snafu Posted January 9, 2018 Posted January 9, 2018 8 hours ago, Crayola64 said: I'll give it a read tomorrow! I also think a concern with Mueller will be seeking to find something if there really isn’t anything. For attention-sake. Yep. This is what "smart" people do when they're trying to impress someone. The typical result is like a Rube Goldberg machine.
Deranged Rhino Posted January 9, 2018 Posted January 9, 2018 And while everyone was focused on Fire and Fury and the Oprahen-ing.... happenings were happening: http://dailycaller.com/2018/01/08/exclusive-house-intel-information-has-received-all-docs-on-trump-dossier-from-doj-and-fb-i/?utm_campaign=atdailycaller&utm_source=Twitter&utm_medium=Social Quote The documents additionally could provide insights into the Obama administration’s request to “unmask” or force the intelligence community to reveal the identity of Trump transition officials who were in contact with diplomats and foreign principals. The Justice Department and the FBI have actively stonewalled Congress since 2017 over the Obama administration’s relationship to Fusion GPS, Steele and its use of the dossier to obtain a warrant before the Federal Intelligence Surveillance Court, which can authorize surveillance on foreign citizens. Who made all this possible? (Including this one here too) http://thehill.com/homenews/house/368003-fbi-agents-text-messages-spur-congressional-probe-into-possible-news-leaks
Deranged Rhino Posted January 9, 2018 Posted January 9, 2018 This line of questioning, and how Comey fumbles it, is VERY important to understand in context of the illegal surveillance question: Notice how Comey says it was the head of their counter intel who decided not to inform the Gang of 8 of the surveillance. Who was the head of their counter intel? Oh, right: Bill Priestap. Peter Strozk's boss and one of the key names included in the subpoenas by Nunes. Notice Roger's face - who WARNED 45 that he was under surveillance immediately after the election, prompting the transition team to unexpectedly move from Trump Towers to NJ - as he answers the questions Stefanik poses.
Tiberius Posted January 9, 2018 Posted January 9, 2018 17 hours ago, row_33 said: Trump couldn’t care less lol, He probably just does not understand. His lawyers are freaking out. They have asked if they can submit written responses. Like so they can do his homework for him. Some genius!
Deranged Rhino Posted January 9, 2018 Posted January 9, 2018 Interesting connections: http://thehill.com/homenews/house/368003-fbi-agents-text-messages-spur-congressional-probe-into-possible-news-leaks Quote A few days earlier Strzok texted Page about another new article, suggesting it was anti-FBI. “Yep, the whole tone is anti-Bu. Just a tiny bit from us,” he wrote. Page texted she had seen the article. “Makes me feel WAY less bad about throwing him under the bus to the forthcoming CF article,” she texted. Congressional investigators are still trying to determine what the “CF article” reference means and who the agents thought they were trying to throw “under the bus.” Congress is trying to figure out what the "CF" article refers to. Well, it's simple. It refers to this one from the Washington Post on 11/3/17: http://archive.is/rlN6g CF = Clinton Foundation. The person thrown under the bus (by Page) was Comey. So now we know that Page, an FBI attorney and aid to McCabe, leaked to the Post. This makes sense when you consider the Post and NYT are the two chosen mouthpieces for IC leaks historically. It also makes sense when you factor in Page's loyalty to HRC (evidenced by her texts) and the fact the sore point in the referenced article was the CF's reaction to Comey reopening the email investigation. Page and Strzok were not only willing to bend their investigations into Clinton, but also willing to leak information to the press. Both Page and Strzok are set to testify VERY soon: Now, because of the texts leaking before their questioning, it's likely both will take the 5th. It won't save them.
Deranged Rhino Posted January 9, 2018 Posted January 9, 2018 So Feinstein took it upon herself to release parts of Glenn Simpson's transcripts to be "transparent". https://www.feinstein.senate.gov/public/_cache/files/3/9/3974a291-ddbe-4525-9ed1-22bab43c05ae/934A3562824CACA7BB4D915E97709D2F.simpson-transcript-redacted.pdf Yet, all the names are redacted, or Simpson claims he cannot remember all 12 employees he hired. She didn't have permission to leak this from an ongoing investigation, so why would she do this now? I have an idea...
TakeYouToTasker Posted January 9, 2018 Posted January 9, 2018 Once all of this is said and done, the leaks themselves need to be prosecuted.
snafu Posted January 9, 2018 Posted January 9, 2018 29 minutes ago, TakeYouToTasker said: Once all of this is said and done, the leaks themselves need to be prosecuted. You're right, but you will grow old and die before this ever comes to fruition.
Deranged Rhino Posted January 9, 2018 Posted January 9, 2018 1 hour ago, TakeYouToTasker said: Once all of this is said and done, the leaks themselves need to be prosecuted. I agree. I think Snafu might be correct above, but I'm still hopeful the IG investigation is going to be different than in the past. Might be wrong though.
Deranged Rhino Posted January 9, 2018 Posted January 9, 2018 (edited) DF is in hot water now. As the media spins this release, keep one thing in mind: Grassley and Graham referred Steele to the DOJ for a criminal investigation last week because they have evidence he lied to both the FBI and Congress in his testimony (and possibly to Fusion). This is an attempt by DF to distract from what's coming, and to give people about to testify a heads up to avoid any perjury traps. This is blatant gamesmanship being played. Don't be fooled. *************************************** Yeah... this is something else to watch: https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/the_americas/ecuador-seeking-possible-mediation-in-assange-case/2018/01/09/c8b6e6b0-f56e-11e7-9af7-a50bc3300042_story.html?utm_term=.e3e1fcffa6ba It's all connected to this investigation. Why? Assange knows who gave him what and when. He also knows who didn't give him information. There have been hints for the past few weeks that he is going to be brought to the US under the protection of POTUS - with a pardon waiting. Watch this closely. Edited January 9, 2018 by Deranged Rhino
Deranged Rhino Posted January 9, 2018 Posted January 9, 2018 This radio interview with former US Attorney DiGenova is worth the 14 minute listen... some are finally catching up to what we've been covering in this thread for almost three months now.
3rdnlng Posted January 9, 2018 Posted January 9, 2018 21 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said: This radio interview with former US Attorney DiGenova is worth the 14 minute listen... some are finally catching up to what we've been covering in this thread for almost three months now. Thank you. The noose seems to be tightening.
Deranged Rhino Posted January 9, 2018 Posted January 9, 2018 1 minute ago, 3rdnlng said: Thank you. The noose seems to be tightening. It sure does.
/dev/null Posted January 10, 2018 Posted January 10, 2018 2 hours ago, 3rdnlng said: Thank you. The noose seems to be tightening.
boyst Posted January 10, 2018 Posted January 10, 2018 5 hours ago, Deranged Rhino said: DF is in hot water now. As the media spins this release, keep one thing in mind: Grassley and Graham referred Steele to the DOJ for a criminal investigation last week because they have evidence he lied to both the FBI and Congress in his testimony (and possibly to Fusion). This is an attempt by DF to distract from what's coming, and to give people about to testify a heads up to avoid any perjury traps. This is blatant gamesmanship being played. Don't be fooled. *************************************** Yeah... this is something else to watch: https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/the_americas/ecuador-seeking-possible-mediation-in-assange-case/2018/01/09/c8b6e6b0-f56e-11e7-9af7-a50bc3300042_story.html?utm_term=.e3e1fcffa6ba It's all connected to this investigation. Why? Assange knows who gave him what and when. He also knows who didn't give him information. There have been hints for the past few weeks that he is going to be brought to the US under the protection of POTUS - with a pardon waiting. Watch this closely. He would be taken out by a "lone wolf" type once he touches down.
Deranged Rhino Posted January 10, 2018 Posted January 10, 2018 Trump files suit against Buzzfeed and Glenn Simpson over the dossier... https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2018/01/09/trump-lawyer-sues-buzzfeed-over-dossier-claims/1019331001/ http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/01/09/trump-lawyer-files-defamation-suits-against-buzzfeed-fusion-gps-over-russia-dossier.html 38 minutes ago, Boyst62 said: He would be taken out by a "lone wolf" type once he touches down. It's certainly possible. He's not really a friend of anyone in this country. He's an anarchist who enjoys exposing hypocrisy and corruption. I still hold to the notion that something happened to him last October when the Embassy lost power. I've speculated it's possible he was taken off the board way back then - possibly by folks who wanted to protect him from retribution (there were two different attempted break ins at the Embassy in the weeks before the power/internet was cut). If there's any truth to that, then he'd be coming under special forces type protection. Assange is a divisive guy, but the one thing no one can dispute is that to date there hasn't been one fake document published by WikiLeaks. Not one. How he gets his information is unquestionably controversial (most times), how he publishes the information is often problematic (no redactions) and has put peoples' life in danger at times... but the information is always real and has yet to be disputed by anyone who's files have been released by them. So it's a conundrum. You can't ignore the information even if you disagree with everything he and WikiLeaks stands for (which is total transparency).
boyst Posted January 10, 2018 Posted January 10, 2018 17 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said: Trump files suit against Buzzfeed and Glenn Simpson over the dossier... https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2018/01/09/trump-lawyer-sues-buzzfeed-over-dossier-claims/1019331001/ http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/01/09/trump-lawyer-files-defamation-suits-against-buzzfeed-fusion-gps-over-russia-dossier.html It's certainly possible. He's not really a friend of anyone in this country. He's an anarchist who enjoys exposing hypocrisy and corruption. I still hold to the notion that something happened to him last October when the Embassy lost power. I've speculated it's possible he was taken off the board way back then - possibly by folks who wanted to protect him from retribution (there were two different attempted break ins at the Embassy in the weeks before the power/internet was cut). If there's any truth to that, then he'd be coming under special forces type protection. Assange is a divisive guy, but the one thing no one can dispute is that to date there hasn't been one fake document published by WikiLeaks. Not one. How he gets his information is unquestionably controversial (most times), how he publishes the information is often problematic (no redactions) and has put peoples' life in danger at times... but the information is always real and has yet to be disputed by anyone who's files have been released by them. So it's a conundrum. You can't ignore the information even if you disagree with everything he and WikiLeaks stands for (which is total transparency). I've loved him since day 1.
3rdnlng Posted January 10, 2018 Posted January 10, 2018 49 minutes ago, Boyst62 said: I've loved him since day 1. He had you with "hello"?
Tiberius Posted January 10, 2018 Posted January 10, 2018 https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/09/opinion/im-proud-we-published-the-trump-russia-dossier.html?action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSource=story-heading&module=opinion-c-col-left-region®ion=opinion-c-col-left-region&WT.nav=opinion-c-col-left-region&_r=0 Exactly one year ago BuzzFeed published what’s now known simply as “the dossier”: a set of reports put together by a former British intelligence officer named Christopher Steele during the 2016 presidential campaign. The 35-page dossier suggested that the Russian government had both compromised and colluded with President-elect Donald Trump. Since we published, the public has learned a great deal more about how seriously the F.B.I. took the dossier. The F.B.I., CNN reported, used the dossier to justify its effort to spy on an American citizen, and reimbursedMr. Steele for some of his expenses. The BBC reported that the dossier was a “road map” to the F.B.I. investigation. Fox News recently reported that a top Department of Justice official met with Mr. Steele during the 2016 campaign. And on Tuesday, the public was given a glimpse, in the release of secret testimony, into the fierce battle between Senate Democrats and Republicans over the dossier and how the F.B.I. made use of it during the 2016 campaign. As the seriousness of the Russia investigation has become clearer, the pro-Trump line has shifted from dismissing the dossier to stressing its role in the investigation: The dossier, some of Mr. Trump’s defenders now say, played too big a part, given that a portion of Mr. Steele’s funding came from political enemies of Mr. Trump, including the Democratic National Committee. “Are we in the midst of a major criminal investigation against the president of the United States as a result of this dodgy dossier?” askedTom Fitton, a Trump ally, on “Fox & Friends” recently. While Mr. Trump’s camp dismiss the dossier as malicious fiction or pure political opportunism, some elements have been corroborated. For example, that the Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort hid payments for his work in Ukraine, as federal authorities have alleged; that the Russian diplomat Mikhail Kalugin was withdrawn suddenly from the United States; and that Mr. Trump sought, but never consummated, business deals in Russia. Mr. Steele also reported, in pages submitted just 11 days after a Russian lawyer reportedly promised Mr. Trump’s aides negative information on Hillary Clinton during a meeting in Trump Tower, that “the Kremlin had been feeding Trump and his team valuable intelligence on his opponents, including Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton. “One large portion of the dossier is crystal-clear, certain, consistent and corroborated,” a C.I.A. veteran, John Sipher, wrote recently. “Russia’s goal all along has been to do damage to America and our leadership role in the world.” For all these reasons, the chorus of criticism of our decision to publish has faded. I haven’t had a single person approach me to say, “I wish I hadn’t read the dossier, and wish I had less insight into the forces at play in America.” Do you feel that way? Does anyone?
Recommended Posts