|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Jun 15, 2018 12:37:15 GMT -6
Apologies, I couldn’t resist:  |
|
|
|
Post by nmgaucho on Jun 15, 2018 12:52:38 GMT -6
Apologies, I couldn’t resist: Can you blame them when it's pretty obvious the current administration is littered with criminals. Their job is to fight crime you know |
|
|
|
Post by xingtherubicon on Jun 15, 2018 13:06:43 GMT -6
Apologies, I couldn’t resist: Can you blame them when it's pretty obvious the current administration is littered with criminals. Their job is to fight crime you know Is it their job to "See to it that Trump doesn't win?" You're an embarrassment to blind shills everywhere... and last, but not least... Hey gaucho...have they impeached Trump yet? BWHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAAHAHAHHA |
|
|
|
Post by trumped on Jun 15, 2018 13:23:06 GMT -6
I’ve been saying Seth Rich since he was murdered:
Jack Posobiec🇺🇸
@jackposobiec
·
1h
HUGE: Clapper just made a massive change to his story. He is now walking back his claim that "Russia" gave the DNC emails to Wikileaks, but they gave them to a "third-party cutout" who in turn delivered them to Julian Assange
——
Jack Posobiec🇺🇸
@jackposobiec
·
1h
The report, written by extreme Trump critic Michael Isikoff, acknowledges there is no evidence that Russia hacked the DNC, and are now discussing a single individual who delivered the emails to Wikileaks
——-
The Antelqpe
@anontelope129
·
11m
Replying to @jackposobiec
Seth rich to @craigmurrayorg
AS @wikileaks BASICALLY SAID
As Craig Murray Said
One of the most honorable people in UK
|
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Jun 15, 2018 13:33:44 GMT -6
Paul Sperry @paulsperry_ BREAKING: FBI agents found Abedin deleting classified & Clinton emails from her Yahoo account but failed to subpoena her devices. If they had, maybe they wouldn’t have had to reopen the case in 11th hour when NY agents found work emails on the laptop she shared w her perv husband 12:31 PM - Jun 15, 2018 2,152 1,406 people are talking about this ...... Paul Sperry @paulsperry_ FROM IG REPORT: "[T]he Midyear team did not obtain search warrants to examine the content of emails in Mills’s or Abedin’s private email accounts and did not seek to obtain any of the senior aides’ personal devices." WTF?!#SHAMinvestigation 12:37 PM - Jun 15, 2018 546 463 people are talking about this ..... View image on Twitter View image on Twitter Mark Meadows ✔ @repmarkmeadows Replying to @repmarkmeadows There are glaring examples of bias all over this. Right here, page 421, the report says Strzok was so biased that the IG "did not have confidence" Strzok's handling of the Weiner laptop (at the end of the Clinton investigation) was "free from bias." That's a big deal. 1:10 PM - Jun 15, 2018 539 356 people are talking about this  |
|
|
|
Post by trumped on Jun 15, 2018 14:04:38 GMT -6
These are some deep state crooks.
Send em to NK jail with Donalds blessing
|
|
|
|
Post by kcrufnek on Jun 15, 2018 14:17:30 GMT -6
www.dailywire.com/news/31878/kimberley-strassel-anybody-saying-ig-didnt-find-james-barrettExcerpt: In a series of tweets on Thursday, The Wall Street Journal's Kimberley Strassel provided a succinct summary of why she maintains that anyone trying to claim that IG Michael Horowitz "didn't find bias" is full of it. Below is the full text of her series of tweets, followed by the tweets themselves: Don't believe anyone who claims Horowitz didn't find bias. He very carefully says that he found no "documentary" evidence that bias produced "specific investigatory decisions." That's different. It means he didn't catch anyone doing anything so dumb as writing down that they took a specific step to aid a candidate. You know, like: "Let's give out this Combetta immunity deal so nothing comes out that will derail Hillary for President." But he in fact finds bias everywhere. The examples are shocking and concerning, and he devotes entire sections to them. And he very specifically says in the summary that they "cast a cloud" on the entire "investigation's credibility." That's pretty damning. Meanwhile this same cast of characters who the IG has now found to have made a hash of the Clinton investigation and who demonstrate such bias, seamlessly moved to the Trump investigation. And we're supposed to think they got that one right? Also don't believe anyone who says this is just about Comey and his instances of insubordination. (Though they are bad enough.) This is an indictment broadly of an FBI culture that believes itself above the rules it imposes on others. People failing to adhere to their recusals (Kadzik/McCabe). Lynch hanging with Bill. Staff helping Comey conceal details of presser from DOJ bosses. Use of personal email and laptops. Leaks. Accepting gifts from media. Agent affairs/relationships. It also contains stunning examples of incompetence. Comey explains that he wasn't aware the Weiner laptop was big deal because he didn't know Weiner was married to Abedin? Then they sit on it a month, either cuz it fell through cracks (wow) or were more obsessed w/Trump. And I can still hear the echo of the howls from when Trump fired Comey. Still waiting to hear the apologies now that this report has backstopped the Rosenstein memo and the obvious grounds for dismissal. She has done great work on this. |
|
|
|
Post by kcrufnek on Jun 15, 2018 14:19:30 GMT -6
I’ve been saying Seth Rich since he was murdered: Jack Posobiec🇺🇸 @jackposobiec · 1h HUGE: Clapper just made a massive change to his story. He is now walking back his claim that "Russia" gave the DNC emails to Wikileaks, but they gave them to a "third-party cutout" who in turn delivered them to Julian Assange —— Jack Posobiec🇺🇸 @jackposobiec · 1h The report, written by extreme Trump critic Michael Isikoff, acknowledges there is no evidence that Russia hacked the DNC, and are now discussing a single individual who delivered the emails to Wikileaks ——- The Antelqpe @anontelope129 · 11m Replying to @jackposobiec Seth rich to @craigmurrayorg AS @wikileaks BASICALLY SAID As Craig Murray Said One of the most honorable people in UK Clapper is a clueless fool who has done nothing but lie from the beginning. He's as bad as any of them. |
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Jun 15, 2018 17:34:55 GMT -6
www.nationalreview.com/2018/06/ig-report-fbi-no-bias-conclusion-may-not-supported/The IG’s Report May Be Half-Baked By ANDREW C. MCCARTHY June 15, 2018 2:08 PM But who knows? You’ve got to hand it to Michael Horowitz: The Justice Department inspector general’s much-anticipated report on the Clinton-emails investigation may be half-baked, but if it is, it is the most comprehensive, meticulously detailed, carefully documented, thoughtfully reasoned epic in the history of half-bakery. Why say do I say the report “may be half-baked”? Why don’t I just come out and declare, “The report is half-baked”? Well, I figure if I write this column in the IG’s elusive style, we’ll have the Rosetta Stone we need to decipher the report. See, you probably sense that I believe the report is half-baked. But if I say it “may be” half-baked . . . well, technically that means it may not be, too. I mean, who really knows, right? If that annoys you, try wading through 568 pages of this stuff, particularly on the central issue of the investigators’ anti-Trump bias. The report acknowledges that contempt for Trump was pervasive among several of the top FBI and DOJ officials making decisions about the investigation. So this deep-seated bias must have affected the decision-making, right? Well, the report concludes, who really knows? Not in so many words, of course. The trick here is the premise the IG establishes from the start: It’s not my job to draw firm conclusions about why things happened the way they did. In fact, it’s not even my job to determine whether investigative decisions were right or wrong. The cop-out is that we are dealing here with “discretionary” calls; therefore, the IG rationalizes, the investigators must be given very broad latitude. Consequently, the IG says his job is not to determine whether any particular decision was correct; just whether, on some otherworldly scale of reasonableness, the decision was defensible. And he makes that determination by looking at every decision in isolation. But is that the way we evaluate decisions in the real world? In every criminal trial, the defense lawyer tries to sow reasonable doubt by depicting every allegation, every factual transaction, as if it stood alone. In a drug case, if the defendant was photographed delivering a brown paper bag on Wednesday, the lawyer argues, “Well, we don’t have X-ray vision, how do we really know there was heroin in the bag?” The jurors are urged that when they consider what happened Wednesday, there is only Wednesday; they must put out of their minds that text from Tuesday, when the defendant told his girlfriend, “I always deliver the ‘product’ in paper bags.” Fortunately, the judge ends up explaining to the jury that, down here on Planet Earth, common sense applies. In our everyday lives, we don’t look at related events in isolation; we view them in conjunction because they read on each other. Let’s say on Monday I confide to my friend that I can’t stand Bob, and on Tuesday I tell Bob I can’t join him for dinner because I have other plans. It may or may not be true that I have other plans, but common sense tells you my disdain for Bob has factored into the decision — even if I don’t announce that fact to Bob. For all his assiduous attention to detail, IG Horowitz has weaved a no-common-sense report.
|
|
|
|
Post by trumped on Jun 15, 2018 20:08:32 GMT -6
Paul Sperry
@paulsperry_
·
9h
A close reading of IG report suggests there indeed was a cabal w/in the exec suite of FBI HQ to take down Trump & subvert the will of American voter. A scheme led by the supervisor of the Crossfire Hurricane investigation & the legal liaison b/t his team & the deputy FBI director
|
|
|
|
Post by NN on Jun 15, 2018 20:36:55 GMT -6
Paul Sperry @paulsperry_ · 9h A close reading of IG report suggests there indeed was a cabal w/in the exec suite of FBI HQ to take down Trump & subvert the will of American voter. A scheme led by the supervisor of the Crossfire Hurricane investigation & the legal liaison b/t his team & the deputy FBI director Had they wanted to take Trump down all they would have had to do was leak they were investigating him just before the election (which they were). |
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Jun 16, 2018 0:24:15 GMT -6
Anybody shocked by this? dailycaller.com/2018/06/15/cnn-msnbc-ig-report-fbi-reporters/CNN and MSNBC buried the inspector general report’s revelation that a number of FBI agents were receiving unauthorized free handouts, such as dinners and tickets, from reporters. Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz noted in his report on the Clinton investigation, which was released Thursday, that his department found numerous instances in which FBI agents were improperly in contact with reporters and were receiving a number of free perks from their relationships. (RELATED: IG Report: FBI Agents Regularly Received Free Handouts From Journalists) The department “identified numerous FBI employees, at all levels of the organization and with no official reason to be in contact with the media, who were nevertheless in frequent contact with reporters.” FBI agents’ relationships with the media extended to “improperly receiving benefits from reporters, including tickets to sporting events, golfing outings, drinks and meals, and admittance to nonpublic social events” and could have encouraged some agents to leak information to the press, Horowitz implied in the report. –– ADVERTISEMENT –– In fact, these relationships could have violated federal gift-giving rules laid out by the U.S. Office of Government Ethics. (RELATED:IG Revelations On Agent/Journo Gift-Giving Could Be Federal Crimes) Despite the serious potential implications of the IG’s findings, CNN and MSNBC gave little coverage to that part of the report. It was only ever mentioned on CNN twice — once by Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham and once by former U.S. attorney Preet Bharara — and received no mentions in articles on their website. MSNBC anchors were similarly mum about the story with the exception of Ari Melber, host of “The Beat.” Melber dedicated at least two minutes Thursday to the FBI’s obsession with its image in the media and a little under a minute to the specific findings on improper contacts with the media. Melber also showed several charts from the IG report that showed the extent of some reporters’ contacts with members of the FBI. |
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Jun 16, 2018 0:38:39 GMT -6
www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-06-15/fbi-agent-called-hillary-president-while-investigating-her-texted-screw-you-trumpFBI Agents Called Hillary "President" While Investigating Her, Texted "Screw You Trump" On Election Day ....... One of four FBI agents investigating Hillary Clinton's email server - not Peter Strzok or Lisa Page, referred to Clinton as "the President" in a text exchange with another FBI employee four days after interviewing the Democratic candidate, according to Thursday's DOJ Inspector General report.  Then, in a different text exchange with one of the other three Clinton email investigators (not Peter Strzok or Lisa Page), another agent wrote "screw you trump" after the first agent admitted "You should know...that I'm...with her."
|
|
|
|
Post by oilsooner on Jun 16, 2018 6:38:20 GMT -6
Anybody shocked by this? dailycaller.com/2018/06/15/cnn-msnbc-ig-report-fbi-reporters/CNN and MSNBC buried the inspector general report’s revelation that a number of FBI agents were receiving unauthorized free handouts, such as dinners and tickets, from reporters. Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz noted in his report on the Clinton investigation, which was released Thursday, that his department found numerous instances in which FBI agents were improperly in contact with reporters and were receiving a number of free perks from their relationships. (RELATED: IG Report: FBI Agents Regularly Received Free Handouts From Journalists) The department “identified numerous FBI employees, at all levels of the organization and with no official reason to be in contact with the media, who were nevertheless in frequent contact with reporters.” FBI agents’ relationships with the media extended to “improperly receiving benefits from reporters, including tickets to sporting events, golfing outings, drinks and meals, and admittance to nonpublic social events” and could have encouraged some agents to leak information to the press, Horowitz implied in the report. –– ADVERTISEMENT –– In fact, these relationships could have violated federal gift-giving rules laid out by the U.S. Office of Government Ethics. (RELATED:IG Revelations On Agent/Journo Gift-Giving Could Be Federal Crimes) Despite the serious potential implications of the IG’s findings, CNN and MSNBC gave little coverage to that part of the report. It was only ever mentioned on CNN twice — once by Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham and once by former U.S. attorney Preet Bharara — and received no mentions in articles on their website. MSNBC anchors were similarly mum about the story with the exception of Ari Melber, host of “The Beat.” Melber dedicated at least two minutes Thursday to the FBI’s obsession with its image in the media and a little under a minute to the specific findings on improper contacts with the media. Melber also showed several charts from the IG report that showed the extent of some reporters’ contacts with members of the FBI. But, muh “Faux News!!!” My guess: MSNBC and CNN we’re giving the gifts, so they don’t want that story out there. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk |
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Jun 16, 2018 13:47:00 GMT -6
So, Comey sent out this tweet:
View image on Twitter
View image on Twitter
James Comey
✔
@comey
So good to see new growth in Iowa and across the country.
1:36 PM - Jun 16, 2018
4,097
1,538 people are talking about this
And now many are saying he’s going to run in 2020.
|
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Jun 16, 2018 13:51:45 GMT -6
www.nationalreview.com/2018/06/misconduct-at-fbi-department-of-justice/POLITICS & POLICY Problems at the Justice Department and FBI Are Serious By ANDREW C. MCCARTHY June 16, 2018 5:30 AM And they won’t be solved by whining about criticism. What do you do with an FBI agent, sworn to uphold the law, who flagrantly violates the law in a rogue investigation aimed at making a name for himself by bringing down some high-profile targets? Why . . . you promote him, of course. At least that is the way the Justice Department answered that question in the case of David Chaves, an FBI agent who serially and lawlessly leaked grand-jury information, wiretap evidence, and other sensitive investigative intelligence to the media in his quest to make an insider-trading case against some celebrities. And when finally called on it, the Justice Department circled the wagons: proceeding with its tainted prosecution, referring the now-retired Chaves for an internal investigation that has gone exactly nowhere after nearly two years, and using legal maneuvers to block the courts and the public from scrutinizing the scope of the misconduct.
|
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Jun 16, 2018 13:54:07 GMT -6
www.nationalreview.com/2018/06/inspector-general-report-reveals-fbi-bias-in-clinton-email-investigation/There is much to admire in Justice Department inspector general Michael Horowitz’s highly anticipated report on the FBI’s Clinton-emails investigation. Horowitz’s 568-page analysis is comprehensive, fact-intensive, and cautious to a fault. It is also, nonetheless, an incomplete exercise — it omits half the story, the Russia investigation — and it flinches from following the facts to their logical conclusion. The media and the Left are spinning the report as a vindication of the FBI from the charge of bias, when the opposite is the truth. The IG extensively takes on numerous issues related to the decision not to charge former secretary of state Hillary Clinton for, primarily, causing the retention and transmission of classified information on the non-secure “homebrew” server system through which she improperly and systematically conducted government business. (Our Dan McLaughlin usefully catalogues the topics Horowitz addresses here.) If there is a single theme that ties the sprawling report together, however, it is bias. Or, as the report put it, “the question of bias.” It should not really be a question, because the evidence of anti-Trump bias on the part of the agents who steered the Clinton probe — which was run out of headquarters, highly unusual for a criminal investigation — is immense. In fact, the most hair-raising section of the report, an entire chapter, is devoted to communications among several FBI officials (not just the infamous duo of Peter Strzok and Lisa Page), which overflow with abhorrence for Trump (“loathsome,” “an idiot,” “awful,” “an enormous d**che,” “f**k Trump”) and his core supporters (“retarded,” “the crazies,” one could “smell” them). More alarmingly, the agents express a determination to stop Trump from becoming president (e.g., Strzok, on being asked if Trump would become president, says “No. No he’s not. We’ll stop it”; and on being assured that his election is highly unlikely, opines that “we can’t take that risk” and that the bureau needs “an insurance policy” against him). Despite marshaling this damning proof of bias, Horowitz spends much of his report discounting it with respect to individual investigative decisions. Yet despite marshaling this damning proof of bias, Horowitz spends much of his report discounting it with respect to individual investigative decisions. His approach obscures more than it illuminates. The IG says it is not his burden to second-guess “discretionary” investigative decisions unless they were irrational. Thus, even if agents exhibited bias, he presumes that such decisions as granting immunity, declining to seek relevant evidence, or forgoing subpoenas are defensible as long as some government policy arguably supports them — even if other, better options were available. FBI director Christopher Wray has pounced on this, disingenuously arguing that the IG “did not find any evidence of political bias or improper considerations impacting the investigation.” It is a misleading comment: The IG found overwhelming evidence of bias and merely withheld judgment on whether it affected the investigation at key points. Of course, what principally drove decisions in the Clinton-emails investigation (or “matter,” as Obama attorney general Loretta Lynch, like the Clinton campaign, insisted it be called) was the certainty that President Obama and his Justice Department were never going to permit Secretary Clinton to be charged with a crime, notwithstanding the abundant evidence. (Without a hint of irony, the report’s executive summary speaks of the supposed difficulty of proving Clinton’s knowledge of the hundreds of classified emails inevitably on her system, and then explains that the FBI abjured use of the grand jury because it would have required exposing prodigious amounts of classified information.) That is, regardless of whether individual decisions were driven by pro-Clinton bias, the predetermined outcome surely was. That’s why then-director James Comey was drafting his exoneration remarks months before critical evidence was obtained, and before Clinton and other key witnesses were interviewed. A comparison between the handling of the Clinton emails and that of the Trump-Russia probes would almost certainly illustrate the influence of this bias, but that is exactly what the IG report lacks.
|
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Jun 16, 2018 16:13:50 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by oilsooner on Jun 16, 2018 16:47:46 GMT -6
So, Comey sent out this tweet: View image on Twitter View image on Twitter James Comey ✔ @comey So good to see new growth in Iowa and across the country. 1:36 PM - Jun 16, 2018 4,097 1,538 people are talking about this And now many are saying he’s going to run in 2020. :barrylaugh: This dude is the out of control narcissist folks think Trump is. |
|
|
|
Post by kcrufnek on Jun 16, 2018 16:54:17 GMT -6
At first the FBI wasn't going to do anything his laptop and its contents. It wasn't until the NYPD threw a fit and threatened to go public did the FBI come clean. |
|
|
|
Post by sooner98 on Jun 16, 2018 17:14:16 GMT -6
www.nationalreview.com/2018/06/ig-report-fbi-no-bias-conclusion-may-not-supported/The IG’s Report May Be Half-Baked By ANDREW C. MCCARTHY June 15, 2018 2:08 PM But who knows? You’ve got to hand it to Michael Horowitz: The Justice Department inspector general’s much-anticipated report on the Clinton-emails investigation may be half-baked, but if it is, it is the most comprehensive, meticulously detailed, carefully documented, thoughtfully reasoned epic in the history of half-bakery. Why say do I say the report “may be half-baked”? Why don’t I just come out and declare, “The report is half-baked”? Well, I figure if I write this column in the IG’s elusive style, we’ll have the Rosetta Stone we need to decipher the report. See, you probably sense that I believe the report is half-baked. But if I say it “may be” half-baked . . . well, technically that means it may not be, too. I mean, who really knows, right? If that annoys you, try wading through 568 pages of this stuff, particularly on the central issue of the investigators’ anti-Trump bias. The report acknowledges that contempt for Trump was pervasive among several of the top FBI and DOJ officials making decisions about the investigation. So this deep-seated bias must have affected the decision-making, right? Well, the report concludes, who really knows? Not in so many words, of course. The trick here is the premise the IG establishes from the start: It’s not my job to draw firm conclusions about why things happened the way they did. In fact, it’s not even my job to determine whether investigative decisions were right or wrong. The cop-out is that we are dealing here with “discretionary” calls; therefore, the IG rationalizes, the investigators must be given very broad latitude. Consequently, the IG says his job is not to determine whether any particular decision was correct; just whether, on some otherworldly scale of reasonableness, the decision was defensible. And he makes that determination by looking at every decision in isolation. But is that the way we evaluate decisions in the real world? In every criminal trial, the defense lawyer tries to sow reasonable doubt by depicting every allegation, every factual transaction, as if it stood alone. In a drug case, if the defendant was photographed delivering a brown paper bag on Wednesday, the lawyer argues, “Well, we don’t have X-ray vision, how do we really know there was heroin in the bag?” The jurors are urged that when they consider what happened Wednesday, there is only Wednesday; they must put out of their minds that text from Tuesday, when the defendant told his girlfriend, “I always deliver the ‘product’ in paper bags.” Fortunately, the judge ends up explaining to the jury that, down here on Planet Earth, common sense applies. In our everyday lives, we don’t look at related events in isolation; we view them in conjunction because they read on each other. Let’s say on Monday I confide to my friend that I can’t stand Bob, and on Tuesday I tell Bob I can’t join him for dinner because I have other plans. It may or may not be true that I have other plans, but common sense tells you my disdain for Bob has factored into the decision — even if I don’t announce that fact to Bob. For all his assiduous attention to detail, IG Horowitz has weaved a no-common-sense report. Pretty much everything written by Andrew McCarthy, Kimberly Strassel, and Mollie Hemingway is a must-read when trying to sort through this whole fiasco.
I'm now of the opinion that Michael Horowitz is every bit as useless as Jeff Sessions in trying to bring about true justice here. My patience is completely spent, and I hold no hope that any future IG reports concerning the Russia investigation will pack any kind of a punch that will make a difference. It will be more of the same nonsense about not being able to prove bias in their decisions. Maybe there will be more Strzok/Page texts revealed that will rile us up for a while, but nothing will be done about it.
It's pretty much now up to 1) President Trump, and will he unilaterally tell Rod Rosenstein to shove it, and declassify every appropriate (unredacted) document as requested by Congress, so that we all can see the ugly truth about what has happened, and 2) the American people. The choice is theirs: will they vote in November for truth and justice, or will they vote based on lies and deception. A vote for the Republican candidate will finally bring an end to this national nightmare, and a vote for the Democrat candidate will be a vote to impeach Trump for no good reason whatsoever, his only crime being that he is unliked by insane, schizophrenic Democrats. A Republican House majority should result in the prompt firing of Sessions, Rosenstein, and Mueller, and the appointment of an Attorney General who will actually do his job. A Democrat House majority will result in a complete cover-up of all wrongdoings, and impeachment proceedings based on no discernable impeachable offenses. What'll it be, America?
|
|
|
|
Post by kcrufnek on Jun 16, 2018 17:22:04 GMT -6
Pretty much everything written by Andrew McCarthy, Kimberly Strassel, and Mollie Hemingway is a must-read when trying to sort through this whole fiasco. Also anything by Catherine Herridge on Fox. |
|
|
|
Post by oilsooner on Jun 16, 2018 20:09:34 GMT -6
 Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk |
|
|
|
Post by kcrufnek on Jun 17, 2018 7:04:48 GMT -6
Maybe if only Judge Jeanine would tell us how she really feels.
|
|
|
|
Post by principledcon on Jun 17, 2018 7:43:03 GMT -6
Today was solely about exposing them. The bigger stuff is yet to come. Today is not about arrests its just exposure. This is a war and today was just one battle. Its a war because a politcal party tried a coup against our country, our values and our morales. No shots were fired but its a war nonetheless. Its all tied togethef the email scandal and the fake collusion. This goes all the way to the top to Obama and Crooked Hillary. Deep state actors. There will be much more to come. People across the country and just now starting to get a sense of it when the FBI says Trump will not become President. Lots more hidden that will be rooted out. This is Germany Hitler type stuff they attempted. To get Crooked Hillary in office to then hide all these crimes. Imagine how none of ghis comes to light if she’s elected. If they do this we know they cooked the ballot boxes too - and still lost. Shows how many really voted for Trump to overcome this. I keep saying it but Trump saved our country. The only candidate who could have won. He cane along at the exact right time in our history. Happy Birthday Mr President! Those seeking proof of 'God' need look no further....no way Trump should have won but through divine intervention... And the candidate he was running against was one of the worst ever helped... |
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Jun 17, 2018 7:58:22 GMT -6
amp.dailycaller.com/2018/06/17/trump-russia-investigation-2020/President Donald Trump may be in the midst of his 2020 re-election campaign by the time he gets answers on whether biased federal law enforcement agents took improper steps in investigating members of his 2016 campaign. The Department of Justice’s internal watchdog, Inspector General Michael Horowitz, in March announced a probe into potential FISA abuses in the FBI’s surveillance of Carter Page, as well as the FBI’s use of a confidential source and potential “other issues that may arise during the course of the review.” Horowitz on Thursday released his report into the FBI’s handling the investigation into Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email server as secretary of state. The IG first launched that investigation in October 2016, following requests from several congressional Democrats. If Horowitz takes as long on the Russia report as he did on the Clinton email report — 18 months — he won’t release his findings until September 2019, at which point Trump’s re-election campaign will be well underway. If Horowitz’s investigation takes longer than his last one, it could conclude sometime in 2020.
|
|
|
|
Post by politicalmexininja on Jun 17, 2018 8:06:19 GMT -6
Those seeking proof of 'God' need look no further....no way Trump should have won but through divine intervention... And the candidate he was running against was one of the worst ever helped... No doubt, coop.... |
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Jun 17, 2018 9:47:37 GMT -6
I’m curious to see how this one plays out now: www.foxnews.com/shows/sunday-morning-futures.htmlRep. Nunes told Maria the Department of Justice leadership has until Monday to turn over the subpoenaed documents or they will have “hell to pay.” Rep. Devin Nunes: The deadline is this week. So if documents begin to be turned over tomorrow and a clear way and path forward for everything else is not clear here in the next couple of days there’s going to be hell to pay by Wednesday morning… All of the members of the House of Representatives are going to start taking action against the Department of Justice and FBI. Maria Bartiromo: Taking action meaning contempt of Congress? Rep. Devin Nunes: Well that’s just one of many options but I can tell you that it’s not going to be pretty. |
|
|
|
Post by trumped on Jun 17, 2018 10:07:59 GMT -6
 Rich @8richard6 · 46m There was several Names hidden besides Obama that used Hillary’s illegal email; White House Executives, Mueller, Holder, Petraeus & Pennetta! All guilty |
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Jun 17, 2018 15:03:59 GMT -6
Under the heading of minor miracles, you had members of the House working on a Friday night,”Gowdy said. “Paul Ryan led this meeting. You had [House Intelligence Committee Chair] Devin Nunes, [House Judiciary Committee Chair] Bob Goodlatte, myself and everyone you can think of from the FBI and the DOJ, and we went item by item on both of those outstanding subpoenas.
And Paul made it very clear; there’s going to be action on the floor of the House this week if the FBI and DOJ do not comply with our subpoena request,” he continued. “So [Deputy Attorney General] Rod Rosenstein, [FBI Director] Chris Wray you were in the meeting, you understood him just as clearly as I did. We’re going to get compliance or the House of Representatives is going to use its full arsenal of constitutional weapons to gain compliance.”
“I don’t want the drama; I want the documents,” Gowdy added.
Gowdy also expressed disdain with FBI leadership in light of the damning DOJ IG report released Thursday, confirming FBI officials vowed to “stop” the Trump campaign and presidency.
“I don’t know what [Special Counsel Robert] Mueller has,” he said. “I do know this: that bias is so pervasive and everyone who has ever stood in front of a jury and had to explain it in a way will tell you it is the most miserable feeling in the world and I’ve never seen this level of bias.”
The IG report also delegitimized the FBI’s surveillance of the Trump campaign and the bureau’s accusations of Trump, Russian collusion, Gowdy argued.
“The only person in the universe who claims to have evidence of collusion is Adam Schiff and unlike any other secret he’s ever had, he’s never told anyone what evidence he has – there is no evidence of collusion,” he said. “Obstruction of justice? Good luck having your star witness being Jim Comey in any prosecution from shop lifting to obstruction of justice – good luck if that’s your star witness.
The IG does not exonerate Trump from the Russia probe, but “it certainly helps him,” Gowdy said.
“The same people, the same players that were involved in the Clinton probe, later moved to the Russia probe. John Brennan, who said [Trump] ‘should be in the dust bin of history.’” “Comey, who said ‘impeachment was too good of a remedy.’ Lorretta Lynch, who wanted Hillary Clinton to win. And then we’ve got Peter Strzok and Lisa Page — they presumed and pronounced Donald Trump’s guilt before the investigation even began.”
|
|
