Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 51 to 75 of 98
  1. #51
    Believe. Pavlov's Avatar
    My Team
    Los Angeles Lakers
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Post Count
    41,752
    Also Blasey-Ford’s lawyer
    You just posted a grocer's blog.

  2. #52
    wrong about pizzagate TSA's Avatar
    My Team
    Sacramento Kings
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Post Count
    20,548
    Timing of McCabe’s lawyer leaking the letter now makes sense


  3. #53
    wrong about pizzagate TSA's Avatar
    My Team
    Sacramento Kings
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Post Count
    20,548
    Timing of McCabe’s lawyer leaking the letter now makes sense

    PROCESS: The completion of the draft report indicates: (1) the investigation has concluded; (2) the IG referencer checks are now complete; and (3) the draft is submitted to the DOJ (AG Bill Barr) and FBI (Christopher Wray) for a review.

    Depending on the size, scale and content of the report a classification review could take several weeks. This is where President Trump previously granting AG Bill Barr authority to make declassification decisions will come into play. Ultimately the decision on what can be released is now in the hands of U.S. Attorney General William Barr.

    Memorandum Here
    White House Statement Here
    AG Bill Barr’s May 23rd, 2019, declassification authority covers investigative material from the DOJ, FBI, Central Intelligence Agency, State Department, Treasury Department, Department of Energy, Department of Defense, Department of Homeland Security and the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI).

    How much AG Bill Barr will declassify is an unknown; and this part will most likely be the source of a great deal of debate and political positioning.

    After the classification review, and possible declassification determinations by AG Bill Barr, the draft report will be returned to the Office of Inspector General for a Final Draft assembly. Any information remaining classified will be placed into a separate “Classified Appendix” that will not be public.

    The Final Draft could, likely will, be shared with key stakeholders who are outlined within the report during the Principal Review Phase (generally two/three weeks). Here the IG may accept feedback on the investigative findings. If the IG accepts feedback for placement in the report; the referencer will generally provide additional material specific to the allowed response from the principal(s), with further comment from the IG.

    https://theconservativetreehouse.com...mpression=true

  4. #54
    Believe. Pavlov's Avatar
    My Team
    Los Angeles Lakers
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Post Count
    41,752
    Is there an indictment?

  5. #55
    non-essential Chris's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Post Count
    39,908
    Also Blasey-Ford’s lawyer
    wReck

  6. #56
    Veteran
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Post Count
    43,429
    QChris cant even name tag right.

    You and TSA jerking each other last night expecting an indictment that never came.

  7. #57
    wrong about pizzagate TSA's Avatar
    My Team
    Sacramento Kings
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Post Count
    20,548
    QChris cant even name tag right.

    You and TSA jerking each other last night expecting an indictment that never came.
    you thinking there would or wouldn’t be an indictment last night

  8. #58
    Veteran
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Post Count
    43,429
    you thinking there would or wouldn’t be an indictment last night
    You and QChris sure as were expecting it. Even bumping months old posts.

  9. #59
    Believe.
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Aug 2018
    Post Count
    9,877
    When the reports of a possible indictment for Andrew McCabe surfaced, we noted it would be interesting to see how the Lawfare alliance responds. Today we can see that response.

    Andrew McCabe’s defense attorney, Michael Bromwich (also the attorney for ‘beach friend’ Christine Blasey-Ford in the Kavanaugh narrative), leaks his communication with U.S. Attorney for DC, Jessie Liu, to the New York Times.

    Leaks to the NYT and WaPo are how the Lawfare alliance push their narrative. These are the same DOJ/FBI officials who leaked to the same media when constructing the Russian Conspiracy narrative around the Trump campaign. [Same exact people]

    (NYT) […] In a letter sent late on Thursday, defense lawyers asked whether a grand jury had considered charges against Mr. McCabe, who is being investigated over whether he lied to internal investigators about interactions with news media. The letter came shortly after the Justice Department told Mr. McCabe’s lawyers that it had rejected their pitch to the deputy attorney general to drop the case.
    “It is clear that no indictment has been returned,” the lawyers wrote, citing coverage of the case by The New York Times and The Washington Post. A grand jury hearing evidence that was recalled on Thursday after months of inactivity left for the day without any sign of an indictment, The Post reported. None had emerged on Friday. (more)

    The purpose for the letter is to push information gained within the Lawfare network into the media narrative. It is transparently obvious that Lawfare allied lawyers who left the U.S. Attorneys Office in DC are leaking what they know to the Lawfare allied members on McCabe’s defense; this is simply how they operate.

    Notice the informality of the letter from Michael Bromwich to U.S. Attorney Jessie Liu. The tone is part of the overall group dynamic. This is a social circle of former and current connected legal interests within the Dept. of Justice.

    Bromwich cannot directly say he is aware of Grand Jury evidence, because such information would be illegal to acquire. However, current and former DOJ officials can leak to the Times and Washington Post, and Bromwich can then cite the reporting on those leaks. Everyone knows the game, the bas ization of justice is all done with an internal wink and a nod.

    The Lawfare objective is for the media and McCabe’s defense to push out information about how a grand jury may have not returned an indictment in 2018, a ‘no true bill’ finding.

    Pushing this information into the public sphere supports the objective of the defense; however, the Lawfare alliance cannot admit how they gained that information -leaks from allies inside the DOJ- because that would be illegal.

    In addition to Andrew McCabe and Michael Bromwich, the Lawfare alliance includes: former FBI legal counsel James Baker, former DOJ-NSD lawyer David Laufman (who also represented Monica McLean, Blasey-Ford’s FBI bestie and narrative engineer friend), former SDNY U.S. Attorney Daniel Goldman; Lawfare head Benamin Wittes; James Comey’s leaking buddie Daniel Richman; Obama Administration lawyer Norm Eisen; criminal defense attorney Barry Berke; and a host of current and former FBI and DOJ foot-soldiers. All of the characters network in the same social circle.

    This tribal network then extends outward to their media allies. The Lawfare team leak to specific contacts they have within media… the media then write the articles to the benefit of the Lawfare network and collaborative political interests.

    Fusion GPS is part of the Lawfare network as a distribution hub for research information needed by the journalists who are writing on behalf of the Lawfare need. Those of you who have followed politics might remember Ezra Klein’s “Journ-o-List”; the email group of 400+ reporters for multiple media outlets who collectively collaborated on stories.

    Journ-O-List was a private Google Groups forum for discussing politics and the news media with 400 “left-leaning” journalists, academics and others. Ezra Klein created the online forum in February 2007 while blogging at The American Prospect and shut it down on June 25, 2010 amid wider public exposure. (link)
    After they were exposed the media group closed shop on that specific operation, but they never stopped the process. They simply changed and evolved their methods for group planning, strategy and distribution. The network and purpose continues.

    The Lawfare Alliance feeds information into this media network based on need.

    FBI Director James Comey, FBI Legal Counsel James Baker, Comey memo recepient Daniel Richman, Deputy AG Sally Yates, Comey friend Benjamin Wittes, FBI lead agent Peter Strzok, FBI counsel Lisa Page, Mueller lead Andrew Weissmann and the Mueller team of lawyers, all of them -and more- are connected to the Lawfare group; and this network provides the sounding board for all of the weaponized approaches, including the various new legal theories we saw outlined within the Weissmann-Mueller Report.

    The Lawfare continuum is very simple. The corrupt 2015 Clinton exoneration; which became the corrupt 2016 DOJ/FBI Trump investigation; which became the corrupt 2017 DOJ/FBI Mueller probe; is currently the 2019 “impeachment” plan. Weissmann and Mueller delivered their report to evolve the plan from corrupt legal theory into corrupt political targeting. Every phase within the continuum holds the same goal.

    And so it goes…

    https://theconservativetreehouse.com...mpression=true

    TSA: tap dance...juggle...self-pretzel twisting...backflips...tap dance....juggle....backflips...uh... no indictment but but her emails..




  10. #60
    Veteran
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Post Count
    97,514
    McCabe team pressures DOJ to show cards amid grand jury speculation

    A lawyer for Andrew McCabe, the former FBI official facing the possibility of federal charges, is

    making a fresh attempt to pressure prosecutors to drop the case against him –

    citing supposed "rumors" that a grand jury has already declined to indict him.


    Grand jury proceedings are highly secretive, and the status of McCabe's case remains unclear.

    , McCabe's legal team sought to pressure the Justice Department to show its cards,

    citing “rumors from reporters starting this morning that the grand jury considering charges against Mr. McCabe had declined to vote an indictment.”

    Attorney Michael Bromwich said if this is the case, “

    the only fair and just result is for you to accept the grand jury’s decision and end these proceedings.”

    They urged the DOJ not to "resubmit" the case if "the evidence presented by your office was insufficient to convince 12 members of the grand jury to find probable cause to believe that Mr. McCabe had committed any crimes."

    https://www.foxnews.com/politics/mcc...-to-show-cards

    Totally political now under Trash/Barr. Trash's vendetta against McCabe for the Russian investigation.



  11. #61
    Banned
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Apr 2019
    Post Count
    239
    TSA: tap dance...juggle...self-pretzel twisting...backflips...tap dance....juggle....backflips...uh... no indictment but but her emails..




  12. #62
    wrong about pizzagate TSA's Avatar
    My Team
    Sacramento Kings
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Post Count
    20,548
    You and QChris sure as were expecting it. Even bumping months old posts.
    Prove I was expecting it that night.

  13. #63
    wrong about pizzagate TSA's Avatar
    My Team
    Sacramento Kings
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Post Count
    20,548
    Let me begin with the basics. No competent federal prosecutor should ever get a no true bill from a grand jury. In nearly 20 years as a prosecutor, it not only never happened to me; I could count on one hand the number of times I heard of it happening to any other prosecutor in the office, and still have fingers to spare.

    This is not because of the old saw that the deck is so stacked against a suspect in grand-jury proceedings that a prosecutor could indict a ham sandwich. To be sure, grand-jury proceedings are very one-sided. Still, there are many cases that grand juries do not like and would not charge. Nevertheless, these cases do not result in no true bills. Instead, there is steady dialogue between the prosecutors and the grand jurors over each case. The latter ask questions and, when they are troubled, convey that fact to the former. Before submitting a proposed indictment, it is customary for the prosecutor to ask whether the grand jurors believe they have heard enough evidence, whether they would like to hear from other witnesses, whether they have other concerns, or whether they would like to consider an indictment. The prosecutor is well aware if the grand jury has doubts about the case; if there are indications that the grand jury is not inclined to vote for charges, the prosecutor simply refrains from presenting an indictment.

    Bear in mind, moreover, that a grand jury, unlike a trial jury, is not being asked to find proof beyond a reasonable doubt. Its modest task is to determine whether a significantly lower proof hurdle — probable cause — has been met. Also unlike a trial jury, the grand jury need not be unanimous; federal grand juries have up to 23 members, and only 12 need assent for an indictment to be approved. The grand jurors know they are not being asked to convict anyone; just to determine that there is enough evidence to warrant having a trial, at which the defendant will be given all the due-process protections the Cons ution ensures. And double-jeopardy principles are not in play at the grand-jury stage as they are at trial: On the rare occasion that a federal grand jury votes a no true bill, prosecutors are free to re-present the case to the same or another grand jury.

    Assuming that the false statements capably outlined in the Horowitz report are the only potential crimes under consideration, it is hard to believe any grand jury could find insufficient probable cause to indict. Even McCabe is not claiming that what he told investigators was true; he seems to be saying he didn’t mean to lie (multiple times). When a suspect has committed all the acts necessary for a penal offense, and the only question is whether he had criminal intent, probable cause is usually a given.

    Of course, we do not know that the false statements are the only matters under consideration, or even that McCabe is the only subject of the grand jury’s investigation. It is entirely possible that the grand jury has not yet been asked to indict because relevant conduct is still under consideration — conduct related to McCabe, related to other suspects, or both.

    And then there is the matter of prejudice to consider.

    Besides the ongoing grand-jury investigation of McCabe’s alleged false statements, the former deputy director is also among the current and former officials who are subjects of another IG probe of abuses of power in the Russia investigation. On Friday evening, IG Horowitz wrote a letter to leaders of the Senate and House Judiciary Committees, explaining that his report is substantially complete and is undergoing a classification review to determine what portions may be disclosed. We can safely assume, then, that the release of that report, which is apt to be explosive, is imminent. Meanwhile, Connecticut U.S. attorney John Durham also has an ongoing investigation into the origins of the Russia investigation. There have been reports that Durham is using a grand jury to gather evidence and testimony.

    Why are these other investigations germane to what is happening with the Washington grand jury? Well, sometimes, when a suspect is under scrutiny in multiple investigations, the Justice Department will ask the court to seal any indictments returned by the grand jury. That way, there can be no credible claim that the grand jurors in one case were swayed by allegations filed by another grand jury. Relatedly, sometimes if a grand jury’s investigation has not yet been completed, but a major development in another investigation involving the subject — such as an IG report — is about to occur, the Justice Department will ask the grand jury to file charges, but then seal the indictment. That way, it cannot credibly be said that the grand jury’s decision to indict was swayed by negative publicity surrounding developments in the other investigation.

    https://www.nationalreview.com/2019/...mpression=true

  14. #64
    Veteran
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Post Count
    97,514
    McCabe’s attorney made a particularly telling statement about any attempt to indict McCabe:

    “[We are] confident that,

    unless there is inappropriate pressure from high levels of the Administration,

    the U.S. Attorney’s Office would conclude that it should decline to prosecute.”

    Prescient. Very prescient.

    And there’s every reason to think the

    U.S. Attorney’s Office moved entirely based on a pile of “inappropriate pressure” applied by Barr, or Trump, or both.

    In just the last two months, Trump has referred to

    McCabe as a “dirty cop,”

    a “disgrace,” and

    “a major sleazebag.”


    McCabe’s attorneys reads,

    “We believe that if the grand jury has indeed voted a no true bill,

    the Justice Manual compels you

    to not resubmit the case to the same or a different grand jury.”

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

    Harry Litman
    @harrylitman

    A Grand Jury's refusal to return an indictment is something that happens maybe once every five years in a given office.

    If it occurred here, given the magnitude and visibility of the McCabe case,

    it is a stunning and humiliating rebuke for overreaching and playing politics.

    12:04 PM - Sep 13, 2019


    https://www.dailykos.com/stories/201...tail=emaildkre


    Trash "testifying", sliming, slandering political opponent McCabe from his Bully Pulpit.



  15. #65
    Banned
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Apr 2019
    Post Count
    239
    McCabe’s attorney made a particularly telling statement about any attempt to indict McCabe:

    “[We are] confident that,

    unless there is inappropriate pressure from high levels of the Administration,

    the U.S. Attorney’s Office would conclude that it should decline to prosecute.”

    Prescient. Very prescient.

    And there’s every reason to think the

    U.S. Attorney’s Office moved entirely based on a pile of “inappropriate pressure” applied by Barr, or Trump, or both.

    In just the last two months, Trump has referred to

    McCabe as a “dirty cop,”

    a “disgrace,” and

    “a major sleazebag.”


    McCabe’s attorneys reads,

    “We believe that if the grand jury has indeed voted a no true bill,

    the Justice Manual compels you

    to not resubmit the case to the same or a different grand jury.”

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

    Harry Litman
    @harrylitman

    A Grand Jury's refusal to return an indictment is something that happens maybe once every five years in a given office.

    If it occurred here, given the magnitude and visibility of the McCabe case,

    it is a stunning and humiliating rebuke for overreaching and playing politics.

    12:04 PM - Sep 13, 2019


    https://www.dailykos.com/stories/201...tail=emaildkre


    Trash "testifying", sliming, slandering political opponent McCabe from his Bully Pulpit.



  16. #66
    Banned
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Apr 2019
    Post Count
    239
    When TSA and Chrissy girl are on the case.

  17. #67
    Believe.
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Aug 2018
    Post Count
    9,877
    Did mccabe get matching prison jumpsuits with comey?

    uh- er wait!


    sorry i was thinking of paulie and the fixer in their jumpsuits!


    lolololol

  18. #68
    LMAO koriwhat's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Post Count
    37,901
    Did mccabe get matching prison jumpsuits with comey?

    uh- er wait!


    sorry i was thinking of paulie and the fixer in their jumpsuits!


    lolololol
    don't lie, you don't know how to think let alone critically. you're a ing mentally ill re .

  19. #69
    Believe.
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Aug 2018
    Post Count
    9,877
    don't lie, you don't know how to think let alone critically. you're a ing mentally ill re .

    kori : “trump 12000 lies plus treason - nothing to see hear!”


    “Mccabe - broke company policy - cut his head off!!!”


    lol

  20. #70
    LMAO koriwhat's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Post Count
    37,901
    kori : “trump 12000 lies plus treason - nothing to see hear!”


    “Mccabe - broke company policy - cut his head off!!!”


    lol
    you literally need help... you know, like a psyche-ward, a padded room, and a straight jacket. you're a cause of concern for all in public.

    those like you deserve nothing less.

  21. #71

  22. #72
    Believe.
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Aug 2018
    Post Count
    9,877
    kori : “trump 12000 lies plus treason - nothing to see hear!”


    “Mccabe - broke company policy - cut his head off!!!”


    lol
    no one will bat an eye that just a couple of months ago

    trumps lie count was ONLY at 12000 lies confirmed-


    today - well OVER 16000


    let that sink in....


    would anyone here KEEP anyone in THEIR lives that had lied TO YOUR FACE

    just 10-20 times——



    let alone 16000 times...



    oh yeah btw-




    MCCABE = called that !

  23. #73
    Believe.
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Aug 2018
    Post Count
    9,877
    https://www.cnn.com/2020/02/14/polit...ice/index.html







    Deeep state conspiracy in the ter!

  24. #74
    notthewordsofonewhokneels Thread's Avatar
    My Team
    Los Angeles Lakers
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Post Count
    81,180
    Yep, & CNN is going to parade him across the shows all weekend long.

  25. #75
    Believe.
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Aug 2018
    Post Count
    9,877
    Yep, & CNN is going to parade him across the shows all weekend long.
    culb


    lets boil down what this means - all bull aside -
    let us boil it down and then

    please answer the question lingering afterwards....


    we know there is/never was- a deep state or a deep state conspiracy-

    which of course means- trump did what we all said he did-

    he cheated the 2016 election/accepted russias help (whether Mueller failed to prove conspiracy on his own or with Barr corrupting the investigation- we will find out later)

    meaning- your cult leader is pretty ing treasonous and sold out the usa



    so...


    why Culbear- why support someone who is not faithful to our country?


    why?

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •