attacked the HRC campaign.
So, yeah, some of your assertions are half true and in time we may see exactly how this Russian/Trump team conspiracy actually swung the election towards Trump and then those reasons you are giving might not be so clear cut to you also.
There are currently 8 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 8 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote