|
|
Post by oilsooner on May 31, 2018 16:09:13 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by trumped on May 31, 2018 16:18:50 GMT -6
I am thinking these folks were/are worse than the mobsters because who watches the watchers? These are the highest level crooks in the world due to level of access and power at their disposal (positions they held/hold)
|
|
|
|
Post by trumped on May 31, 2018 16:53:52 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on May 31, 2018 19:08:15 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on May 31, 2018 19:09:58 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by sooner98 on May 31, 2018 21:38:53 GMT -6
On Thursday, retired FBI agent James Gagliano asked why the DNC is resisting to surrender its compromised servers if they were truly the victim of a hack. Why would the FBI conduct a pre-dawn raid of Paul Manafort's house with guns drawn (you know, just in case Mrs. Manafort was there in her pajamas waiting for them with an AK-47), to obtain documents when Manafort, by all accounts, was cooperating with the investigation...meanwhile a raid on DNC headquarters to obtain probably the single most important piece of hard evidence that could clear up this entire thing (the DNC server that was allegedly "hacked by Russians") is completely off limits to any kind of evaluation by Mueller's team?
The answer of course is that Mueller is a corrupt hack who isn't interested in any kind of justice at all.
"But, they aren't investigating Trump, they're investigating the Russians! It's a counter-intelligence investigation! They did it to protect Trump! It was totally proper and legal!"
Yeah, complete and utter horseshit.
|
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on May 31, 2018 21:42:24 GMT -6
Interesting twist here:
John Solomon from The Hill told Sean Hannity on Thursday night the Obama White House attempted to take over the Russian-collusion investigation.
John Solomon: I’m putting finishing touches on a column that I think will come out tomorrow. And it will reveal two really important things. The efforts to begin targeting and reaching out to Trump campaign officials to gain intelligence on Russia that would ultimately justify the investigation began weeks and maybe months before the FBI had a formal predicate. And that’s very important the rules say you can’t use sources until you have a predicated investigation. The investigation is July 31, 2016. My sources and documents that I will be able to make public tomorrow will show that there were contacts going on by people identified as informers, informants, people who provided information began much, much earlier than July 31st. That’s the first part. The second part is as the investigation was just starting to ramp up there are internal FBI documents showing FBI agents talking about the White House trying to take over the investigation. Fears that the Justice Department were going to leak for political reasons and their own personal fear…
Sean Hannity: Slow down. When you say the White House you mean the Obama White House- they were attempting to take over the investigation.
John Solomon: That’s what these messages say.
Sean Hannity: These are FBI messages and this is the Obama White House. How high up are we talking about here?
John Solomon: We don’t know the messages are just what they are.
|
|
|
|
Post by trumped on May 31, 2018 22:05:15 GMT -6
This is such a slam dunk case but the deep state is doing everything to fight their sinking ship. They have their hound dogs and the MSM looking for any scrap to divert attention, like these scripted acts like calling Ivanka a cunt to get attention changed.
Look for some false flag events soon to keep it diverted. This was an attempt at a coup in the USA. And so many are still oblivious. It blows my mind hiw corrupt this has been. We are in a fight for our country from within.
|
|
|
|
Post by sooner98 on May 31, 2018 22:35:41 GMT -6
It's funny how the Democrats keep yammering about how Trump is such a "threat to democracy", when in reality, it is THEM who represent the threat to democracy by wanting to throw out the certified results of a presidential election for no good reason whatsoever (for you Democrats who are having trouble understanding, the electoral process by which the people choose an elected official is called "democracy"...please let me know if I need to dumb that down for you even more).
A good rule of thumb for when a Democrat politician or pundit is talking, is to assume they are either lying, or projecting (accusing the opposition of exactly the crimes and misdeeds that you yourself are guilty of), or both.
|
|
|
|
Post by oilsooner on Jun 1, 2018 5:42:50 GMT -6
Interesting twist here: John Solomon from The Hill told Sean Hannity on Thursday night the Obama White House attempted to take over the Russian-collusion investigation. John Solomon: I’m putting finishing touches on a column that I think will come out tomorrow. And it will reveal two really important things. The efforts to begin targeting and reaching out to Trump campaign officials to gain intelligence on Russia that would ultimately justify the investigation began weeks and maybe months before the FBI had a formal predicate. And that’s very important the rules say you can’t use sources until you have a predicated investigation. The investigation is July 31, 2016. My sources and documents that I will be able to make public tomorrow will show that there were contacts going on by people identified as informers, informants, people who provided information began much, much earlier than July 31st. That’s the first part. The second part is as the investigation was just starting to ramp up there are internal FBI documents showing FBI agents talking about the White House trying to take over the investigation. Fears that the Justice Department were going to leak for political reasons and their own personal fear… Sean Hannity: Slow down. When you say the White House you mean the Obama White House- they were attempting to take over the investigation. John Solomon: That’s what these messages say. Sean Hannity: These are FBI messages and this is the Obama White House. How high up are we talking about here? John Solomon: We don’t know the messages are just what they are. The doors may be about to come off. Not sure if this is all true, but if so, Comey, Clapper, et al. are done. Claims at the following link (strzok texts as evidence) that the investigation started in April 2016. Popadopolous meeting in London with Austrialias diplomat, where he allegedly told them he knew Russia had Hillary’s emails (which was the alleged catalyst to start the entire Russia narrative, AND put a spy in Trumps campaign) didn’t happen until May of 2016. Was the counter intel op in progress before May 2016? Was there counter intel assets inserted into Trumps campaign before May 2016? Comey and the rest better hope not. threadreaderapp.com/thread/1002215604336709632.htmlThat link alone doesn’t mean much. But, that plus what you have here does start to look like there could be smoke. Will be I nteresting to see how it plays out. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk |
|
|
|
Post by trumped on Jun 1, 2018 11:10:34 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Jun 1, 2018 11:44:16 GMT -6
thehill.com/opinion/white-house/390228-london-bridges-falling-down-curious-origins-of-fbis-trump-russia-probeThe bridge to the Russia investigation wasn’t erected in Moscow during the summer of the 2016 election. It originated earlier, 1,700 miles away in London, where foreign figures contacted Trump campaign advisers and provided the FBI with hearsay allegations of Trump-Russia collusion, bureau documents and interviews of government insiders reveal. These contacts in spring 2016 — some from trusted intelligence sources, others from Hillary Clinton supporters — occurred well before FBI headquarters authorized an official counterintelligence investigation on July 31, 2016. The new timeline makes one wonder: Did the FBI follow its rules governing informants? Here’s what a congressman and an intelligence expert think. “The revelation of purposeful contact initiated by alleged confidential human sources prior to any FBI investigation is troublesome,” Rep. Mark Meadows (R-N.C.), an ally of President Trump and chairman of a House subcommittee that’s taking an increasingly aggressive oversight role in the scandal, told me. “This new information begs the questions: Who were the informants working for, who were they reporting to and why has the [Department of Justice] and FBI gone to such great lengths to hide these contacts?” Kevin Brock agrees that Congress has legitimate questions. The retired FBI assistant director for intelligence supervised the rewriting of bureau rules governing sources, under then-director Robert Mueller a decade ago. Those rules forbid the FBI from directing a human source to target an American until a formally predicated investigative file is opened. Brock sees oddities in how the Russia case began. “These types of investigations aren’t normally run by assistant directors and deputy directors at headquarters,” he told me. “All that happens normally in a field office, but that isn’t the case here and so it becomes a red flag. Congress would have legitimate oversight interests in the conditions and timing of the targeting of a confidential human source against a U.S. person.” Other congressional and law enforcement sources express similar concerns, heightened by FBI communications suggesting political pressures around the time the probe officially opened. “We’re not going to withstand the pressure soon,” FBI lawyer Lisa Page texted fellow agent Peter Strzok on Aug. 3, 2016, days after Strzok opened the official probe and returned from a trip to London. At the time, they were dealing with simultaneous challenges: the wrap-up of the Hillary Clinton email scandal and the start of the Russia-Trump probe. Over several days, they exchanged texts that appear to express fears of political meddling or leaking by the Obama White House, the Department of Justice (DOJ) and the CIA. “This is MUCH more tasty for one of those DOJ aholes to leak,” Strzok wrote as the two FBI colleagues — then having an affair, the bureau later told Congress — debated how long they could delay a CIA-FBI meeting so as to “not play into the agency’s BS game.” They voiced alarm when an FBI colleague — “Liz” — suggested the Obama White House was about to hijack the investigation. “Went well, best we could have expected,” Strzok texted Page after an Aug. 5, 2016, meeting. “Other than Liz quote ‘the White House is running this.’ ” Page then texted to assure Strzok of a paper trail showing the FBI in charge: “We got emails that say otherwise.” The next day, they went into further detail about their White House concerns. “So maybe not the best national security president, but a genuinely good and decent human being,” Page texted Strzok, referencing former President Obama. Strzok replied: “Yeah, I like him. Just not a fan of the weakness globally. Was thinking about what the administration will be willing to do re Russia.” In the end, the FBI secretly investigated the Trump campaign for months, engaging with other agencies on a more limited inquiry of Russian efforts to hack Clinton’s campaign. The summer 2016 text messages are bookends to a series of London contacts that pre-date the official opening of the investigation and produced the evidence the FBI used that fall to justify its court-ordered surveillance of presidential campaign figures. According to documents and government interviews, one of the FBI’s most senior counterintelligence agents visited London the first week of May 2016. Congress never got the FBI to explain that trip — but, soon after it, one of the most consequential moments of the scandal occurred: On May 10, Australian diplomat Alexander Downer met in a London bar with Trump adviser George Papadopoulos, who boasted of knowing that Russia would release dirt on Clinton. That contact was not immediately reported to U.S. intelligence. By early June, a second overture to a Trump campaign adviser occurred in London. In a “Dear Carter” email, a Cambridge University graduate student invited Trump campaign adviser Carter Page to attend a popular July security conference in London.
|
|
|
|
Post by oilsooner on Jun 1, 2018 11:58:14 GMT -6
thehill.com/opinion/white-house/390228-london-bridges-falling-down-curious-origins-of-fbis-trump-russia-probeThe bridge to the Russia investigation wasn’t erected in Moscow during the summer of the 2016 election. It originated earlier, 1,700 miles away in London, where foreign figures contacted Trump campaign advisers and provided the FBI with hearsay allegations of Trump-Russia collusion, bureau documents and interviews of government insiders reveal. These contacts in spring 2016 — some from trusted intelligence sources, others from Hillary Clinton supporters — occurred well before FBI headquarters authorized an official counterintelligence investigation on July 31, 2016. The new timeline makes one wonder: Did the FBI follow its rules governing informants? Here’s what a congressman and an intelligence expert think. “The revelation of purposeful contact initiated by alleged confidential human sources prior to any FBI investigation is troublesome,” Rep. Mark Meadows (R-N.C.), an ally of President Trump and chairman of a House subcommittee that’s taking an increasingly aggressive oversight role in the scandal, told me. “This new information begs the questions: Who were the informants working for, who were they reporting to and why has the [Department of Justice] and FBI gone to such great lengths to hide these contacts?” Kevin Brock agrees that Congress has legitimate questions. The retired FBI assistant director for intelligence supervised the rewriting of bureau rules governing sources, under then-director Robert Mueller a decade ago. Those rules forbid the FBI from directing a human source to target an American until a formally predicated investigative file is opened. Brock sees oddities in how the Russia case began. “These types of investigations aren’t normally run by assistant directors and deputy directors at headquarters,” he told me. “All that happens normally in a field office, but that isn’t the case here and so it becomes a red flag. Congress would have legitimate oversight interests in the conditions and timing of the targeting of a confidential human source against a U.S. person.” Other congressional and law enforcement sources express similar concerns, heightened by FBI communications suggesting political pressures around the time the probe officially opened. “We’re not going to withstand the pressure soon,” FBI lawyer Lisa Page texted fellow agent Peter Strzok on Aug. 3, 2016, days after Strzok opened the official probe and returned from a trip to London. At the time, they were dealing with simultaneous challenges: the wrap-up of the Hillary Clinton email scandal and the start of the Russia-Trump probe. Over several days, they exchanged texts that appear to express fears of political meddling or leaking by the Obama White House, the Department of Justice (DOJ) and the CIA. “This is MUCH more tasty for one of those DOJ aholes to leak,” Strzok wrote as the two FBI colleagues — then having an affair, the bureau later told Congress — debated how long they could delay a CIA-FBI meeting so as to “not play into the agency’s BS game.” They voiced alarm when an FBI colleague — “Liz” — suggested the Obama White House was about to hijack the investigation. “Went well, best we could have expected,” Strzok texted Page after an Aug. 5, 2016, meeting. “Other than Liz quote ‘the White House is running this.’ ” Page then texted to assure Strzok of a paper trail showing the FBI in charge: “We got emails that say otherwise.” The next day, they went into further detail about their White House concerns. “So maybe not the best national security president, but a genuinely good and decent human being,” Page texted Strzok, referencing former President Obama. Strzok replied: “Yeah, I like him. Just not a fan of the weakness globally. Was thinking about what the administration will be willing to do re Russia.” In the end, the FBI secretly investigated the Trump campaign for months, engaging with other agencies on a more limited inquiry of Russian efforts to hack Clinton’s campaign. The summer 2016 text messages are bookends to a series of London contacts that pre-date the official opening of the investigation and produced the evidence the FBI used that fall to justify its court-ordered surveillance of presidential campaign figures. According to documents and government interviews, one of the FBI’s most senior counterintelligence agents visited London the first week of May 2016. Congress never got the FBI to explain that trip — but, soon after it, one of the most consequential moments of the scandal occurred: On May 10, Australian diplomat Alexander Downer met in a London bar with Trump adviser George Papadopoulos, who boasted of knowing that Russia would release dirt on Clinton. That contact was not immediately reported to U.S. intelligence. By early June, a second overture to a Trump campaign adviser occurred in London. In a “Dear Carter” email, a Cambridge University graduate student invited Trump campaign adviser Carter Page to attend a popular July security conference in London. Now the FBI has to prove it wasn’t all a set up. Even Muellers own man says it’s odd. We need an impartial investigation. Maybe let the Swiss do it. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk |
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Jun 1, 2018 13:58:53 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Jun 1, 2018 16:24:26 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by trumped on Jun 1, 2018 17:28:14 GMT -6
They are hiding bigtime shit. |
|
|
|
Post by trumped on Jun 1, 2018 19:09:20 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Jun 1, 2018 20:27:49 GMT -6
Sean Hannity: We have an IG report coming out and I’m told as many as 28 people that have knowledge of the Clinton email server want to be subpoenaed so that they can tell the story of corruption at the highest levels of the bureau at that love.
|
|
|
|
Post by oilsooner on Jun 1, 2018 20:43:06 GMT -6
Bahaha, this fuckin guy.. thehill.com/homenews/administration/390360-white-house-planning-for-potential-trump-putin-summit-reportWhite House planning for potential Trump-Putin summit: report The White House is preparing for a potential summit between President Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin, The Wall Street Journal reported Friday. Jon Huntsman, the U.S. ambassador to Russia, is helping to set up the meeting, though the planning is still in its early stages, the Journal reported. “This has been an ongoing project of Ambassador Huntsman, stretching back months, of getting a formal meeting between Putin and Trump,” a senior administration official told the Journal. If it comes to fruition, the summit would be the third meeting between Trump and Putin. The two leaders met on the sidelines of Group of 20 summit in Hamburg, Germany, last July and again in Vietnam during the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation summit in Vietnam in November. During a phone call between the two leaders in March, Trump extended an invitation to Putin to come to Washington. The prospective meeting would come at a point of heightened tensions between the Washington and Moscow. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk |
|
|
|
Post by sooner98 on Jun 1, 2018 21:14:24 GMT -6
Bahaha, this fuckin guy.. thehill.com/homenews/administration/390360-white-house-planning-for-potential-trump-putin-summit-reportWhite House planning for potential Trump-Putin summit: report The White House is preparing for a potential summit between President Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin, The Wall Street Journal reported Friday. Jon Huntsman, the U.S. ambassador to Russia, is helping to set up the meeting, though the planning is still in its early stages, the Journal reported. “This has been an ongoing project of Ambassador Huntsman, stretching back months, of getting a formal meeting between Putin and Trump,” a senior administration official told the Journal. If it comes to fruition, the summit would be the third meeting between Trump and Putin. The two leaders met on the sidelines of Group of 20 summit in Hamburg, Germany, last July and again in Vietnam during the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation summit in Vietnam in November. During a phone call between the two leaders in March, Trump extended an invitation to Putin to come to Washington. The prospective meeting would come at a point of heightened tensions between the Washington and Moscow. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Please, let this happen. This would be like, the ultimate in-your-face troll event directed toward every last #Resistance psychopath who still inexplicably for some reason believes Trump campaign/Russia collusion is true.The mind-exploding cognitive dissonance from the left as a result of this summit will be glorious. "OMG THIS PROVES COLLUSION!! TRAITOR!! TRAITOR!!!" |
|
|
|
Post by oilsooner on Jun 1, 2018 21:14:57 GMT -6
Bahaha, this fuckin guy.. thehill.com/homenews/administration/390360-white-house-planning-for-potential-trump-putin-summit-reportWhite House planning for potential Trump-Putin summit: report The White House is preparing for a potential summit between President Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin, The Wall Street Journal reported Friday. Jon Huntsman, the U.S. ambassador to Russia, is helping to set up the meeting, though the planning is still in its early stages, the Journal reported. “This has been an ongoing project of Ambassador Huntsman, stretching back months, of getting a formal meeting between Putin and Trump,” a senior administration official told the Journal. If it comes to fruition, the summit would be the third meeting between Trump and Putin. The two leaders met on the sidelines of Group of 20 summit in Hamburg, Germany, last July and again in Vietnam during the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation summit in Vietnam in November. During a phone call between the two leaders in March, Trump extended an invitation to Putin to come to Washington. The prospective meeting would come at a point of heightened tensions between the Washington and Moscow. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Please, let this happen. This would be like, the ultimate in-your-face troll event directed toward every last #Resistance psychopath who still believes in Trump campaign/Russia collusion for some reason. The mind-exploding cognitive dissonance from the left as a result of this summit will be glorious. "OMG THIS PROVES COLLUSION!! TRAITOR!! TRAITOR!!!" Exactly. This cat gets it. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk |
|
|
|
Post by trumped on Jun 1, 2018 22:26:37 GMT -6
Wow, the MSMis in full attack mode to cover crimes:
|
|
|
|
Post by kcrufnek on Jun 1, 2018 23:03:31 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by trumped on Jun 1, 2018 23:50:19 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by sooner98 on Jun 2, 2018 11:55:41 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by atl1979 on Jun 2, 2018 12:28:48 GMT -6
Wow, the MSMis in full attack mode to cover crimes: Wapo says that Trump will "weaponize" the IG report !!! WTF do they expect. Once Clapper, Brennan, and Comey etc. tore up and shit on the Constitution it was a declaration of war. WTF did they think is going to happen? |
|
|
|
Post by trumped on Jun 2, 2018 12:36:06 GMT -6
^^^
No lie they attempted a coup right out of any banana republic playbook. I don’t think half the country understands the gravity of what they did.
|
|
|
|
Post by sooner98 on Jun 2, 2018 14:16:26 GMT -6
^^^ No lie they attempted a coup right out of any banana republic playbook. I don’t think half the country understands the gravity of what they did. The scary thing is, I think the half of the country you are referring to (maybe more like 40 to 45 percent of it) DOES understand what they did, and don't have a problem with it at all. Trump's base (about 45 percent) have a good idea of exactly what has happened as well, except that they actually still believe in law and order (for example, using the FBI to spy on political opposition is illegal and shouldn't be done, regardless of party). It's the other 10 to 15 percent that still believe in law and order, but are on the fence, or are still ignorant of the facts, or just plain don't care, or maybe think that Donald Trump is icky, that need to have their eyes opened. Hopefully the IG report will be the nuclear bomb we are hoping for. |
|
|
|
Post by trumped on Jun 2, 2018 14:46:51 GMT -6
And Ari makes a valid point:
|
|
|
|
Post by trumped on Jun 2, 2018 15:08:17 GMT -6
Wow if true
|
|
