Mueller dismisses top FBI agent in Russia probe for anti-Trump texts

7,734,174 Views | 49408 Replies | Last: 12 hrs ago by Ag with kids
richardag
How long do you want to ignore this user?
will25u said:


More evidence of the corruption of the Democratic Party leadership and their minions in bureaucracies.
Among the latter, under pretence of governing they have divided their nations into two classes, wolves and sheep.”
Thomas Jefferson, Letter to Edward Carrington, January 16, 1787
Some Junkie Cosmonaut
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
will25u said:




W...T...F
txags92
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Some Junkie Cosmonaut said:

will25u said:




W...T...F
When you realize that being admitted to the DC Bar is a status, not a mark of professional ethics, it is easy to understand. This is a reward for staying on the reservation during the Sussmann trial.
will25u
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Ulysses90
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
This may have been raised before but I have not read about the theory that Strzok was neer actually FBI but rather a CIA agent detailed to the FBI to provide a cover story for illegal CIA domestic surveillance.

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2022/08/breaking-exclusive-trump-gotem-huge-concerns-peter-strzok-working-cia-likely-heart-mar-lago-raid/
titan
How long do you want to ignore this user?
S

Intriguing. It might explain why he of all people was interview by MSNBC. It seemed like the ultimate tone-deaf moment to have him try to testify to credibility.
will25u
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Fat Black Swan
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
will25u said:



will25u
How long do you want to ignore this user?
oh no
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
why? what's it mean?
MouthBQ98
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Congress should simply dissolve the highly partisan and biased DC circuit into its neighboring districts. There is no reason it should have a standalone district. That practically begs for corruption.
will25u
How long do you want to ignore this user?
oh no said:

why? what's it mean?
DeFilippis was the lead prosecutor for the Sussman case. He seemed to do pretty well presenting in the courtroom of the Sussman case.
will25u
How long do you want to ignore this user?
oh no said:

why? what's it mean?
akm91
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Biden/Garland meddling?
aggiehawg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
akm91 said:

Biden/Garland meddling?
Possibly. Not clear yet if he is withdrawing from the case or is leaving Durham's team altogether. If he's leaving, could be the rumor mill is indicating Garland will fire Durham.
txags92
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
aggiehawg said:

akm91 said:

Biden/Garland meddling?
Possibly. Not clear yet if he is withdrawing from the case or is leaving Durham's team altogether. If he's leaving, could be the rumor mill is indicating Garland will fire Durham.
Or we just figured out the reason for some of the inexplicable prosecutorial decisions that were made during the Sussmann trial
Ellis Wyatt
How long do you want to ignore this user?
txags92 said:

aggiehawg said:

akm91 said:

Biden/Garland meddling?
Possibly. Not clear yet if he is withdrawing from the case or is leaving Durham's team altogether. If he's leaving, could be the rumor mill is indicating Garland will fire Durham.
Or we just figured out the reason for some of the inexplicable prosecutorial decisions that were made during the Sussmann trial
That was my first thought. We'll see.
will25u
How long do you want to ignore this user?
will25u
How long do you want to ignore this user?

aggiehawg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Quote:

In March of 2019, two senior Justice Department officials penned a memo to their boss, Attorney General William Barr, outlining the reasons why the then-president of the United States shouldn't be charged with obstruction of justice.

That memo, never previously released, shows that all the hysterical speculation, all the confident predictions about Trump being frog-marched off to prison, all the wildly off-base "analysis' about the obstruction case against Donald Trump was a bunch of cow manure.
Quote:

Mueller would have had a mutiny on his hands if he absolved Trump. So he chose to punt the ball to the AG, knowing that clearing the president would be seen as a partisan act.
But Mueller's report cited 10 instances of possible obstruction. Surely one of them was prosecutable, yes?
Quote:

The Mueller report scrutinized 10 instances in which Trump lashed out or otherwise injected himself into the Russia investigation. Those include his May 2017 firing of then-FBI director James Comey; his request to Comey three months earlier to drop an investigation into his administration's national security adviser Michael Flynn; and his subsequent efforts to have Mueller fired.

In their memo, the two officials, Edward O'Callaghan and Steven Engel, asserted that none of those acts amount to criminal obstruction of justice and said evidence suggested that Trump took the steps he did "not for an illegal purpose" but because he believed the investigation was politically motivated and hampering his ability to govern.

Quote:

Trump saw what was happening to him as a political witch hunt. That was cited in the memo as a primary reason the president should not be charged with a crime.
Quote:

"After the President provided his direction, in each instance, the orders were not carried out," the memo states. "Of course, it is true that an act may constitute an attempt or an endeavor, even if unsuccessful. But the facts that the President could have given these directions himself, and did not remove any subordinate for failing to convey his directions, weigh against finding an intent to obstruct justice."

They argued that the facts in the Trump investigation did not match up with any other prior obstruction prosecutions. Most of the obstruction cases cited by Mueller, they said, involved instances in which there was an inherently wrongful effort to hide or destroy evidence or to thwart the investigation of an underlying crime. Those factors do not exist here, they wrote.

Link
will25u
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Rapier108
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Arkancide
"If you will not fight for right when you can easily win without blood shed; if you will not fight when your victory is sure and not too costly; you may come to the moment when you will have to fight with all the odds against you and only a precarious chance of survival. There may even be a worse case. You may have to fight when there is no hope of victory, because it is better to perish than to live as slaves." - Sir Winston Churchill
aggiehawg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Aaaand the Clinton death toll continues to rise.
Tramp96
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I bet he shot himself in the back of the head.
zip90
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Tramp96 said:

I bet he shot himself in the back of the head.

Twice
aggiehawg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
zip90 said:

Tramp96 said:

I bet he shot himself in the back of the head.

Twice
With a bolt action rifle.
American Hardwood
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
That article is over a year old. Why tweet about it now?
dreyOO
How long do you want to ignore this user?
As a reminder that the truly evil people in this world continue to live forever apparently? I'm waiting for that hag to depart the earth.
aggiehawg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Quote:

Former Attorney General William Barr is unleashing heavy criticism of former special counsel Robert Mueller to an unprecedented degree years after his Russia investigation came to an end.

"I don't think he was on top of his game. I think he made some very serious errors," Barr said in an interview with former New York Times editor Bari Weiss on her Honestly podcast published Thursday.
Quote:

"He goes out and hires partisan Democrats to make up his investigative team, which means half the country is going to be suspicious from the very beginning," Barr told Weiss, according to the transcript. "That defeated the whole purpose of naming him. I think it was pretty evident within a few months of his taking the position that there had been no collusion."
Well, duh. When they didn't renew the Carter Page FISA in September 2017, it was clear they knew.

Quote:

"But instead of stopping it at that point and letting the country move on, he took two instances, which clearly on their face were not obstruction and which even his final report doesn't try to argue were obstruction," and used them to "bootstrap the rest of the two-year investigation," Barr added.
They were trying to bait Trump into actually doing something they could then scream about OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE with all of the leaks to provoke him.

Quote:

Critics of Barr have long condemned his rollout of Mueller's report, including his sending a letter to Congress with a summary of its findings that preceded the report's release. But in speaking with Weiss, Barr expressed exasperation at what he said was the Mueller team's failure to heed his request to deliver to him a report that could be released to the public immediately.

"I asked him, when you give me the report, you have to sanitize it so I'm in a position to release it as soon as you give it to me because if there's a delay between the time you give me the report and the time I can make it public under the law ... a lot of damage can be done to the country, the stock market, and our foreign adversaries. People are going to wonder if the president's going to jail. So you have to give it to me in a form in which I can release it," Barr said.

The former attorney general said what he got, a report with no redactions and grand jury materials that needed to be concealed, forced him to come forward with a summary while redactions were implemented for roughly three weeks. This was despite Mueller saying he understood Barr's directive to give him a report that could be released quickly, the former attorney general said.
Quote:

"I don't know why it was done. It was inexplicable to me," Barr said. He said in the intervening period he had to tell people "what the bottom line was: that there was going to be no indictment of the president and, therefore, there was no collusion. He didn't reach a decision on obstruction. I took the sentence from his conclusion and said while he didn't find obstruction, he didn't exonerate him. I put that in the letter. And then I said, 'However, I am making the decision based on the report, and I don't find there was obstruction.' And then I explained why I didn't find there was obstruction. So half the letter is me explaining my decision not Mueller's decision. And I thought that was the responsible thing to do. People who are acting in good faith can scour that letter and not see anything misleading in it."

He added: "The other thing I haven't really understood what the thrust of this complaint is because we got the report out a couple of weeks later, and if the stuff was so damaging, why didn't Congress impeach him at that point? There were crickets. So the idea that I affected the thing by summarizing the report ... was the left-wing throwing a tantrum because Mueller didn't deliver the goods as far as they were concerned."
Link

Barr's being disingenuous here. He knows that Pelosi. Nadler and Schiff were counting on using that grand jury information as a basis for impeaching Trump. She rewrote the rules of the House and hired a bunch of lawyers in anticipation of getting their hands on that information from Mueller. But before Mueller finished the report, DC Circuit Court of Appeals restricted access to grand jury material under federal rule 6(e). That decision derailed their plans.

Barr dropped the ball plenty of times after this but he outmaneuvered Team Mueller and saved Trump from an impeachment for anything in the Mueller investigation.
will25u
How long do you want to ignore this user?
will25u
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Election integrity and Trump criminal investigation guy.




will25u
How long do you want to ignore this user?
TTT!

whatthehey78
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Implication(s)??
aggiehawg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
whatthehey78 said:

Implication(s)??
Durham is another bust in the justice department. He knows the FBI was dirty but won't directly expose and charge them for it.
whatthehey78
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
aggiehawg said:

whatthehey78 said:

Implication(s)??
Durham is another bust in the justice department. He knows the FBI was dirty but won't directly expose and charge them for it.
Thanks
First Page Last Page
Page 1391 of 1412
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.