OMG it wasn’t a witch hunt, too bad Trump couldn’t fire everyone in time to prevent that damn IG report. Of course that won’t stop him from using witch hunt, it will just be moved up to the impeachment investigation.

There was an investigation, they said there was no political bias, Im glad for that and can accept it. I did not want evidence of politically motivated DOJ investigations, that scared the heck out of me.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Bill Barr is trying to Bill Barr the Horowitz report like he did the Mueller report, let’s not play this game again.

“The Inspector General’s report now makes clear that the FBI launched an intrusive investigation of a U.S. presidential campaign on the thinnest of suspicions that, in my view, were insufficient to justify the steps taken.”

Barr is a joke!
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

wow....someone is jumping the gun

Wait, I just saw Trump claiming the report completely exonerates him and proves it's all a witch hunt???

Trump on the IG report: "It is incredible. Far worse than I ever would've thought possible. It's an embarrassment to our country, it's dishonest. It's everything that a lot of people thought it would be, except far worse."

Justice Department Watchdog Crushes Trumpworld’s Deep State Dreams
Rick Wilson on the IG report
We were told Russia was a hoax, the president was persecuted by Obama, and the real traitors would be locked up. So much for all that.

For months, President Trump and his allies have been salivating over a report from the Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz, outlining what they expected would be a tale worthy of a John Le Carre novel. Taking a cue from Trump, Fox News and a constellation of right-wing media have promised us the report would reveal the smoking guns in the Deep State’s plot to destroy the president. The report, a product of Trump’s insistence that his servile Department of Justice investigate the origins of the Trump-Russia probe, would unleash the hounds of hell on the Democrats, the Obama administration, and the intelligence community.
Well, the report’s finally been released and the results are underwhelming, to put it mildly. Burn this phrase, lifted directly from the report, into your mind: “No evidence political bias influenced the decision to open the Russia probe.” As has happened time and again, Trump’s ludicrously overwrought promise — that this was to be a tentpole of his ongoing (and entirely imaginary) war against the Deep State — was followed by an utterly underwhelming outcome.
The vast enterprise of formerly conservative media outlets now dedicated to trafficking in baroque QAnon-adjacent conspiracy theories in defense of Trump will try their best to polish this turd into a diamond, but the chances are slim they’ll be able to convince even their own audience of credulous Trump rubes and conspiracy nuts this report means all that much.

https://gen.medium.com/justice-department-watchdog-crushes-trumpworlds-deep-state-dreams-7595d731b85f

And the report, if you have a lot of time to read, but you ought to at least look at it. Remember we paid for it.
https://www.justice.gov/storage/120919-examination.pdf

And Wray's response to the report
https://www.fbi.gov/news/pressrel/press-releases/fbi-director-christopher-wray-response-to-inspector-general-report

We were told Russia was a hoax ...and it was

the president was persecuted by Obama...he directed it

and the real traitors would be locked up...indictments are coming







hang in there pete only 5 more years :hihi:

Sooooo let's get this right?

Carter Page was not a Russian Asset but was someone working with a paricular US 3 letter agency. The email was edited to state that Page didn't previosuly work for that agency when the email stated he HAD worked for that agency.

That particular 3 letter agency told the FBI not to believe the Steele Dossier.

The Steele Dossier was less reliable without those edits and obfuscations and the above not mentioned three letter agency stated to not trust the Steele Dossier.

That FBI lawyers knowingly omitted information that would weaken the Steele Dossier and illegally edited the documents used in the FISA application several times to keep the investigation going, knowing the information they had was insufficient to ask for the 302 or even worse, ran counter to what they were using on the application.

That on the 302 Page had met with particular Russians that it turns out he didn't meet with. (Side note, Carter Page still seems like a dumbass).

That the Steele Dossier / Fusion GPS was funded by the DNC.

There are others but these are the key items (well, these and outright fraud) that allowed the 302 Application to go through FISA and get us here we we are today.

So good, no Politically Motivated Deep State Witch Hunt Conspiracy, just some career SES people cooking the books to make it look like the other guy was cooking the books.

Ya know in those movies where it shows the Good Cops fudging the info to get the Judge to sign off on a Warrant because they just know the other guy is guilty and they want leverage or a chance to "uncover" other items?

Well this is what happens when they eff up.



Justice Department Watchdog Crushes Trumpworld’s Deep State Dreams
Rick Wilson on the IG report
We were told Russia was a hoax, the president was persecuted by Obama, and the real traitors would be locked up. So much for all that.


I generally like Rick Wilson and have followed him since before the primaries but he is a Snake Oil Merchant and his current income is directly anti-Trump. He has trotted along the Trump Conspiracy for years and goes deep into the Russia Did It and Putin Owns Trump for a while. He is not Louise Mensch level crazy.

Sooooo let's get this right?

Carter Page was not a Russian Asset but was someone working with a paricular US 3 letter agency. The email was edited to state that Page didn't previosuly work for that agency when the email stated he HAD worked for that agency.

That particular 3 letter agency told the FBI not to believe the Steele Dossier.

The Steele Dossier was less reliable without those edits and obfuscations and the above not mentioned three letter agency stated to not trust the Steele Dossier.

That FBI lawyers knowingly omitted information that would weaken the Steele Dossier and illegally edited the documents used in the FISA application several times to keep the investigation going, knowing the information they had was insufficient to ask for the 302 or even worse, ran counter to what they were using on the application.

That on the 302 Page had met with particular Russians that it turns out he didn't meet with. (Side note, Carter Page still seems like a dumbass).

That the Steele Dossier / Fusion GPS was funded by the DNC.

There are others but these are the key items (well, these and outright fraud) that allowed the 302 Application to go through FISA and get us here we we are today.

So good, no Politically Motivated Deep State Witch Hunt Conspiracy, just some career SES people cooking the books to make it look like the other guy was cooking the books.

Ya know in those movies where it shows the Good Cops fudging the info to get the Judge to sign off on a Warrant because they just know the other guy is guilty and they want leverage or a chance to "uncover" other items?

Well this is what happens when they eff up.





I generally like Rick Wilson and have followed him since before the primaries but he is a Snake Oil Merchant and his current income is directly anti-Trump. He has trotted along the Trump Conspiracy for years and goes deep into the Russia Did It and Putin Owns Trump for a while. He is not Louise Mensch level crazy.
That was the third application mind you. And the IG still found no political bias.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

there was all kinds of reason not to use the Steele dossier. none of the news outlets believed it. i’m glad there was no evidence of political bias, but what other reason was there for the significant errors.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

there was all kinds of reason not to use the Steele dossier. none of the news outlets believed it. i’m glad there was no evidence of political bias, but what other reason was there for the significant errors. they
used the flimsy evidence to monitor a rival political campaign.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

there was all kinds of reason not to use the Steele dossier. none of the news outlets believed it. i’m glad there was no evidence of political bias, but what other reason was there for the significant errors.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Seems like the IG found more rigor should have been used considering the context of a presidential campaign, but these rules didn’t exist. The team followed existing rules. They did they’re job.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Seems like the IG found more rigor should have been used considering the context of a presidential campaign, but these rules didn’t exist. The team followed existing rules. They did they’re job.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

They butchered their job
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Seems like the IG found more rigor should have been used considering the context of a presidential campaign, but these rules didn’t exist. The team followed existing rules. They did they’re job.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Really Jeff?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Really Jeff?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
IG said everything was justified. You’ve got you binkie right?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I was talking about your spelling,dotard.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

They did they’re job.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Pathetic
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Seems like the IG found more rigor should have been used considering the context of a presidential campaign, but these rules didn’t exist. The team followed existing rules. They did they’re job.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

i think i more rigor should
have been used considering the context that Page is an american citizen. they did not follow existing rules, come on, the report says “serious mistakes.”.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

The NO BIAS! conclusion is amusing.


I think we will be amused watching Horowitz squirm, dissemble and wither on Wednesday trying to defend that NO BIAS! conclusion when pressed about so many deviations of procedure, Woods violations, purposeful omissions and outright deceptions -- all to obtain the Page FISA warrant by any means*.

The Demedia are celebrating the conclusion of NO BIAS! but they are setting themselves up again for exposure of their own bias, by simply not telling the entire story.

Their reporting and commentary is choreographed to instill a belief that the IG did a deep dive into everything, that Horowitz uncovered everything that could be discovered and the book can now be closed.

In actuality, Horowitz was very limited. This was an administrative inspection examining process and procedure. Horowitz was limited to questioning only personnel in the employ of the DOJ -- not being able to look outside the DOJ and with all the FBI and DOJ employees that have been fired or quit or retired, his investigative reach was rigidly constrained.

Horowitz had no grand jury powers, he had no subpoena powers to compel testimony, only of documents and no ability to indict anyone or even threaten charges. All he could do is suggest civil or administrative actions within the DOJ, or refer a person to the AG for prosecution after the report is published . . . Given his investigation is subordinate to the concurrent Durham investigation and Horowitz being required to turn over any evidence of criminal action, criminal referral is of no effect or benefit for Horowitz. All this means Horowitz had no leverage, no hammer to make people come clean.

Understand, if Horowitz uncovered actual criminal activity he could not put that in his report!

Anything considered criminal information had to be passed on to Durham. If he suspected a person committed a crime and/or knew they were under grand jury subpoena or if he knew the particulars of incriminating documents that he turned over, he could not put that in his report! -- perhaps that explains the very conspicuous absence of the infamous Strzok/Page "insurance policy" text?

For that reason, Horowitz's testimony on Wednesday will be interesting . . . The questions he won't be able to answer could be as informative as the ones he does answer.

The legal effect of these circumstances is what Barr's and Durham's statements are trying to warn the Demedia and the liberals about . . . problem is, they are too boisterous celebrating to hear, and too occupied denouncing Barr and Durham as being political to understand.



*The Carter Page FISA warrant was desperately needed because with the 18 month look-back and the two hop rule, it (and renewals) would allow the cover-up of thousands of illegal §702(16)(17) abuses of the NSA database in the summer / fall of 2016, into the election, transition and flowing right into the Mueller investigation.

IG said everything was justified.


Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

:smash:

The NO BIAS! conclusion is amusing.


I think we will be amused watching Horowitz squirm, dissemble and wither on Wednesday trying to defend that NO BIAS! conclusion when pressed about so many deviations of procedure, Woods violations, purposeful omissions and outright deceptions -- all to obtain the Page FISA warrant by any means*.

The Demedia are celebrating the conclusion of NO BIAS! but they are setting themselves up again for exposure of their own bias, by simply not telling the entire story.

Their reporting and commentary is choreographed to instill a belief that the IG did a deep dive into everything, that Horowitz uncovered everything that could be discovered and the book can now be closed.

In actuality, Horowitz was very limited. This was an administrative inspection examining process and procedure. Horowitz was limited to questioning only personnel in the employ of the DOJ -- not being able to look outside the DOJ and with all the FBI and DOJ employees that have been fired or quit or retired, his investigative reach was rigidly constrained.

Horowitz had no grand jury powers, he had no subpoena powers to compel testimony, only of documents and no ability to indict anyone or even threaten charges. All he could do is suggest civil or administrative actions within the DOJ, or refer a person to the AG for prosecution after the report is published . . . Given his investigation is subordinate to the concurrent Durham investigation and Horowitz being required to turn over any evidence of criminal action, criminal referral is of no effect or benefit for Horowitz. All this means Horowitz had no leverage, no hammer to make people come clean.

Understand, if Horowitz uncovered actual criminal activity he could not put that in his report!

Anything considered criminal information had to be passed on to Durham. If he suspected a person committed a crime and/or knew they were under grand jury subpoena or if he knew the particulars of incriminating documents that he turned over, he could not put that in his report! -- perhaps that explains the very conspicuous absence of the infamous Strzok/Page "insurance policy" text?

For that reason, Horowitz's testimony on Wednesday will be interesting . . . The questions he won't be able to answer could be as informative as the ones he does answer.

The legal effect of these circumstances is what Barr's and Durham's statements are trying to warn the Demedia and the liberals about . . . problem is, they are too boisterous celebrating to hear, and too occupied denouncing Barr and Durham as being political to understand.



*The Carter Page FISA warrant was desperately needed because with the 18 month look-back and the two hop rule, it (and renewals) would allow the cover-up of thousands of illegal §702(16)(17) abuses of the NSA database in the summer / fall of 2016, into the election, transition and flowing right into the Mueller investigation.

Funny typical response when the report fails to support yours and others fantasies..you responded just like bengiza, biden, emails..
With suggestion. Of cover up or the IG himself is bias..

Where is the smoking gun ,, maybe the IG used the standard the Republicans are using to defend Trump. He cant find. Anyone who spoke directly to anyone who directed or ask can you do us a favor conduct surveillance on Trumps campaign for political reasons
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Funny typical response when the report fails to support yours and others fantasies..


Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

but it did.....

If Trump suggests the world is flat, Barr will find a way to spin that to be true and the GOP will adopt the newest and greatest conspiracy theory. The high stepping right in the senate will never accept the truth, Trump speaks the only truth in their minds.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

If Trump suggests the world is flat, Barr will find a way to spin that to be true and the GOP will adopt the newest and greatest conspiracy theory. The high stepping right in the senate will never accept the truth, Trump speaks the only truth in their minds.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Thank you for sharing your valuable opinion today. Enjoy your freedoms.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Soon to come
Acting FBI Director Janine Pirro
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Soon to come
Acting FBI Director Janine Pirro
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Thanks for sharing
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Soon to come
Acting FBI Director Janine Pirro
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Don’t joke about such things.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I see a lot of smoke coming out of Floridaman and the Trumplicans, seems to be the scream louder and you win theory, because to his base truth doesn't matter, Floridaman does

If you read the report you'll find that it blows the Trumplican conspiracy theories out of the water.

The Crossfire investigation was for political purposes............

“We did not find documentary or testimonial evidence that political bias or improper motivation influenced the decisions to open the four individual investigations..."

They planted spies in the campaign...........

“We found no evidence that the FBI attempted to place any CHSs within the Trump campaign, recruit members of the Trump campaign as CHSs, or task CHSs to report on the Trump campaign.”

The investigation was based on the Steele report paid for by the Dems......

“These officials, though, did not become aware of Steele’s election reporting until weeks later, and we therefore determined that Steele’s reports played no role in the Crossfire Hurricane opening..."

I see a lot of smoke coming out of Floridaman and the Trumplicans, seems to be the scream louder and you win theory, because to his base truth doesn't matter, Floridaman does

If you read the report you'll find that it blows the Trumplican conspiracy theories out of the water.

The Crossfire investigation was for political purposes............

“We did not find documentary or testimonial evidence that political bias or improper motivation influenced the decisions to open the four individual investigations..."

They planted spies in the campaign...........

“We found no evidence that the FBI attempted to place any CHSs within the Trump campaign, recruit members of the Trump campaign as CHSs, or task CHSs to report on the Trump campaign.”

The investigation was based on the Steele report paid for by the Dems......

“These officials, though, did not become aware of Steele’s election reporting until weeks later, and we therefore determined that Steele’s reports played no role in the Crossfire Hurricane opening..."

I think you are correct as you scream loudly here on a daily basis. I also think it will ultimately discourage you as Trump is a certainty to win in 2020. But keep screaming as you fall deeper into the abyss of misfits.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I think you are correct as you scream loudly here on a daily basis. I also think it will ultimately discourage you as Trump is a certainty to win in 2020. But keep screaming as you fall deeper into the abyss of misfits.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Keep believing that

OK
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

A day after U.S. Attorney General William Barr disputed a watchdog’s finding that the FBI was legally justified in opening the Russia investigation, a group of lawyers who served in Republican administrations on Tuesday accused him of mischaracterizing the conclusions and more broadly injecting politics into the Justice Department to benefit President Donald Trump.

Barr disavowed certain findings of the Justice Department’s inspector general, Michael Horowitz, who documented missteps in the FBI’s inquiry into Russian interference in the 2016 election but otherwise determined the investigation was lawfully opened. Taking aim at that latter finding, Barr said the inspector general’s report “now makes clear that the FBI launched an intrusive investigation of a U.S. presidential campaign on the thinnest of suspicions that, in my view, were insufficient to justify the steps taken.”
“It is also clear that, from its inception, the evidence produced by the investigation was consistently exculpatory,” he said, in a prepared statement that went out within a half-hour of the inspector general report’s release.

His commentary added fuel to criticism that he’s serving more as a “spokesman” for Trump —as James Comey called him in a Washington Post op-ed—than as the independent head of the U.S. Justice Department. Barr’s critics have accused him of politicizing the Justice Department, using his leadership to advance defense-lawyer arguments benefitting Trump personally and not more widely the office of the presidency. Barr is set to speak later this afternoon in Washington at an event hosted by the Wall Street Journal.
On Tuesday, a group of former Justice Department and White House lawyers, all of whom served in Republican administrations, criticized Barr over his latest dip into a partisan battle. The former leaders are all affiliated with Checks & Balances, a group of conservative lawyers who have bristled at Trump’s presidency. The group has lashed out at Barr previously, challenging his attempt to implement an “autocratic vision of executive power.”

Jonathan Rose, who served under the Reagan administration as the assistant attorney general in charge of the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Policy, said the inspector general’s report “rebuts in detail the AG’s charge that the FBI’s investigation of the 2016 Trump campaign was unjustified, overly intrusive, or systematically suppressed exculpatory evidence.”

“This is the first attorney general in the history of presidential impeachment proceedings to enlist as a partisan warrior on behalf of a President. It is a sad day for those of us who revere the historic commitment of the FBI and the Department of Justice to even-handed law enforcement based on truth and verifiable facts,” said Rose, who had previously served under the Nixon administration as the deputy associate attorney general.
Donald Ayer, who served as deputy attorney general under the George H.W. Bush administration, said Barr’s reaction to the inspector general’s report was reminiscent of his handling of Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s report on the Russia investigation. Ahead of the Mueller report’s release, Barr came under criticism for mischaracterizing the report’s findings.

Ayer, a former Jones Day partner who now teaches at Georgetown Law, said the inspector general’s exhaustive investigation showed that the Russia investigation was “properly initiated based on a sound factual basis, and that the allegations of ‘witch hunt’ and bias on the part of those overseeing it are without foundation.”

“Rather than focus on those critical findings which should reassure all Americans, Barr dwells entirely on the report’s further findings that some agents (who he describes as a ‘small group of now-former’ FBI employees) were guilty of misconduct in the manner in which they put forward evidence in some submissions to the [Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act] court,” Ayer said, referring to the secretive court tasked with weighing warrant applications filed under the surveillance law.

Indeed, the inspector general’s report stated repeatedly that the review of the Russia investigation had not uncovered evidence that “political bias or improper motivation” influenced the FBI’s action, an assertion that flew in the face of Trump’s refrain that the probe amounted to a partisan “witch hunt.”

Christopher Wray testifies before the Senate Judiciary Committee during his confirmation hearing in 2017. Credit: Diego M.
FBI Director Christopher Wray has accepted the findings of the inspector general’s report, saying it revealed “unacceptable” problems and missteps. Wray, a former partner at King & Spalding, has vowed to make changes to how the bureau handles confidential informants and applies for warrants through the FISA courts.

On Tuesday, Trump targeted Wray over his reaction to the report, writing in a tweet: “I don’t know what report current Director of the FBI Christopher Wray was reading, but it sure wasn’t the one given to me. With that kind of attitude, he will never be able to fix the FBI, which is badly broken despite having some of the greatest men & women working there!”

Carrie Cordero, a co-founder of Checks and Balances and former counsel to the head of the Justice Department’s national security division under the George W. Bush administration, said Trump’s tweet on Tuesday “betrays his own bias: one in favor of personal loyalty and blind partisanship instead of dedication to mission and country.”

“We should not accept as normal or acceptable a political leader who routinely seeks to damage the credibility of the leadership and institutions dedicated to keeping Americans safe,” she said.

Funny typical response when the report fails to support yours and others fantasies..you responded just like bengiza, biden, emails..
With suggestion. Of cover up or the IG himself is bias..

Where is the smoking gun ,, maybe the IG used the standard the Republicans are using to defend Trump. He cant find. Anyone who spoke directly to anyone who directed or ask can you do us a favor conduct surveillance on Trumps campaign for political reasons
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

the report highlighted many errors, some it labeled as “serious”. the DOJ ignored a lot of exculpatory information when applying for FISA warrants on an american citizen.

i’m not sure what the motive was to commit a large number of serious errors, if not political, in this case. Maybe the FBI is just that unprofessional all around.

Durham stuck his neck out to say he disagrees with parts of the reports. Let’s see what he says. But if I’m ok with the mueller report not finding Trump colluded with russia, than i should
be equally satisfied with the IG report finding no political bias.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

the report highlighted many errors, some it labeled as “serious”. the DOJ ignored a lot of exculpatory information when applying for FISA warrants on an american citizen.

i’m not sure what the motive was to commit a large number of serious errors, if not political, in this case. Maybe the FBI is just that unprofessional all around.

Durham stuck his neck out to say he disagrees with parts of the reports. Let’s see what he says. But if I’m ok with the mueller report not finding Trump colluded with russia, than i should
be equally satisfied with the IG report finding no political bias.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Here's a link to IG reports, all of them. https://oig.justice.gov/reports/all.htm
What the IGs do is find errors in procedure, that is the job they are to perform.
Read any executive summary, you will find that the issues are listed and they always are found and acted upon.
All jobs performed by humans have errors, misjudgements and miscalculations.
In my experience few people conspire to do their jobs incorrectly, perhaps it is common in your industry.

FBI bad for conducting legal surveillance... :realmad:

Trump asking ukraine for a favor against Biden :faga::lm:

Here's a link to IG reports, all of them. https://oig.justice.gov/reports/all.htm
What the IGs do is find errors in procedure, that is the job they are to perform.
Read any executive summary, you will find that the issues are listed and they always are found and acted upon.
All jobs performed by humans have errors, misjudgements and miscalculations.
In my experience few people conspire to do their jobs incorrectly, perhaps it is common in your industry.

not every task performed by humans, is found to have serious errors. Is that really news to you?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

FBI bad for conducting legal surveillance... :realmad:

Trump asking ukraine for a favor against Biden :faga::lm:

FBI bad for making serious errors when deciding to suspend the inalienable rights of an american citizen. One who presumably by sheer coincidence, worked for the presidential campaign which the agent leading the investigation, said he’d “stop” from becoming president.

You’re bending over backwards to whitewash this, because it helps your political agenda.

Carter Page is going to be suing as many people as that Sandman kid. I can’t imagine any insurance company willing to write slander/libel insurance for CNN or MSNBC. I used to work
for a company which sold
such insurance.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Barr stated, “The Inspector General’s report now makes clear that the FBI launched an intrusive investigation of a U.S. presidential campaign on the thinnest of suspicions that, in my view, were insufficient to justify the steps taken.”

Note what Barr did not say. He did not say that launching the investigation was illegal. Nor did he say the FBI violated any internal policy. Instead, he relied on his own opinion that the evidence was insufficient to justify the investigation. His hindsight does not make the investigation illegal or improper.

He stated that “the evidence produced by the investigation was consistently exculpatory.” This statement overlooks facts contained in Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s report documenting contacts between the Trump campaign and Russia. He neglected to mention Trump’s negotiations for a Trump Tower in Moscow, the June 2016 meeting with Russians at Trump Tower in New York to obtain dirt on Hillary Clinton, and Manafort’s meeting with Konstantin Kilimnik in August 2016 to share polling data on battleground states. Barr’s omissions tend to make him sound more like a defense attorney for Trump than the Attorney General of the United States.

Just keep defending Putin's Puppet and his lackeys.

Note what Barr did not say. Nor did he say the FBI violated any internal policy. .

The IG report said that. Barr didn't have to. The IG report said there were serious mistakes by the DOJ in seeking to suspend the constitutional rights of an American citizen.

Is that true, or is it false?

I don't work at the DOJ, I have no idea how common it is to commit serious mistakes when seeking to suspend the rights of a citizen. I hope it's not standard practice. If it's not, and I presume it's not (since overseeing the DOJ is a big part of Obama's job), why so many mistakes in this one case? Was there anything special about spying on the Trump campaign, that motivated the DOJ to make serious mistakes in its quest to get permission to spy on them?

Or did Obama's DOJ routinely make a large number of serious mistakes when making applications to the FISA court? I have no idea, neither does anyone here...

Which is it? Did Obama's DOJ routinely make a large number of serious mistakes when applying for FISA warrants, meaning there was nothing special about this case?? Or did they normally go by the book, but screw up big time when it came to Carter Page? That's a very, very key question.

Barr stated, “The Inspector General’s report now makes clear that the FBI launched an intrusive investigation of a U.S. presidential campaign on the thinnest of suspicions that, in my view, were insufficient to justify the steps taken.”

Note what Barr did not say. He did not say that launching the investigation was illegal. Nor did he say the FBI violated any internal policy. Instead, he relied on his own opinion that the evidence was insufficient to justify the investigation. His hindsight does not make the investigation illegal or improper.

He stated that “the evidence produced by the investigation was consistently exculpatory.” This statement overlooks facts contained in Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s report documenting contacts between the Trump campaign and Russia. He neglected to mention Trump’s negotiations for a Trump Tower in Moscow, the June 2016 meeting with Russians at Trump Tower in New York to obtain dirt on Hillary Clinton, and Manafort’s meeting with Konstantin Kilimnik in August 2016 to share polling data on battleground states. Barr’s omissions tend to make him sound more like a defense attorney for Trump than the Attorney General of the United States.

Just keep defending Putin's Puppet and his lackeys.

The IG report said that. What? Barr didn't have to. The IG report said there were serious mistakes by the DOJ in seeking to suspend the constitutional rights of an American citizen.

Is that true, or is it false?

I don't work at the DOJ, I have no idea how common it is to commit serious mistakes when seeking to suspend the rights of a citizen. I hope it's not standard practice. If it's not, and I presume it's not (since overseeing the DOJ is a big part of Obama's job), why so many mistakes in this one case? Was there anything special about spying on the Trump campaign, that motivated the DOJ to make serious mistakes in its quest to get permission to spy on them?

Or did Obama's DOJ routinely make a large number of serious mistakes when making applications to the FISA court? I have no idea, neither does anyone here...

Which is it? Did Obama's DOJ routinely make a large number of serious mistakes when applying for FISA warrants, meaning there was nothing special about this case?? Or did they normally go by the book, but screw up big time when it came to Carter Page? That's a very, very key question.

Just why is it as you say with great emphasis....Key?

While it is important in the world of FISA and rights, to the investigation it was inconsequential and did not result in anything. There were many other things discovered and if there had been less obstruction perhaps more would have been found.

FISA is a precious trust and an inspector general report identifying even carelessness that leads to serial misstatements in FISA applications is a serious matter that needs to addressed. And some of the conduct he describes may involve deliberate misconduct too.

None of them involves the sort of misconduct or errors that will reasonably bear the weight Trump and his defenders have put on the notion that something was rotten at the bureau. Not only were these errors not political, but they took place at the lower levels—individual agents and an attorney. What’s more, Horowitz does not even find that the conduct rendered the FISA applications defective—a point on which he does not weigh in.

If I were Carter Page, I would read this report with some grim satisfaction; Page has a right to be pissed off. The inspector general has, after all, concluded that serious errors took place in seeking Page’s surveillance orders. But that’s about as far as it goes. The errors were not political. They were not part of some coup. And in any event, the Page FISA applications did not end up being all that important. None of the indictments that Mueller handed down were driven by evidence collected in surveillance of Page, who was never charged with anything. The issues Horowitz raises are important because the integrity of the FISA process is so important. But no aspect of the integrity of the Russia investigation turns on the questions Horowitz raises about the Page FISA applications.

🍔🙀🍔
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Barr must have read my posts.


I think I should sue him for plagiarism


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LRKFo0JmuBc

Is Barr the Attorney General or Floridaman’s lawyer?
Just another guy who auditioned and got a spot on Floridaman’s reality TV show
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Is Barr the Attorney General or Floridaman’s lawyer?
Just another guy who auditioned and got a spot on Floridaman’s reality TV show
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
This pretty much sums things up. He’s a disgrace to the DOJ and is selling out America.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Remember the tell:

You don't need a "4-page letter" or blitz of interviews if the goal is to simply allow the DOJ's exhaustive work to speak for itself when it comes out.

People can read the Mueller Report or IG Report to get that.

Barr is up to something else.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

If it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck and waddles like a duck; well guess what it’s a f*cking duck. I am enjoying the spin on the right and Barr is an embarrassment as head of the DOJ.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

lamest impeachment effort in American history...nice job democraps

"Whether or not they've spent the last eight months paying attention to this, they will when this goes to the Senate. Everyone loves a good trial. This is OJ on steroids because it involves the President of the United States"
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

This pretty much sums things up. He’s a disgrace to the DOJ and is selling out America.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

This is good stuff and probably could be used by Shift as evidence in this crucial affair. Great work Jeff,stay vigilant.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

“Barr’s conduct is nothing short of disgraceful & continues his pattern of misstating facts & out-and-out lying about documents to protect “ Trump. The HJC should call him up to the Hill & make him explain his remarks...under oath.”
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

“Barr’s conduct is nothing short of disgraceful & continues his pattern of misstating facts & out-and-out lying about documents to protect “ Trump. The HJC should call him up to the Hill & make him explain his remarks...under oath.”
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

"Barr tells it like it is. I don't think the HJC wants any part of what Barr would say."

As Attorney General, Barr is a threat to democracy. He has distorted facts and misled the public. He appointed Durham to run a concurrent investigation because he knew the Inspector General would debunk his conspiracy theories, and he needed someone he could control.
Durham revealed much about his own character when he issued a transparently political message challenging the IG's report before completing his investigation. Barr, who deceived the public about the contents of the Mueller report, has similarly tried to undermine the IG report.
Barr's crackpot theory boils down to the idea that the last administration tried to sabotage Trump's candidacy by keeping its investigation of Trump's campaign completely secret while colluding with Jason Chaffetz to leak information about its investigation of Hillary Clinton.
Barr bizarrely argues it'd be bad if a president abused his power to sabotage a rival's campaign with an investigation. The notion that Obama came anywhere near doing this is the debunked lunacy of pizzagate enthusiasts, but it's exactly what the "transcript" shows Trump did.
Barr's comments also suggest a plan to take personnel actions against individuals tied to the investigation of Trump. Whether action is warranted or not, an Attorney General commenting on personnel actions that must be taken by lower level managers suggests the fix is in.
Whether he ultimately intervenes in personnel matters is almost beside the point. His remarks were intended to intimidate the DOJ attorneys and FBI agents investigating others associated with the president. And there's something far more ominous that his remarks have signaled.
Barr, who traveled the world looking for ways to defend the politician he serves instead of the rule of law, has also signaled he may use the criminal investigative apparatus of the state to go after perceived enemies of his boss—weaponizing it as a tool of a political party.
Even the mere suggestion that he would do this is a direct assault on democracy and a betrayal of the public trust. It is extremely dangerous and may chill legitimate investigations. It's the stuff of autocracies. It must not be tolerated. It cannot be tolerated in a republic.
(Barr even talks like an authoritarian. He said he'd ignore any ethics guidance he disagreed with. He ignored the 1st amendment and blamed "secularism" for society's ills. He told certain "communities" [wink] they need to show more respect or live without police protection.)
In this context, it's important to remember that Trump fired Sessions the day after the election because he would not stop the Russia investigation. A president firing someone for failing to treat him as though he is above the law should have been viewed as an impeachable act.
Instead, Barr was greeted warmly as a stabilizing force by people who should have known better. But, as the beneficiary of a slow motion Saturday Night Massacre, Barr was hired to do what Sessions wouldn't do. He was hired for this moment in history.
It's important not to make the same mistake twice. Some people underestimated Barr's ruthless partisanship before. No one should do that again. Like Trump, Barr is capable of doing anything he can get away with—and that includes interfering in the 2020 election, if we let him.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

As Attorney General, Barr is a threat to democracy. He has distorted facts and misled the public. He appointed Durham to run a concurrent investigation because he knew the Inspector General would debunk his conspiracy theories, and he needed someone he could control.
Durham revealed much about his own character when he issued a transparently political message challenging the IG's report before completing his investigation. Barr, who deceived the public about the contents of the Mueller report, has similarly tried to undermine the IG report.
Barr's crackpot theory boils down to the idea that the last administration tried to sabotage Trump's candidacy by keeping its investigation of Trump's campaign completely secret while colluding with Jason Chaffetz to leak information about its investigation of Hillary Clinton.
Barr bizarrely argues it'd be bad if a president abused his power to sabotage a rival's campaign with an investigation. The notion that Obama came anywhere near doing this is the debunked lunacy of pizzagate enthusiasts, but it's exactly what the "transcript" shows Trump did.
Barr's comments also suggest a plan to take personnel actions against individuals tied to the investigation of Trump. Whether action is warranted or not, an Attorney General commenting on personnel actions that must be taken by lower level managers suggests the fix is in.
Whether he ultimately intervenes in personnel matters is almost beside the point. His remarks were intended to intimidate the DOJ attorneys and FBI agents investigating others associated with the president. And there's something far more ominous that his remarks have signaled.
Barr, who traveled the world looking for ways to defend the politician he serves instead of the rule of law, has also signaled he may use the criminal investigative apparatus of the state to go after perceived enemies of his boss—weaponizing it as a tool of a political party.
Even the mere suggestion that he would do this is a direct assault on democracy and a betrayal of the public trust. It is extremely dangerous and may chill legitimate investigations. It's the stuff of autocracies. It must not be tolerated. It cannot be tolerated in a republic.
(Barr even talks like an authoritarian. He said he'd ignore any ethics guidance he disagreed with. He ignored the 1st amendment and blamed "secularism" for society's ills. He told certain "communities" [wink] they need to show more respect or live without police protection.)
In this context, it's important to remember that Trump fired Sessions the day after the election because he would not stop the Russia investigation. A president firing someone for failing to treat him as though he is above the law should have been viewed as an impeachable act.
Instead, Barr was greeted warmly as a stabilizing force by people who should have known better. But, as the beneficiary of a slow motion Saturday Night Massacre, Barr was hired to do what Sessions wouldn't do. He was hired for this moment in history.
It's important not to make the same mistake twice. Some people underestimated Barr's ruthless partisanship before. No one should do that again. Like Trump, Barr is capable of doing anything he can get away with—and that includes interfering in the 2020 election, if we let him.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

This is riddled with error.

re-pete is determined to prove beyond any doubt that he's completely nuts

This is riddled with error.

No, it’s not
Just doesn’t fit what the Trumplicans echo chamber pushes
Case in point Floridaman’s rally last night when he called the FBI scum
🍑🤡
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Calling the FBI scum is just hyperbole .. supporters except it willingly.. if you don't you just hate him... guess Wray will be gone next for not showing his Allegiance to Trump.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Does anyone know any people w/charities who get fined, band from ever having a charity and whose children have to undergo training to tell them right from wrong? What is Trump's approval rating amongst R's again?



President Trump has paid $2 million to eight charities as part of a settlement in which the president admitted he misused funds raised by the Donald J. Trump Foundation to promote his presidential bid and pay off business debts, the New York State attorney general said on Tuesday.

The foundation’s giving patterns and management came under scrutiny during Mr. Trump’s run for office, and last year the New York attorney general filed a lawsuit accusing the president and his family of using the foundation as an extension of their businesses and the campaign.

The payments were part of a settlement announced last month that capped a drawn-out legal battle. In the end, the president admitted in court documents that he had used the foundation to settle legal obligations of his businesses and even to purchase a portrait of himself.

“Charities are not a means to an end, which is why these damages speak to the president’s abuse of power and represent a victory for not-for-profits that follow the law,” the attorney general, Letitia James, said in a statement. “Funds have finally gone where they deserve — to eight credible charities.”



Last month, a state judge ordered the president to give $2 million to the eight charities, or $250,000 per charity. Under the settlement, Mr. Trump’s lawyers also agreed to liquidate the Trump Foundation’s remaining assets of more than $1.7 million and disburse them to those same nonprofits, which have no connection to the president or his family.

The president wired payments directly to the organizations a few weeks ago, but the payments were not made public until this week, an official in the attorney’s office said.

The nonprofit groups that received payments were the Army Emergency Relief, the Children’s Aid Society, Citymeals on Wheels, Give an Hour, Martha’s Table, the United Negro College Fund, the United Way of the National Capital Area, and the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum. Each received a total of $476,140.01.

In a statement, Marc Mukasey and Alan Futerfas, the attorneys for the foundation, said the attorney general “doesn’t want the media to focus on the massive trial they lost today.”

“Our case was amicably resolved weeks ago,” the statement said. “The judge commended both parties for the resolution. The legacy of the Trump Foundation — which gave away many millions to those most in need at virtually no cost — is secure.”



In a mid-November filing, the attorney general’s office requested that the judge, Justice Saliann Scarpulla of State Supreme Court in Manhattan, order Mr. Trump not to write off the payments as charitable contributions in his tax filings, but the judge did not do so.

As part of the settlement, Mr. Trump, who at first dismissed the suit as a political attack, made 19 detailed admissions, acknowledging, for example, that the foundation had purchased the $10,000 portrait of himself that was ultimately displayed at one of his Florida hotels.

He admitted to using the foundation’s money to settle obligations of some of his for-profit companies, including a golf club in Westchester County, N.Y., and Mar-a-Lago, his private club in Florida which he frequently visits.

And he admitted that the foundation had given his presidential campaign control over about $2.8 million that the foundation had raised at a veterans fund-raiser in Iowa in January 2016. Mr. Trump acknowledged the fund-raiser was in fact a campaign event.

The Trump Foundation, which Mr. Trump founded in 1987, disbanded last December after an investigation by Barbara Underwood, then-acting attorney general of New York. Ms. Underwood’s office found “unlawful coordination with the Trump presidential campaign, repeated and willful self-dealing, and much more.”

It is illegal for charitable foundations to advance the self-interests of their executives.

The investigation had been started by the former attorney general, Eric T. Schneiderman, and was based on information first reported by The Washington Post during the presidential campaign. Ms. James took over the case when she was sworn into office in 2019.

As part of the settlement, Mr. Trump’s three children who were officers of the foundation — Eric Trump, Donald Trump Jr. and Ivanka Trump — were ordered to undergo mandatory training to ensure they do not engage in similar misconduct in the future.

On Tuesday, the attorney general’s office confirmed the children had undergone the training.

Shoulda made an article of impeachment out of that too
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

It sure makes me smile seeing our local group of #^&#^&#^&#^&#^&#^&#^&s all charged up about nothing. Liberal dreams from liberal fools.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Shoulda made an article of impeachment out of that too
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

No. It shouldn't.

It does show what a tremendous fraud and conman he remains.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Shoulda made an article of impeachment out of that too
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

probably, Should have arrested Pres. Trump.

It sure makes me smile seeing our local group of #^&#^&#^&#^&#^&#^&#^&s all charged up about nothing. Liberal dreams from liberal fools.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Do you think ripping off a charity is nothing?

Do you think ripping off a charity is nothing?

Do you think you are in our local group of #^&#^&#^&#^&#^&#^&#^&s?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Do you think you are in our local group of #^&#^&#^&#^&#^&#^&#^&s?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I think you are a vile person.

Lindsey Graham is going on in the Senate hearing about how people who think Trump is an "idiot" can't be journalists or FBI agents if they ever express that thought out loud. I guess that doesn't apply to Republican senators.

Lindsey Graham@LindseyGrahamSC
Donald Trump gets his foreign policy from watching television - the Cartoon Network. #CNNDebate #ReadyToLead
8:34 PM · Sep 16, 2015

does hypocrisy from the Repub. party surprise you anymore?

The political theater unfolding in the Senate Judiciary Committee today is premised on the fantastical notion that the FBI investigated Trump to stop him from becoming president, which requires you to ignore the fact that the FBI released information about Clinton and not Trump.

does hypocrisy from the Repub. party surprise you anymore?

They are all unbelievable hypocrites and they are all high stepping it to Trumps will and the lemmings on this board echo the party line of the week. I applaud Pete for his enthusiasm, but to debate something that the other side will never see or admit to, IMHO is just time wasted.

They are all unbelievable hypocrites and they are all high stepping it to Trumps will and the lemmings on this board echo the party line of the week. I applaud Pete for his enthusiasm, but to debate something that the other side will never see or admit to, IMHO is just time wasted.

this is really dumb....get a grip

Every time somebody bitches about the hypocrisy of one party without acknowledging that it exists in equal numbers in the other party, sucks the IQ points right out of the board.

It really is the stupidest argument you can put forth. Been going on since this forums inception :rolleyes:
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Every time somebody bitches about the hypocrisy of one party without acknowledging that it exists in equal numbers in the other party, sucks the IQ points right out of the board.I would say you were correct up to the election of Pres. Trump and the surrender of the Repub. party to him.

It really is the stupidest argument you can put forth. Been going on since this forums inception :rolleyes:
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I think SD's postings are the stupidest since this forums inception.

I think SD's postings are the stupidest since this forums inception.

^^^^^^
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I think SD's postings are the stupidest since this forums inception.

Some people are like Slinkies … not really good for anything, but you can’t help smiling when you see one tumble down the stairs.

I think you are a vile person.

Thanks for sharing
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

No, it’s not
Just doesn’t fit what the Trumplicans echo chamber pushes
Case in point Floridaman’s rally last night when he called the FBI scum
🍑🤡
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

The errors of omission are blatant. For one, it forgets to mention that Barr eats babies.

The errors of omission are blatant. For one, it forgets to mention that Barr eats babies.

#^&If you can’t convince them, confuse them.

#^&If you can’t convince them, confuse them.

At least in this case, you practice what you preach.

Just wait till GW Bush and Obama meet for beers and do their joint interview shortly before the closing of the Senate trial. :cheers2:

Just wait till GW Bush and Obama meet for beers and do their joint interview shortly before the closing of the Senate trial. :cheers2:

Could care less about what either of those two think.

Remember the tell:

You don't need a "4-page letter" or blitz of interviews if the goal is to simply allow the DOJ's exhaustive work to speak for itself when it comes out.

People can read the Mueller Report or IG Report to get that.

Barr is up to something else.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device


If people would allow the IG report to "speak for itself" neither Barr or Durham would need to comment on it. Barr's comments were less about the actual IG report than trying to rein in absolutely ridiculous overreading of it and the insane and incorrect "conclusions" being drawn from it.

People are taking the IG report as the be-all-end-all conclusion about the "investigation of the Russia investigation" and a completely false narrative is emerging from that (which you have completely bought into). That's what Barr is rebutting, NOT the IG report . . . The report says all it COULD say; you are the one ignoring that fact and representing it saying things it does not say.

All Barr and Durham are saying is the IG's subordinate, limited investigation is NOT conclusive.

Barr said that the IG's purview was limited, he could only look at procedures and process within the DOJ and could only question people who were working at DOJ at the time of questioning.

Horowitz could not compel testimony or threaten charges . . . all he could do is ask a question and unless he independently knew of direct conflicting information, he registered that answer as the truth / fact and he was duty bound to report that answer as the truth / fact -- and those answers are what comprises his report . . . IOW, he is only relying on people's word.

That's plainly evident in Horowitz repeatedly saying he found no evidence of bias; people told him that did not act with bias and Horowitz had to accept that at face value and include that in his report, which is why he just said he DID NOT make an actual "finding" that there was no bias. He could not report that there was bias because nobody admitted they acted with bias was or told him there was bias.

Given your continued and evolving mischaracterizations of the report, your statement that we need to "let the report speak for itself" would be funny if it weren't so disingenuous which is why you are only deserving of ridicule.


.

At this Senate Judiciary Committee hearing, Dianne Feinstein gets IG Michael Horowitz to confirm that there were numerous text messages between FBI agents who were pro-trump as well.

You'd have thought the FBI was one big ole' Hillary party!

The IG report makes clear the FBI took steps -- detrimental to the investigation -- to keep things quiet so as not to tilt election scales.

But Comey went public on Clinton. Twice.

The investigation into FBI leaks to Giuliani ahead of the 2016 investigation has taken longer that the time it took to complete both the Mueller investigation & the Ukraine hearings leading to articles of impeachment. According to the IG, the Giuliani investigation is ongoing.
Why is Barr sitting on that?

Horowitz remains resolute that the conspiracy theories are groundless. He does not, however, deliver a clean bill of health to the FBI either in the FISA process or, we now learn, in leaking anti-Clinton information.

Horowitz remains resolute that the conspiracy theories are groundless. He does not, however, deliver a clean bill of health to the FBI either in the FISA process or, we now learn, in leaking anti-Clinton information.

he went a lot further than not delivering a clean bull of health for the FISA applications. He said no one who touched FISA was vindicated, and that they uncovered “serious problems” with how the FBI suspended Pages civil rights.

Only a select few, motivated by a desire to deny any facts that paint the left in any negative light, could
read that and say Horowitz fell
short of delivering a clean bill of health.

Falling short of the ideal is one thing. Multiple serious problems is something different.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

he went a lot further than not delivering a clean bull of health for the FISA applications. He said no one who touched FISA was vindicated, and that they uncovered “serious problems” with how the FBI suspended Pages civil rights.

Only a select few, motivated by a desire to deny any facts that paint the left in any negative light, could
read that and say Horowitz fell
short of delivering a clean bill of health.

Falling short of the ideal is one thing. Multiple serious problems is something different.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

There is no conspiracy that he found, or any indication of one.
What was done affected both campaigns to some extent and the Clinton campaign prior to the election, thru Comey's statements and the NY office leaks, that both damaged Clinton's election opportunity.

But Floridaman needs to be able to remove Russian sanctions in order to pay his debt for the last election and make his down payment for this one.

he went a lot further than not delivering a clean bull of health for the FISA applications. He said no one who touched FISA was vindicated, and that they uncovered “serious problems” with how the FBI suspended Pages civil rights.

Only a select few, motivated by a desire to deny any facts that paint the left in any negative light, could
read that and say Horowitz fell
short of delivering a clean bill of health.

Falling short of the ideal is one thing. Multiple serious problems is something different.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Noise, yes I’m happy problems were found and hopefully they will be addressed. The race in 2016 and the current impeachment is about a candidate and now current president welcoming, encouraging and even attempting to use military aid as a bargaining chip in helping him in our elections. Ignore the noise the issue is foreign interference in our elections.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

There is no conspiracy that he found, or any indication of one.
What was done affected both campaigns to some extent and the Clinton campaign prior to the election, thru Comey's statements and the NY office leaks, that both damaged Clinton's election opportunity.

But Floridaman needs to be able to remove Russian sanctions in order to pay his debt for the last election and make his down payment for this one.

he found zero evidence of a
politically motivated conspiracy. He did find a large number of serious and basic errors in the FBIs attempt to spy on the Trump campaign. Maybe it was politically motivated, maybe the FBI always made serious and fundamental
mistakes, neither you nor i know which is the case. What we do know, is that according to Horowitz, serious and fundamental
mistakes were made when asking to suspend the civil
rights of an american citizen.

Does that concern you?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

What was done affected both campaigns to some extent and the Clinton campaign prior to the election, thru Comey's statements and the NY office leaks, that both damaged Clinton's election opportunity.


Was there a warrant of some sort concocted to investigate the Clinton campaign? Was there an investigation into the Clinton campaign's ties to Russia started by some illegal counter-intelligent effort based on the connection with the foreign Steele dossier which depended on Russian sources?

Was there an investigation into the Clinton campaign's ties to Russia started by some illegal counter-intelligent effort based on the connection with the foreign Steele dossier which depended on Russian sources?

Did the IG report say there was "illegal counter-intelligence"?

Did the IG report say there was "illegal counter-intelligence"?

In questioning by Graham, Horowitz let slip that phrase.

I'll have to see if I can find that.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Was there a warrant of some sort concocted to investigate the Clinton campaign? Was there an investigation into the Clinton campaign's ties to Russia started by some illegal counter-intelligent effort based on the connection with the foreign Steele dossier which depended on Russian sources?

What investigation before the election did the Obama administration and the FBI keep secret and which one was both leaked and spoken of in public?

Who won the 2016 election?

Who's still running against their 2016 opponent in every campaign rally?

What investigation before the election did the Obama administration and the FBI keep secret and which one was both leaked and spoken of in public?

Who won the 2016 election?

Who's still running against their 2016 opponent in every campaign rally?

You tried to insert the notion that HRC was equally hurt by what the IG found. That is not true. Nor was there any attempt to investigate her even though there was, in the eyes of "many people" abundant reason to do so.

Fact is, the IG report, in terms of its scope and capability, was very damning of what was done in order to investigate the Trump campaign. Even though you try to minimize it. As Barr correctly said, the flimsiest of evidence was used, and continued to be used long after the FBI knew that the surveillance of Carter Page and the Steele dossier were bogus.

Fact is Barr and Durham met with the IG ahead of the release and they offered nothing to change the findings, siding with Barr doesn’t change anything. No deep state. No coup. Interference by foreign powers continues at Trumps request, through his personal attorney, but let’s focus on the past it’s so much more important than the security of the elections.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Fact is Barr and Durham met with the IG ahead of the release and they offered nothing to change the findings, siding with Barr doesn’t change anything. No deep state. No coup. Interference by foreign powers continues at Trumps request, through his personal attorney, but let’s focus on the past it’s so much more important than the security of the elections.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Fact is there was no need to change the facts of the investigation. The only disagreement that Barr and Durham offered was in the notion that there was no evidence of political bias. Barr explained that Horowitz did not have the legal authority to sufficiently explore that issue. Horowitz could only ask questions and accept the answers. He did not have the power to subpoena nor to compel nor to go beyond those working in the DOJ.

As far as the "facts" of the investigation goes, Barr and Durham accepted them, Horowitz's suggestion that there was no political bias is not a factual statement that there was none, but merely a statement that he did not find it. As Barr said, he did not have the tools available to determine it. But that Durham does have the ability to explore the whole issue of criminality well beyond what Horowitz had. And that the Durham investigation will be more thorough and probative of criminality.

And the fact is that Horowitz said that no one involved was exonerated.

Fact is there was no need to change the facts of the investigation. The only disagreement that Barr and Durham offered was in the notion that there was no evidence of political bias. Barr explained that Horowitz did not have the legal authority to sufficiently explore that issue. Horowitz could only ask questions and accept the answers. He did not have the power to subpoena nor to compel nor to go beyond those working in the DOJ.

As far as the "facts" of the investigation goes, Barr and Durham accepted them, Horowitz's suggestion that there was no political bias is not a factual statement that there was none, but merely a statement that he did not find it. As Barr said, he did not have the tools available to determine it. But that Durham does have the ability to explore the whole issue of criminality well beyond what Horowitz had. And that the Durham investigation will be more thorough and probative of criminality.

And the fact is that Horowitz said that no one involved was exonerated.

does anyone have any clue when Durham will release his report?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

does anyone have any clue when Durham will release his report?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Barr hinted that it might be early to mid next summer. But who knows.

Barr hinted that it might be early to mid next summer. But who knows.

thanks. long time.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

does anyone have any clue when Durham will release his report?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

When it’s politically expedient
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

thanks. long time.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

no rush....democraps are destroying themselves and turnng trump into a folk hero...it's immense fun to watch...looking forward to Comey, McCabe, Brennan, Clapper, Strozk, Page...maybe even Obama....all going to jail....:hihi: