Jump to content

Justice Dept. Investigating Justice Dept.


Recommended Posts

53 minutes ago, Swimsailor said:

Um, no...

post #89

”It’s clear the applications were improper”

 

Dog lies, it's what he does. Put the pooch on Ignore

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 472
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

I disagree with that.  Righty means "conservative," does it not?  Conservatives like the truth just fine.  It is Republicans who are truth-resistant, and they are neither righty nor conservative.  The

And it's traitorous pieces of shit like Dog who want to turn the whole thing on its head and blame some fucking fairy-tale "Deep State" on the failings of His President and Lapdogs.

Posted Images

9 minutes ago, Dog said:

Not exactly ...In the case of Russian collusion they found no evidence there was anything wrong. In this case they found no evidence that what was wrong was deliberately wrong.

Bwahahahahahahahahaha!!!!  Holy shit, man.  Just when I thought you couldn't get any dumber.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Dog said:

Not exactly ...In the case of Russian collusion they found no evidence there was anything wrong. In this case they found no evidence that what was wrong was deliberately wrong.

Not exactly ...In the case of Russian collusion, they found no evidence of criminal conspiracy. In other words, they found no evidence that what was wrong was criminally wrong.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Dog said:

Not exactly ...In the case of Russian collusion they found no evidence there was anything wrong. In this case they found no evidence that what was wrong was deliberately wrong.

Would you like some mustard with that pretzel of contorted logic you just spewed out?

I'm still waiting for you to answer Sol's post (#105). I'm wondering if you could twist logic any further, but I'm sure you'll find a way.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Danceswithoctopus said:

Not exactly ...In the case of Russian collusion, they found no evidence of criminal conspiracy. In other words, they found no evidence that what was wrong was criminally wrong.

A bit misleading... or did you not read it, too? The Mueller report detailed many instances of cooperation and coordination between the Trump campaign and the Russians, and detailed that the Trump campaign anticipated benefit from doing so.

Mueller was not empowered by the DOJ to charge Trump with crimes. Because impeachment. Not because he did not commit any.

- DSK

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Dog said:

Not exactly ...In the case of Russian collusion they found no evidence there was anything wrong. In this case they found no evidence that what was wrong was deliberately wrong.

Hmm, you know the Trumpublicans played this card today in the impeachment hearing and it went rather badly. If it can't be proved that Trump was concerned about Biden, and was trying to hurt his election chances, then there is no criminal intent in asking for an announcement of investigation into Biden.... well guess how many times Trump has tweeted about Biden. How many times would it take to indicate that Trump was very concerned with Biden?

Then there's also the 'concern for corruption' card. Also not played well. If Trump was concerned with corruption, why was his preoccupation with an ANNOUNCEMENT of an investigation, not an actual investigation?

Yeah, no evidence. None at all. President Trump is totally innocent! WITCH HUNT!

- DSK

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Steam Flyer said:

A bit misleading... or did you not read it, too? The Mueller report detailed many instances of cooperation and coordination between the Trump campaign and the Russians, and detailed that the Trump campaign anticipated benefit from doing so.

Mueller was not empowered by the DOJ to charge Trump with crimes. Because impeachment. Not because he did not commit any.

- DSK

 

Yeah . . . I was trying to be cute and parallel the puppy's syntax in my post.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Danceswithoctopus said:

Not exactly ...In the case of Russian collusion, they found no evidence of criminal conspiracy. In other words, they found no evidence that what was wrong was criminally wrong.

 

Let me dumb it down a bit. Collusion with the Russians never happened. Seriously fucked up FISA applications did.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

“To spend your life dedicated to protecting America and upholding the Constitution and then to be accused by the President of treason and suggest — and have him further put the suggestion out that the proper penalty for us would be death — I can’t describe to you how revolting that is and quite honestly terrifying,”

— Former acting FBI Director Andrew McCabe, on CNN.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

This matter is far from settled.

“I have the utmost respect for the mission of the Office of Inspector General and the comprehensive work that went into the report prepared by Mr. Horowitz and his staff.  However, our investigation is not limited to developing information from within component parts of the Justice Department.  Our investigation has included developing information from other persons and entities, both in the U.S. and outside of the U.S.  Based on the evidence collected to date, and while our investigation is ongoing, last month we advised the Inspector General that we do not agree with some of the report’s conclusions as to predication and how the FBI case was opened.”  ...John Durham

https://www.justice.gov/usao-ct/pr/statement-us-attorney-john-h-durham

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Dog said:

This matter is far from settled.

Yep. The true Americans haven’t yet had their opportunity to rewrite history.

Elections have consequences, and this investigation hasn’t yet been conducted the way Giuliani and Barr prefer: with revisionist intent, choosing unreliable Ukrainian prosecutors for sources, avoiding uncomfortable facts, and labeling testimony from our best patriots “gossip.”

Let Republicans write the truth and we will get a lie to suit their needs.

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Dog said:

This matter is far from settled.

“I have the utmost respect for the mission of the Office of Inspector General and the comprehensive work that went into the report prepared by Mr. Horowitz and his staff.  However, our investigation is not limited to developing information from within component parts of the Justice Department.  Our investigation has included developing information from other persons and entities, both in the U.S. and outside of the U.S.  Based on the evidence collected to date, and while our investigation is ongoing, last month we advised the Inspector General that we do not agree with some of the report’s conclusions as to predication and how the FBI case was opened.”  ...John Durham

https://www.justice.gov/usao-ct/pr/statement-us-attorney-john-h-durham

 

Under ordinary circumstances, Barr should be having a press conference announcing his retirement. It was Barr who said Trump was being spied on. Isn't it odd that Barr should be questioning the results of an inquiry that included inspecting one million documents, interviewing 100 individuals 170 times in three years of investigation?

DOJ OIG Releases Review of Four FISA Applications and Other Aspects of the
FBI’s Crossfire Hurricane Investigation

Department of Justice (DOJ) Inspector General Michael E. Horowitz announced today the release of a Review of Four FISA Applications and Other Aspects of the FBI’s Crossfire Hurricane Investigation. The DOJ Office of the Inspector General’s (OIG) findings are summarized in the report’s Executive Summary, available at the links below.

During this review, the OIG examined more than one million documents that were in the DOJ’s and FBI’s possession and conducted over 170 interviews involving more than 100 witnesses. The scope of the OIG’s review included:

 The decision to open an FBI investigation on July 31, 2016 known as “Crossfire Hurricane” and four individual cases on current and former members of the Trump campaign, George Papadopoulos, Carter Page, Paul Manafort, and Michael Flynn; the early investigative steps taken; and whether the openings and early steps complied with DOJ and FBI policies (Chapter 3);
 The FBI’s relationship with Christopher Steele, whom the FBI considered to be a confidential human source (CHS); its receipt, use, and evaluation of electronic reports from Steele; and its decision to close Steele as an FBI CHS (Chapters 4- 6);
 Four FBI applications filed with the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) in 2016 and 2017 to conduct Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) surveillance targeting Carter Page; and whether these applications complied with DOJ and FBI policies and satisfied the government’s obligations to the FISC (Chapter 5-8);
 The interactions of DOJ attorney Bruce Ohr with Steele, the FBI, Glenn Simpson of Fusion GPS, and the State Department; whether work Ohr’s spouse performed for Fusion GPS implicated ethical rules applicable to Ohr; and Ohr’s interactions with DOJ attorneys regarding the Manafort criminal case (Chapter 9); and
 The FBI’s use of Undercover Employees (UCEs) and CHSs other than Steele in the Crossfire Hurricane investigation; whether the FBI placed any CHSs within the Trump campaign or tasked any CHSs to report on the Trump campaign; whether the use of
CHSs and UCEs complied with DOJ and FBI policies; and the attendance of a Crossfire Hurricane supervisory agent at counterintelligence briefings given to the 2016 presidential candidates and certain campaign advisors (Chapter 10).
The OIG’s analysis appears in Chapter 11 and the OIG’s conclusions and 9 recommendations to the DOJ and FBI appear in Chapter 12. The FBI’s response to the OIG’s report is included in the report as an attachment.

 https://www.justice.gov/storage/120919-examination.pdf

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, phillysailor said:

Yep. The true Americans haven’t yet had their opportunity to rewrite history.

Elections have consequences, and this investigation hasn’t yet been conducted the way Giuliani and Barr prefer: with revisionist intent, choosing unreliable Ukrainian prosecutors for sources, avoiding uncomfortable facts, and labeling testimony from our best patriots “gossip.”

Let Republicans write the truth and we will get a lie to suit their needs.

Here you go...

“The report relates a trail of terrible judgment and violations of process that should shock Americans who thought better of their premier law-enforcement agency. Readers can look at the detailed executive summary and decide for themselves. But our own initial reading confirms the worst of what we feared about the bureau when it was run by James Comey. The FBI corrupted the secret court process for obtaining warrants to spy on former Trump aide Carter Page. And it did so by supplying the court with false information produced by Christopher Steele, an agent of the Hillary Clinton campaign.”

https://www.wsj.com/articles/a-trail-of-fbi-abuse-11575938300?mod=opinion_lead_pos1

Link to post
Share on other sites

From CNBC: President Donald Trump said a new report from the Justice Department’s internal watchdog is “far worse than I would have ever thought possible.”

The report found no evidence of political bias at the root of the Trump-Russia investigation, and no “deep state” effort to undermine his presidential campaign.

Trump said the report’s findings represent “an attempted overthrow” of the government.

 

I am not siding with a political opinion piece, I am reacting to news. YMMV. 

It seems that Trump is willing to accuse our own federal agencies with sedition based on an inaccurate interpretation of an official report, Trump once again shows how unfit he is as a chief executive of our nation. He seeks to divide America, and his supporters are willing to go along with his destructive nature.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, phillysailor said:

From CNBC: President Donald Trump said a new report from the Justice Department’s internal watchdog is “far worse than I would have ever thought possible.”

The report found no evidence of political bias at the root of the Trump-Russia investigation, and no “deep state” effort to undermine his presidential campaign.

Trump said the report’s findings represent “an attempted overthrow” of the government.

 

I am not siding with a political opinion piece, I am reacting to news. YMMV. 

It seems that Trump is willing to accuse our own federal agencies with sedition based on an inaccurate interpretation of an official report, Trump once again shows how unfit he is as a chief executive of our nation. He seeks to divide America, and his supporters are willing to go along with his destructive nature.

It's also clear from Durham's statement that there is more to come on the question of political bias.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Sol Rosenberg said:

Don’t assume that I haven’t. I didn’t make the assertion, you did. 

Page and paragraph please. 

Have you read it, the entire thing, because by your own stranded if you have not you're uninformed. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Give up Sol. Dogs master has tweeted.

More

"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!"

4,647 replies4,425 retweets14,876 likes
 

Seriously, it's time we all said goodbye to the USA now..Just close the door and walk away until this tragedy reaches it's conclusion.

When the POTUS can regurgitate such blatant falsehoods from media lackeys, you're done.

  • “You have to look at the 17 instances of misconduct cited in the Report, they are very bad. The FISA Court was clearly taken for a ride on this, a failure of the FBI up and fown the chain of command. It’s about as strong a medicine as I’ve seen in a report of this kind...

    2,757 replies5,967 retweets19,518 likes
    Reply
     2.8K
     
    Retweet
     6.0K
     
     
    Like
     20K
kUuht00m_bigger.jpgDonald J. TrumpVerified account @realDonaldTrump
FollowFollow @realDonaldTrump
More

....in a very long time. The FBI has had some dark day in its past, but nothing like this. This was VERY SERIOUS MISCONDUCT ON THE PART OF THE FBI.” @brithume @BretBaier Are you listening Comey, McCabe, lovers Lisa & Peter, the beautiful Ohr family, Brennan, Clapper & many more?

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Dog said:

Have you read it, the entire thing, because by your own stranded if you have not you're uninformed. 

I haven’t made an assertion, you have. You can try to change the subject but I’m not a little kid looking for a GI Joe Doll under a tree so don’t try to gaslight me.

So you cannot support your statement. Surprise surprise.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Sol Rosenberg said:

I haven’t made an assertion, you have. You can try to change the subject but I’m not a little kid looking for a GI Joe Doll under a tree so don’t try to gaslight me.

So you cannot support your statement. Surprise surprise.

 

Yes I did. I provided a cite now go read it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Dog said:

It's also clear from Durham's statement that there is more to come on the question of political bias.

But the clearest of all is that there was no misconduct and no political bias in the decision to investigate the Trump Campaign

Spin that away, bullshitter. Or just flat-out lie.

- DSK

Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, Dog said:

It's also clear from Durham's statement that there is more to come on the question of political bias.

 

1 hour ago, phillysailor said:

Yep. The true Americans haven’t yet had their opportunity to rewrite history.

Elections have consequences, and this investigation hasn’t yet been conducted the way Giuliani and Barr prefer: with revisionist intent, choosing unreliable Ukrainian prosecutors for sources, avoiding uncomfortable facts, and labeling testimony from our best patriots “gossip.”

Let Republicans write the truth and we will get a lie to suit their needs.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Steam Flyer said:

But the clearest of all is that there was no misconduct and no political bias in the decision to investigate the Trump Campaign

Spin that away, bullshitter. Or just flat-out lie.

- DSK

No, that is not clear...What the report says is that they did not find documented or testimonial evidence of political bias (and further that the explanations for the errors were unsatisfactory), not that there was no political bias.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Dog said:
15 minutes ago, Steam Flyer said:

But the clearest of all is that there was no misconduct and no political bias in the decision to investigate the Trump Campaign

Spin that away, bullshitter. Or just flat-out lie.

 

No, that is not clear..   ...

Yes it is.

You cannot accept the facts. Not accepting the facts does not change them.

- DSK

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Danceswithoctopus said:

Not exactly ...In the case of Russian collusion, they found no evidence of criminal conspiracy. In other words, they found no evidence that what was wrong was criminally wrong.

 

I would have to go back and do research, so I may be wrong, but I think it was described as "insufficient" instead of "no" with regard to the evidence of conspiracy.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Dog said:

It's also clear from Durham's statement that there is more to come on the question of political bias.

There just HAS to be political bias so we're going to find it no matter how many lies we have to tell!  

Fuck off dog.  You and you're party are giant pieces of lying shit.

I have a an old family friend.  He's a successful doctor, hospital administrator and was in the state legislature many years.  He's still active in the Republican party.  Several times over the past year he has shared blatantly false news stories on FB.  Stories like Michael Jordan running for Senate and shit like that.  He gets several likes and shares before I convince him to delete the post.  

But this is what you fuckwhits do...just throw shit out there and eventually people will believe it.  How can you stand being such and incompetent human being?  Why do you love being conned so much?  Did Donnie promise you would be a billionaire?  Or is it simply that you hate brown people and fear your whiteness won't win you any points in the world anymore?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Swimsailor said:

There just HAS to be political bias so we're going to find it no matter how many lies we have to tell!  

Fuck off dog.  You and you're party are giant pieces of lying shit.

I have a an old family friend.  He's a successful doctor, hospital administrator and was in the state legislature many years.  He's still active in the Republican party.  Several times over the past year he has shared blatantly false news stories on FB.  Stories like Michael Jordan running for Senate and shit like that.  He gets several likes and shares before I convince him to delete the post.  

But this is what you fuckwhits do...just throw shit out there and eventually people will believe it.  How can you stand being such and incompetent human being?  Why do you love being conned so much?  Did Donnie promise you would be a billionaire?  Or is it simply that you hate brown people and fear your whiteness won't win you any points in the world anymore?

Gossip

Link to post
Share on other sites

Add Christopher Wray to those saying you have to be careful whose opinions and interpretations you listen to. He thinks you shouldn't trust the president. From WaPo:

"In an interview with ABC News, Wray declared there was “no indication” that Ukraine interfered in the 2016 election. And then he went a step further: He urged people to be savvier consumers of news.

Not to put too fine a point on it, but he’s basically saying he doesn’t want them listening to the president of the United States.

“We have no information that indicates that Ukraine interfered with the 2016 presidential election,” Wray said, adding: “Well, look, there’s all kinds of people saying all kinds of things out there. I think it’s important for the American people to be thoughtful consumers of information and to think about the sources of it and to think about the support and predication for what they hear.”

 

But, the  pseudo-religious and the willfully ignorant will choose to believe the liar.

Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, bridhb said:
16 hours ago, Danceswithoctopus said:

Not exactly ...In the case of Russian collusion, they found no evidence of criminal conspiracy. In other words, they found no evidence that what was wrong was criminally wrong.

 

I would have to go back and do research, so I may be wrong, but I think it was described as "insufficient" instead of "no" with regard to the evidence of conspiracy.

If you're talking about Mueller he detailed several instances of coordination between Russians and the Trump campaign, between Wikileaks and the Trump campaign, between Wikileaks and the Russians; and then went on to detail further lines of investigation he was blocked by Trump from pursuing. He detailed that the Trump campaign cooperated with the Russians and detailed their own plan that they intended to benefit from this.

"Collusion" is not a legal term. Therefor the Trumpalos like to holler "No Collusion!!" at every opportunity. The only thing it proves is that they're Trumpalos.

- DSK

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Steam Flyer said:

If you're talking about Mueller he detailed several instances of coordination between Russians and the Trump campaign, between Wikileaks and the Trump campaign, between Wikileaks and the Russians; and then went on to detail further lines of investigation he was blocked by Trump from pursuing. He detailed that the Trump campaign cooperated with the Russians..... Bullshit and detailed their own plan that they intended to benefit from this. 

"Collusion" is not a legal term. Therefor the Trumpalos like to holler "No Collusion!!" at every opportunity. The only thing it proves is that they're Trumpalos.

- DSK

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, Swimsailor said:

Righties hate the truth.

I disagree with that.  Righty means "conservative," does it not?  Conservatives like the truth just fine.  It is Republicans who are truth-resistant, and they are neither righty nor conservative.  They have become a cult of bullshit. 

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Sol Rosenberg said:

I disagree with that.  Righty means "conservative," does it not?  Conservatives like the truth just fine.  It is Republicans who are truth-resistant, and they are neither righty nor conservative.  They have become a cult of bullshit. 

Drip drip drip

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Sol Rosenberg said:

Yup, speak of bullshit and the Beetlejuice of spreading bullshit shows up to bullshit some more.  

Yup...Drip drip drip...Two years and 200 plus pages of RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA bullshit

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Dog said:

Read it. 

The report is 470+ pages. Are you claiming that you read it? Just curious how you could get through this report and not the Mueller report, which is about the same size.

Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Dog said:

No...It's clear the applications were improper. Horowitz just did not find evidence that the errors were deliberate.

 

Lemme guess, still no page and paragraph where we can find support for your assertion?  Just a whole bunch of noise and deflection. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, bhyde said:

The report is 470+ pages. Are you claiming that you read it? Just curious how you could get through this report and not the Mueller report, which is about the same size.

No...I read the executive summary (Which is what I read of the Mueller Report) but my critics here dismissed my views on the Mueller Report's findings because I hadn't read the entire thing. By their own standard they need to read the entire IG report before offering an opinion on it.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Dog said:

No...I read the executive summary (Which is what I read of the Mueller Report) but my critics here dismissed my views on the Mueller Report's findings because I hadn't read the entire thing. By their own standard they need to read the entire IG report before offering an opinion on it.

 

 

So where in the Summary did you find that the "applications were improper?" I didn't see that.

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Dog said:

Yup...Drip drip drip...Two years and 200 plus pages of RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA bullshit

Yes, “collusion” (read conspiracy) was not found by Mueller. But I think it’s fair to say that Team Trump  crept right up to the line on that; that Trump knew about it, was all for it and that he did nothing to flag the foreign meddling in our elections to the proper authorities. Not exemplary behavior in my view. 

Would you agree Dog?

Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, bhyde said:

So where in the Summary did you find that the "applications were improper?" I didn't see that.

We identified at least 17 significant errors or omissions in the Carter Page FISA applications, and many additional errors in the Woods Procedures. These errors and omissions resulted from case agents providing wrong or incomplete infor mation to OI and failing to flag important issues for discussion. While we did not find documentary or testimonial evidence of intentional misconduct on the part of the case agents who assisted OI in preparing the applications, or the agents and supervisors who performed the Woods Procedures, we also did not receive satisfactory explanations for the errors or problems we identified. In most instances, t he agents and supervisors told us that they either did not know or recall why the information was not shared with OI, that the failure to do so may have been an oversight, that they did not recognize at t he time the relevance of t he information to t he FISA application, or that they did not believe the missing information to be significant . On this last point, we believe that case agents may have improperly substituted their own j udgments in place of the j udgment of OI, or in place of the court, to weigh t_he probative va lue of t he information. Further, the failure to update OI on all significant case developments relevant to the FISA applications led us to conclude that the agents and supervisors did not give appropriate attention or treatment to t he facts that cut against probable cause, or reassess t he information supporting probable cause as the investigation progressed. The agents and SSAs also did not follow, or appear to even know, the requirements in t he Woods Procedures to reverify the factual assertions from previous applications that are repeated in renewal applications and verify source characterization statements with the CHS handling agent and document the verification in the Woods File. That so many basic and fundamental errors were made by three separate, hand- picked teams on one of the most sensitive FBI investigations that was briefed to the highest levels within the FBI, and that FBI officials expected would eventually be subjected to close scrutiny, raised significant questions regarding the FBI chain of command's management and supervision of the FISA process. FBI Headquarters established a chain of command for Crossfire Hurricane that included close supervision by senior CD managers, who then briefed FBI leadership throughout the investigation. Although we do not expect managers and supervisors to know every fact about an investigation, or senior officials to know all the details of cases about which they are briefed, in a sensitive, high-priority matter like this one, it is reasonable to expect that they will take the necessary steps to ensure that they are sufficiently familiar with the facts and circumstances supporting and potentially undermining a FISA application in order to provide effective oversight, consistent with their level of supervisory responsibility. We concluded that the information that was known to the managers, supervisors, and senior officials should have resulted in questions being raised regarding the reliability of the Steele reporting and the probable cause supporting the FISA applications, but did not. In our view, this was a failure of not only the operational team, but also of the managers and supervisors, including senior officials, in the chain of command. For these reasons, we recommend that the FBI review the performance of the employees who had responsibility for the preparation, Woods review, or approval of the FISA applications, as well as the managers and supervisors in the chain of command of the Carter Page investigation, including senior officials, and take any action deemed appropriate.

Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Sean said:

Yes, “collusion” (read conspiracy) was not found by Mueller. But I think it’s fair to say that Team Trump  crept right up to the line on that; that Trump knew about it, was all for it and that he did nothing to flag the foreign meddling in our elections to the proper authorities. Not exemplary behavior in my view. 

Would you agree Dog?

The Trump Tower meeting was problematic. The lesson of 2016 is that when procuring dirt on your opponent from the Russians use intermediaries.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Page 17 of the E.S. First paragraph:

Quote

Finally, we also found no documentary or testimonial evidence t hat political bias or improper motivations influenced the FBI's decision to use CHSs or UCEs to interact with Trump campaign officials in the Crossfire Hurricane investigation.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, Dog said:

The Trump Tower meeting was problematic. The lesson of 2016 is that when procuring dirt on your opponent from the Russians use intermediaries.

Yes, that’s actually true.

The president should also not be directly involved in specific “anti-corruption” investigations which directly benefit him.

These sorts of ethical boundaries exist for a reason. Using campaign staff to negotiate with foreign countries, or subverting our national foreign policy for personal gain is wrong, and may indeed be subject to criminal charges or Articles of Impeachment.

I’m glad you can recognize reality, albeit only after a couple of years.

Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, Dog said:

We identified at least 17 significant errors or omissions in the Carter Page FISA applications, and many additional errors in the Woods Procedures. These errors and omissions resulted from case agents providing wrong or incomplete infor mation to OI and failing to flag important issues for discussion. While we did not find documentary or testimonial evidence of intentional misconduct on the part of the case agents who assisted OI in preparing the applications, or the agents and supervisors who performed the Woods Procedures, we also did not receive satisfactory explanations for the errors or problems we identified. In most instances, t he agents and supervisors told us that they either did not know or recall why the information was not shared with OI, that the failure to do so may have been an oversight, that they did not recognize at t he time the relevance of t he information to t he FISA application, or that they did not believe the missing information to be significant . On this last point, we believe that case agents may have improperly substituted their own j udgments in place of the j udgment of OI, or in place of the court, to weigh t_he probative va lue of t he information. Further, the failure to update OI on all significant case developments relevant to the FISA applications led us to conclude that the agents and supervisors did not give appropriate attention or treatment to t he facts that cut against probable cause, or reassess t he information supporting probable cause as the investigation progressed. The agents and SSAs also did not follow, or appear to even know, the requirements in t he Woods Procedures to reverify the factual assertions from previous applications that are repeated in renewal applications and verify source characterization statements with the CHS handling agent and document the verification in the Woods File. That so many basic and fundamental errors were made by three separate, hand- picked teams on one of the most sensitive FBI investigations that was briefed to the highest levels within the FBI, and that FBI officials expected would eventually be subjected to close scrutiny, raised significant questions regarding the FBI chain of command's management and supervision of the FISA process. FBI Headquarters established a chain of command for Crossfire Hurricane that included close supervision by senior CD managers, who then briefed FBI leadership throughout the investigation. Although we do not expect managers and supervisors to know every fact about an investigation, or senior officials to know all the details of cases about which they are briefed, in a sensitive, high-priority matter like this one, it is reasonable to expect that they will take the necessary steps to ensure that they are sufficiently familiar with the facts and circumstances supporting and potentially undermining a FISA application in order to provide effective oversight, consistent with their level of supervisory responsibility. We concluded that the information that was known to the managers, supervisors, and senior officials should have resulted in questions being raised regarding the reliability of the Steele reporting and the probable cause supporting the FISA applications, but did not. In our view, this was a failure of not only the operational team, but also of the managers and supervisors, including senior officials, in the chain of command. For these reasons, we recommend that the FBI review the performance of the employees who had responsibility for the preparation, Woods review, or approval of the FISA applications, as well as the managers and supervisors in the chain of command of the Carter Page investigation, including senior officials, and take any action deemed appropriate.

Sorry, I'm still not seeing where it says the FISA applications were improper.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, phillysailor said:

Yes, that’s actually true.

The president should also not be directly involved in specific “anti-corruption” investigations which directly benefit him.

These sorts of ethical boundaries exist for a reason. Using campaign staff and a nations foreign policy for personal gain is wrong, and may indeed be subject to criminal charges or Articles of Impeachment.

I’m glad you can recognize reality, albeit only after a couple of years.

That's not happening, we know which side of the equivocation fence he will fall on. That was just a feint.

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, phillysailor said:

Yes, that’s actually true.

The president should also not be directly involved in specific “anti-corruption” investigations which directly benefit him.

These sorts of ethical boundaries exist for a reason. Using campaign staff to negotiate with foreign countries, or subverting our national foreign policy for personal gain is wrong, and may indeed be subject to criminal charges or Articles of Impeachment.

I’m glad you can recognize reality, albeit only after a couple of years.

Thus the President must use private lawyers who are career politicians and have ties to foreign criminals to commit quid pro quo, investigate his political rivals and conspire with foreign governments.  So says @Dog.    Its like laundering money.  Once it goes through the laundromat it magically becomes clean.   Perfectly legal and ethical according to some people.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Dog said:

Really...You think everything there is proper?

Here's a good read by Jonathan Turley.

https://thehill.com/opinion/judiciary/473709-horowitz-report-is-damning-for-the-fbi-and-unsettling-for-the-rest-of-us

Cite please.

Here's my cite.

It doesn't say that. 

Here, read something else. 

Sorry bullshitter, I'm busy. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Lark said:

Thus the President must use private lawyers who are career politicians and have ties to foreign criminals to commit quid pro quo, investigate his political rivals and conspire with foreign governments.  So says @Dog.    Its like laundering money.  Once it goes through the laundromat it magically becomes clean.   Perfectly legal and ethical according to some people.

I’d say those actions amount to subverting our national foreign policy for personal gain, hence the personal lawyer being used to negotiate things of value from a foreign country and rightfully bringing Articles of Impeachment.

If @dog would consider the precedent set by Trumps actions and consider its impact when repeated by a Democrat he might begin to understand the ugly ramifications of his opinions.

Thats what I mean about it taking him a few years to recognize reality.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, phillysailor said:

I’d say those actions amount to subverting our national foreign policy for personal gain, hence the personal lawyer being used to negotiate things of value from a foreign country and rightfully bringing Articles of Impeachment.

If @dog would consider the precedent set by Trumps actions and consider its impact when repeated by a Democrat he might begin to understand the ugly ramifications of his opinions.

Thats what I mean about it taking him a few years to recognize reality.

What?   I suppose a lawyer isn't supposed to launder money for his customers either?    https://www.inquirer.com/business/law/j-michael-farrell-philadelphia-attorney-disbarred-money-laundering-20191204.html    Aren't lawyers suppose to act as an intermediary when the State Department is committing crimes for the President?    Of course it will be illegal if a Democrat does it, especially if private Email is used.    We must assume that Giuliani used only State Department phones and email servers to protect national security while negotiating with foreign powers on behalf of Trump's State Department to help assure Trump's most feared political adversary would receive bad publicity at a strategic time.   If he used unsecure communications to solicit foreign campaign aid in exchange for delayed distribution of Congressionally authorized taxpayer money it would have been bad.    

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, phillysailor said:

I’d say those actions amount to subverting our national foreign policy for personal gain, hence the personal lawyer being used to negotiate things of value from a foreign country and rightfully bringing Articles of Impeachment.

If @dog would consider the precedent set by Trumps actions and consider its impact when repeated by a Democrat he might begin to understand the ugly ramifications of his opinions.

Thats what I mean about it taking him a few years to recognize reality.

Dog doesn't strike me as a rummy or a dummy...my guess would be that he recognizes reality just fine, he just chooses to bullshit. Just wait until a democRAT is in the White House and he'll rediscover his desire for limited Presidential power, honesty, fiscal responsibility, etc...he'll just forget the name "Donald Trump" when the next guy is sworn in. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Dog said:

Let me dumb it down a bit. Collusion with the Russians never happened. Seriously fucked up FISA applications did.

Let's put this one to rest. The IG said that the FISA applications had some errors. Those errors were not significant enough to effect the outcome of the FISA process. There was no bias on behalf of the FBI personnel involved.

So - FISA warrants were NOT improper. Gottit?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, Dog said:

Really...You think everything there is proper?

Here's a good read by Jonathan Turley.

https://thehill.com/opinion/judiciary/473709-horowitz-report-is-damning-for-the-fbi-and-unsettling-for-the-rest-of-us

Where does it say the FISA application was improper?

As to the Turley opinion - Was any crime committed by the FBI?

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Dog said:

Let me dumb it down a bit. Collusion with the Russians never happened. Seriously fucked up FISA applications did.

You've dumbed it down to your own level. And inaccurately. You may get some entertainment sticking to your talking point that collusion never happened, but that is NOT what the facts and the Mueller Report said at all.

As to the FISA applications, there were problems, but none were "seriously fucked up".

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, bhyde said:
2 hours ago, Dog said:

We identified at least 17 significant errors or omissions in the Carter Page FISA applications, and many additional errors in the Woods Procedures. These errors and omissions resulted from case agents providing wrong or incomplete infor mation to OI and failing to flag important issues for discussion. While we did not find documentary or testimonial evidence of intentional misconduct on the part of the case agents who assisted OI in preparing the applications, or the agents and supervisors who performed the Woods Procedures, we also did not receive satisfactory explanations for the errors or problems we identified. In most instances, t he agents and supervisors told us that they either did not know or recall why the information was not shared with OI, that the failure to do so may have been an oversight, that they did not recognize at t he time the relevance of t he information to t he FISA application, or that they did not believe the missing information to be significant . On this last point, we believe that case agents may have improperly substituted their own j udgments in place of the j udgment of OI, or in place of the court, to weigh t_he probative va lue of t he information. Further, the failure to update OI on all significant case developments relevant to the FISA applications led us to conclude that the agents and supervisors did not give appropriate attention or treatment to t he facts that cut against probable cause, or reassess t he information supporting probable cause as the investigation progressed. The agents and SSAs also did not follow, or appear to even know, the requirements in t he Woods Procedures to reverify the factual assertions from previous applications that are repeated in renewal applications and verify source characterization statements with the CHS handling agent and document the verification in the Woods File. That so many basic and fundamental errors were made by three separate, hand- picked teams on one of the most sensitive FBI investigations that was briefed to the highest levels within the FBI, and that FBI officials expected would eventually be subjected to close scrutiny, raised significant questions regarding the FBI chain of command's management and supervision of the FISA process. FBI Headquarters established a chain of command for Crossfire Hurricane that included close supervision by senior CD managers, who then briefed FBI leadership throughout the investigation. Although we do not expect managers and supervisors to know every fact about an investigation, or senior officials to know all the details of cases about which they are briefed, in a sensitive, high-priority matter like this one, it is reasonable to expect that they will take the necessary steps to ensure that they are sufficiently familiar with the facts and circumstances supporting and potentially undermining a FISA application in order to provide effective oversight, consistent with their level of supervisory responsibility. We concluded that the information that was known to the managers, supervisors, and senior officials should have resulted in questions being raised regarding the reliability of the Steele reporting and the probable cause supporting the FISA applications, but did not. In our view, this was a failure of not only the operational team, but also of the managers and supervisors, including senior officials, in the chain of command. For these reasons, we recommend that the FBI review the performance of the employees who had responsibility for the preparation, Woods review, or approval of the FISA applications, as well as the managers and supervisors in the chain of command of the Carter Page investigation, including senior officials, and take any action deemed appropriate.

Sorry, I'm still not seeing where it says the FISA applications were improper.

Clear enough?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Pretty good takedown of Dog and his fellow travelers -

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2019/12/there-was-never-deep-state-conspiracy-get-trump/603361/

The ‘Russia Hoax’ Is a Hoax

A report by the FBI inspector general debunks the claims that the investigation into political interference by the Kremlin was a left-wing conspiracy to depose the president.

Excerpt -

If you are following mainstream news outlets, you know that in 2016, Donald Trump benefited from a Russian hacking and disinformation campaign designed to help him get elected even as he sought permission from the Russian government to build a hotel in Moscow. You know that he deflected blame from Russia for that campaign, even as he sought to benefit from it politically. You know that shortly after the election, Trump told Russian officials in the Oval Office that he didn’t mind their efforts on his behalf, inviting further interference. And you know that while those acts may not have amounted to criminal conspiracy, the president’s insistence that there was “no collusion” flies in the face of established facts.

If you are ensconced in the pro-Trump propaganda universe of Fox News and its spawn, you know something different. You know that the Russia investigation was a “hoax” developed by the “deep state” and the media, an attempt by a fifth column within the FBI to engage in a “coup,” a conspiracy, a frame job, “nothing less than the attempted overthrow of the U.S. government.” Any evidence of wrongdoing by the president, in this universe, has been manufactured by Trump’s shadowy and powerful enemies—George Soros, liberals in the FBI, Barack Obama.

The belief that Trump is the victim of a vast and ongoing conspiracy is a crucial element of the president’s enduring appeal to his supporters. If the allegations against the president are all completely false, then his supporters can continue to back him with a clear conscience, since anything and everything negative they hear about the president must be false. The consistency of that message is more important than the actual details, which frequently end up contradicting complex explanations for the president’s innocence that are often incongruous with each other, such as the insistence that Robert Mueller’s investigation was a “total exoneration” of the president but also “total bullshit.”

Link to post
Share on other sites

Bill Barr -

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/justice-department/barr-thinks-fbi-may-have-acted-bad-faith-probing-trump-n1098986

Excerpt -

In an exclusive interview with NBC News, Barr essentially dismissed the findings of the Justice Department's inspector general that there was no evidence of political bias in the launching of the Russia probe, saying that his hand-picked prosecutor, John Durham, will have the last word on the matter.

"I think our nation was turned on its head for three years based on a completely bogus narrative that was largely fanned and hyped by a completely irresponsible press," Barr said. "I think there were gross abuses …and inexplicable behavior that is intolerable in the FBI."

"I think that leaves open the possibility that there was bad faith."

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, phillysailor said:

I’d say those actions amount to subverting our national foreign policy for personal gain, hence the personal lawyer being used to negotiate things of value from a foreign country and rightfully bringing Articles of Impeachment.

If @dog would consider the precedent set by Trumps actions and consider its impact when repeated by a Democrat he might begin to understand the ugly ramifications of his opinions.

Thats what I mean about it taking him a few years to recognize reality.

What things of value?

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Sean said:

Bill Barr -

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/justice-department/barr-thinks-fbi-may-have-acted-bad-faith-probing-trump-n1098986

Excerpt -

In an exclusive interview with NBC News, Barr essentially dismissed the findings of the Justice Department's inspector general that there was no evidence of political bias in the launching of the Russia probe, saying that his hand-picked prosecutor, John Durham, will have the last word on the matter.

"I think our nation was turned on its head for three years based on a completely bogus narrative that was largely fanned and hyped by a completely irresponsible press," Barr said. "I think there were gross abuses …and inexplicable behavior that is intolerable in the FBI."

"I think that leaves open the possibility that there was bad faith."

 

Maybe the IG should investigate Bill Barr for evidence of political bias.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Danceswithoctopus said:

You've dumbed it down to your own level. And inaccurately. You may get some entertainment sticking to your talking point that collusion never happened, but that is NOT what the facts and the Mueller Report said at all.

As to the FISA applications, there were problems, but none were "seriously fucked up".

Well 2 years and $34 million  later we still have no collusion. But what we do have is seriously fucked up FISA applications.