Foxx Posted April 21, 2020 Posted April 21, 2020 2 minutes ago, Tiberius said: Barr is not rushing this for the election? Ya right,. Not that it will work, Trump will have his legal troubles after he gets defeated in November. You know about the hush money payments he is in legal trouble for? lol. rushing a probe that has been going on for two years. you guys are in for a world of hurt, you were caught. 4 1
Tiberius Posted April 21, 2020 Posted April 21, 2020 Just now, Foxx said: lol. rushing a probe that has been going on for two years. you guys are in for a world of hurt, you were caught. Caught? LOL, you are dreaming.
Buffalo_Gal Posted April 21, 2020 Posted April 21, 2020 (edited) 40 minutes ago, Foxx said: lol. rushing a probe that has been going on for two years. you guys are in for a world of hurt, you were caught. LOL The new pivot is whiplashing so hard, is gonna break a few Democratic and "msm" (BIRM) necks. Edited April 21, 2020 by Buffalo_Gal 4 1
MILFHUNTER#518 Posted April 21, 2020 Posted April 21, 2020 1 hour ago, Tiberius said: So basically Barr is going to try and indict people for political purposes? Like your side staging a silent coup to overturn the results of the 2016 election for political purposes?? 3
Tiberius Posted April 21, 2020 Posted April 21, 2020 1 hour ago, MILFHUNTER#518 said: Like your side staging a silent coup to overturn the results of the 2016 election for political purposes?? A coup? So you are saying that the Democrats trying to make Mike Pence President is the same as Barr making up some stupid investigation for political reasons to keep Trump president? ?
leh-nerd skin-erd Posted April 21, 2020 Posted April 21, 2020 (edited) 2 hours ago, Foxx said: lol. rushing a probe that has been going on for two years. you guys are in for a world of hurt, you were caught. In a perfect world, the perpetrators are indicted and media coverage begins just prior to the election. I have no issue whatsoever with this hitting at that time. In fact, given a choice between outing liars/cheats/thieves like Biden, Rice, Obama, Brennan, Clapper et al mid-term, or 3-4 months before the election, I'm all for maximum political effect. @Tiberius "rush" to judgement is hysterical though. Edited April 21, 2020 by leh-nerd skin-erd 4 2
Deranged Rhino Posted April 21, 2020 Posted April 21, 2020 (edited) 11 minutes ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said: In a perfect world, the perpetrators are indicted and media coverage begins just prior to the election. I have no issue whatsoever with this hitting at that time. In fact, given a choice between outing liars/cheats/thieves like Biden, Rice, Obama, Brennan, Clapper et al mid-term, or 3-4 months before the election, I'm all for maximum political effect. @Tiberius "rush" to judgement is hysterical though. Barr made a very interesting comment here: Whole thing is worth a listen -- but he said Durham is not restrained by the timing of the election because none of his targets are candidates or connected to candidates. We're in a 7-10 day window for action per some reports -- I'm personally still skeptical of the first indictments dropping within that time frame, but it's "out there in the ether" at the moment. Edit: Here's the segment: HH: Now Mr. Attorney General, I want to close with a couple of specific issues. The investigation of U.S. Attorney John Durham into the circumstances surrounding the surveillance of President Trump’s campaign, transition, and early administration, does that investigation remain on track undisturbed by the virus? WB: Yes. HH: There are guidelines concerning the announcement of indictments or the closing of the investigations prior to the election. When is that deadline for U.S. Attorney Durham? And do you think he will make it either to disclose indictments or to disclose that the investigation is over? WB: As far as I’m aware, none of the key people that, whose actions are being reviewed at this point by Durham, are running for president. HH: But would not the announcement of indictments after a time certain have an impact on an election of the sort that the U.S. Attorney’s manual recommends against? WB: Well, what is the sort that the attorney manual recommends against? HH: As I recall, this came up with Director Comey making his announcement, and the concerns in 2016 that he had acted improvidently during the run up to the election. I don’t recall what the exact timing is. WB: Yeah, well, that was directly as to a candidate. HH: And so it would not matter, in your view, if there is an investigation, and the day before the election, someone is indicted? WB: Well, you know, I think in its core, the idea is you don’t go after candidates. You don’t indict candidates or perhaps someone that’s sufficiently close to a candidate, that it’s essentially the same, you know, within a certain number of days before an election. But you know, as I say, I don’t think any of the people whose actions are under review by Durham fall into that category. HH: That’s big news to me. I had assumed that they would be in the category of people that could not be indicted given the obvious connection to President Trump, but I’ll take the news and I’ll put it away. Let me ask you about Senator Grassley. A couple of weeks ago, he tweeted, and this is a direct quote, “We are learning FBI flubs on Carter Page spying case are just tip of iceberg. IG audited 29 other spying applications on Americans and found problems with every one of them, in caps. Constitutional rights are at stake when FBI fails to justify use of spying tools. Reforms needed to protect civil liberties.” Is Senator Grassley correct, Mr. Attorney General? WB: Yes, well, I think as I have said, I think that the failure to follow the guidelines and the requirements in preparing FISA applications, you know, is very disturbing, especially coming as recently as it has. And you know, we shouldn’t proceed with FISA unless we have safeguards and ensure that the law is being scrupulously followed by the FBI. HH: Are you shocked by what you have found to date or have been briefed by U.S. Attorney Durham to date about? WB: I wouldn’t use the word shocked, right? You know, I’m very troubled by it, but you know, I think the reason that we have this investigation is because there are a lot of things that are unexplained. And I think we’re getting deeply into the situation, and we’ll be able to sort out exactly what happened. Edited April 21, 2020 by Deranged Rhino 1 3
Tiberius Posted April 21, 2020 Posted April 21, 2020 7 minutes ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said: In a perfect world, the perpetrators are indicted and media coverage begins just prior to the election. I have no issue whatsoever with this hitting at that time. In fact, given a choice between outing liars/cheats/thieves like Biden, Rice, Obama, Brennan, Clapper et al mid-term, or 3-4 months before the election, I'm all for maximum political effect. @Tiberius "rush" to judgement is hysterical though. Rush? Just making up garbage is what Barr is doing. Trump will be indicted after he loses in November
leh-nerd skin-erd Posted April 21, 2020 Posted April 21, 2020 36 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said: Barr made a very interesting comment here: Whole thing is worth a listen -- but he said Durham is not restrained by the timing of the election because none of his targets are candidates or connected to candidates. We're in a 7-10 day window for action per some reports -- I'm personally still skeptical of the first indictments dropping within that time frame, but it's "out there in the ether" at the moment. Edit: Here's the segment: HH: Now Mr. Attorney General, I want to close with a couple of specific issues. The investigation of U.S. Attorney John Durham into the circumstances surrounding the surveillance of President Trump’s campaign, transition, and early administration, does that investigation remain on track undisturbed by the virus? WB: Yes. HH: There are guidelines concerning the announcement of indictments or the closing of the investigations prior to the election. When is that deadline for U.S. Attorney Durham? And do you think he will make it either to disclose indictments or to disclose that the investigation is over? WB: As far as I’m aware, none of the key people that, whose actions are being reviewed at this point by Durham, are running for president. HH: But would not the announcement of indictments after a time certain have an impact on an election of the sort that the U.S. Attorney’s manual recommends against? WB: Well, what is the sort that the attorney manual recommends against? HH: As I recall, this came up with Director Comey making his announcement, and the concerns in 2016 that he had acted improvidently during the run up to the election. I don’t recall what the exact timing is. WB: Yeah, well, that was directly as to a candidate. HH: And so it would not matter, in your view, if there is an investigation, and the day before the election, someone is indicted? WB: Well, you know, I think in its core, the idea is you don’t go after candidates. You don’t indict candidates or perhaps someone that’s sufficiently close to a candidate, that it’s essentially the same, you know, within a certain number of days before an election. But you know, as I say, I don’t think any of the people whose actions are under review by Durham fall into that category. HH: That’s big news to me. I had assumed that they would be in the category of people that could not be indicted given the obvious connection to President Trump, but I’ll take the news and I’ll put it away. Let me ask you about Senator Grassley. A couple of weeks ago, he tweeted, and this is a direct quote, “We are learning FBI flubs on Carter Page spying case are just tip of iceberg. IG audited 29 other spying applications on Americans and found problems with every one of them, in caps. Constitutional rights are at stake when FBI fails to justify use of spying tools. Reforms needed to protect civil liberties.” Is Senator Grassley correct, Mr. Attorney General? WB: Yes, well, I think as I have said, I think that the failure to follow the guidelines and the requirements in preparing FISA applications, you know, is very disturbing, especially coming as recently as it has. And you know, we shouldn’t proceed with FISA unless we have safeguards and ensure that the law is being scrupulously followed by the FBI. HH: Are you shocked by what you have found to date or have been briefed by U.S. Attorney Durham to date about? WB: I wouldn’t use the word shocked, right? You know, I’m very troubled by it, but you know, I think the reason that we have this investigation is because there are a lot of things that are unexplained. And I think we’re getting deeply into the situation, and we’ll be able to sort out exactly what happened. Good stuff DR. I'm less convinced that anyone falls any day, it just seems that the corruption is simply part of life in Washington. A friend of mine is a well-connected attorney from Long Island, at one point very well-connected at the NYS lottery. He told me that with few exceptions, corruption and graft are just a way of life in NY politics. I don't think surprises anyone, but it's damn disheartening when you hear it from someone in the know. With all the supposed 'journalists' doing the Lord's work on keeping us safe, and it's one big cesspool that they live, swim in and get rich along the way. In Washington, it's like that on steroids. I like Barr, I think he's a warrior in the great war, I just don't feel it. Then again, does it really matter? After all...the honorable Michael Cohen is Tibsy's deep throat...his Sammy the Bull aka Rat...and he's going to take down Trump in 2058.. Actually, if I follow Tibsy's line of thought, Trump will be indicted on new charges after he gets done serving time for sexual assault, for bribery with respect to strippers, after he serves a life sentence for being a Russian operative, and certainly after his removal from office earlier this year after impeachment. Thanks for the recap! 2
Deranged Rhino Posted April 21, 2020 Posted April 21, 2020 The swampiest committee on the Hill, who's been holding their findings for over a year after Mueller wrapped, chimes in. And it's a doozy: Could this be an attempt to get ahead of the information that's been coming out this week and Durham? You betch'a. It's also nonsense. 1 3
B-Man Posted April 21, 2020 Posted April 21, 2020 The 2016 election scandal waiting to break by John Crudele Original Article The virus isn’t the only thing going on in Washington that Wall Street and investors need to pay attention to. There is another Black Swan about to take flight that could poop on the markets. As I’ve been telling you for a long time, there are going to be repercussions from the political scandals of 2016. The time is coming soon – maybe very soon – when we will find out who will be indicted and what impact these legal actions will have on the 2020 presidential election. 2
Deranged Rhino Posted April 21, 2020 Posted April 21, 2020 More to come still. ********** Expected for months, expect this to pick up steam in the press as they start to shift from panic over the virus to panic over Durham. https://www.foxnews.com/politics/schiff-nadler-call-for-doj-inspector-general-review-of-barr-comments-related-to-trump-firing-of-icig 4
Buffalo_Gal Posted April 21, 2020 Posted April 21, 2020 11 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said: Expected for months, expect this to pick up steam in the press as they start to shift from panic over the virus to panic over Durham. https://www.foxnews.com/politics/schiff-nadler-call-for-doj-inspector-general-review-of-barr-comments-related-to-trump-firing-of-icig The cast of characters asking for a review of remarks ... Schiff, Nadler, Feinstein, Mark Warner... what do they all have in common? ? 2 1
Deranged Rhino Posted April 21, 2020 Posted April 21, 2020 Correct. This is a push to save the ICA -- which is not able to be saved. It was bs the day it was released, and that is even more apparent today. 3
Magox Posted April 21, 2020 Posted April 21, 2020 1 hour ago, Deranged Rhino said: Grenell isn't playing around. Whoah! 1
BillStime Posted April 21, 2020 Posted April 21, 2020 (edited) Senate Intel report confirms Russia aimed to help Trump in 2016 The GOP-led Senate Intelligence Committee reaffirmed its support for the U.S. intelligence community’s conclusion that the Russian government interfered in the 2016 presidential election with the goal of putting Donald Trump in the Oval Office. I suspect when Putin installed Trump as his puppet, even he could not imagine just how incompetent Trump would be - leading to this moment when the former great global superpower has become the global epicenter of a virus that has claimed 43,500 American lives & 22 million jobs. Edited April 21, 2020 by BillStime 1
Deranged Rhino Posted April 21, 2020 Posted April 21, 2020 ☝️ Late to the party -- but here to push disinformation like his owners want. 1
Warren Zevon Posted April 21, 2020 Posted April 21, 2020 3 minutes ago, BillStime said: Senate Intel report confirms Russia aimed to help Trump in 2016 The GOP-led Senate Intelligence Committee reaffirmed its support for the U.S. intelligence community’s conclusion that the Russian government interfered in the 2016 presidential election with the goal of putting Donald Trump in the Oval Office. I suspect when Putin installed Trump as his puppet, even he could not imagine just how incompetent Trump would be - leading to this moment when the former great global superpower has become the global epicenter of a virus that has claimed 43,500 American lives & 22 million jobs. Who loves Putin more? Trump or Rhino?
Recommended Posts