You said it. It is some BSC type stuff I normally wouldn't believe, but with everything that seems to be playing out and all the "coincidences" I have a hard time doubting it at this point.drcrinum said:
(On a phone which works sometimes.)
This was posted a while back, but it is an ongoing thread that is periodically updated. I suspect it will run for a few more months before it is completed. What a family, the Strzoks are.
IDAGG said:
The interesting thing is if they accessed their personal email from their office, it goes through government servers which make the emails visible to the IT folks without any warrant needed. This is true for anyone who accesses their personal email from work, You can legally expect zero privacy because you are using your company's (or agencies) email servers..
The reason we haven't seen texts of a personal nature, I think, is because the DoJ isn't releasing them.drcrinum said:All government e-mail is archived so that it can be made available for FOIA, and believe me, there are scads of FOIA e-mail requests...just ask Judicial Watch. Every government employee knows this. So if you want to communicate with someone about a personal/private matter, you do it via non-government e-mail. If you wanted to communicate with someone about a nefarious/illegal/improper activity, you certainly wouldn't want to do that via government e-mail...but...unless if you think you will never be caught, meaning your superiors would approve of what you are doing.... Then in the case of Strzok & Page, they had a special reason to communicate via private channels, gmail being one way. Notice that we have not seen any texts concerning the amorous relationship between the two...they knew that the FBI separately recorded text messages, and likely they didn't want it locally known they were into undercover activities. I may be proven wrong, but I suspect nothing about their illicit affair will be found in the texts other than possible references to unscheduled meetings. Likely all such communications occurred via non-government phones and gmail, including IM gmail comms.Bald Messiah said:aggiehawg said:Bald Messiah said:aggiehawg said:
I value your opinion. I really do. I watch lots of threads and I typically star what you say. But, come on. Put your analytical vision on this. It's too convenient. "I gmailed you." Who says this? Really, when is the last time you said "Hey, I just yahoo'd you." Nobody does this.
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/byron-york-justice-department-withholds-majority-of-fbi-texts/article/2647289Quote:
"The department is not providing text messages that were purely personal in nature," Boyd wrote. "Furthermore, the department has redacted from some work-related text messages portions that were purely personal. The department's aim in withholding purely personal text messages and redacting personal portions of work-related text messages was primarily to facilitate the committee's access to potentially relevant text messages without having to cull through large quantities of material unrelated to either the investigation of former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's use of a personal email server or the investigation into Russian efforts to interfere with the 2016 presidential election."
backintexas is going to lose 75% of his interest in this story, nowSenor Cardgage said:The reason we haven't seen texts of a personal nature, I think, is because the DoJ isn't releasing them.drcrinum said:All government e-mail is archived so that it can be made available for FOIA, and believe me, there are scads of FOIA e-mail requests...just ask Judicial Watch. Every government employee knows this. So if you want to communicate with someone about a personal/private matter, you do it via non-government e-mail. If you wanted to communicate with someone about a nefarious/illegal/improper activity, you certainly wouldn't want to do that via government e-mail...but...unless if you think you will never be caught, meaning your superiors would approve of what you are doing.... Then in the case of Strzok & Page, they had a special reason to communicate via private channels, gmail being one way. Notice that we have not seen any texts concerning the amorous relationship between the two...they knew that the FBI separately recorded text messages, and likely they didn't want it locally known they were into undercover activities. I may be proven wrong, but I suspect nothing about their illicit affair will be found in the texts other than possible references to unscheduled meetings. Likely all such communications occurred via non-government phones and gmail, including IM gmail comms.Bald Messiah said:aggiehawg said:Bald Messiah said:aggiehawg said:
I value your opinion. I really do. I watch lots of threads and I typically star what you say. But, come on. Put your analytical vision on this. It's too convenient. "I gmailed you." Who says this? Really, when is the last time you said "Hey, I just yahoo'd you." Nobody does this.http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/byron-york-justice-department-withholds-majority-of-fbi-texts/article/2647289Quote:
"The department is not providing text messages that were purely personal in nature," Boyd wrote. "Furthermore, the department has redacted from some work-related text messages portions that were purely personal. The department's aim in withholding purely personal text messages and redacting personal portions of work-related text messages was primarily to facilitate the committee's access to potentially relevant text messages without having to cull through large quantities of material unrelated to either the investigation of former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's use of a personal email server or the investigation into Russian efforts to interfere with the 2016 presidential election."
I don't think we will see anything that would confirm they had an affair.
Quote:
As some have suggested, this is Watergate on steroids. Not only do we have one party colluding with government agencies to keep its candidate from being prosecuted for her crimes and preventing the election of the other party's candidate, but we also have a sitting and corrupt President using the powers of his office to subvert an election and hand-pick his successor.
Lock her up. Lock him up too. Lock them all up.
Quote:
Executive Order Blocking the Property of Persons Involved in Serious Human Rights Abuse or Corruption -- Issued on: December 21, 2017
...I therefore determine that serious human rights abuse and corruption around the world constitute an unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security, foreign policy, and economy of the United States, and I hereby declare a national emergency to deal with that threat.
I hereby determine and order:
Section 1. (a) All property and interests in property that are in the United States, that hereafter come within the United States, or that are or hereafter come within the possession or control of any United States person of the following persons are blocked and may not be transferred, paid, exported, withdrawn, or otherwise dealt in...
Quote:
(1) corruption, including the misappropriation of state assets, the expropriation of private assets for personal gain, corruption related to government contracts or the extraction of natural resources, or bribery; or;
SHOTS FIRED!drcrinum said:
https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/executive-order-blocking-property-persons-involved-serious-human-rights-abuse-corruption/Quote:
Executive Order Blocking the Property of Persons Involved in Serious Human Rights Abuse or Corruption -- Issued on: December 21, 2017
...I therefore determine that serious human rights abuse and corruption around the world constitute an unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security, foreign policy, and economy of the United States, and I hereby declare a national emergency to deal with that threat.
I hereby determine and order:
Section 1. (a) All property and interests in property that are in the United States, that hereafter come within the United States, or that are or hereafter come within the possession or control of any United States person of the following persons are blocked and may not be transferred, paid, exported, withdrawn, or otherwise dealt in...
Clearly this EO is going to be used to seize assets related to the Mexican & foreign drug cartels, and regarding human rights abuses the Clinton Foundation is likely going to fall under scrutiny of this EO (think Haiti & money laundering), but buried in the details is this little tidbit:Quote:
(1) corruption, including the misappropriation of state assets, the expropriation of private assets for personal gain, corruption related to government contracts or the extraction of natural resources, or bribery; or;
Uh-oh! Bingo! Uranium One!
I think Trump & Sessions put together this EO to provide a method of seizing the assets of the Clinton Foundation & entities related to Uranium One when the indictments are launched following the respective investigations, and in the future you are going to hear about it as the chips are cashed regarding the CF & U1. But it's really a much bigger deal than my two cents above. This EO has already named a number of foreign individuals to whom this EO already has been applied, and guess what...some of these these individuals have been sleeping with the Clintons and Obama. Oh yes! You need to learn about that. It's covered in the thread below as well as an overview of the EO:
https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/957051248074633217.html
Quote:
On Wednesday, as Republicans were clamoring to make public a secret document that they think will undercut the investigation into Russian meddling, President Trump made clear his desire: release the memo.
Trump's directive was at odds with his own Justice Department, which had warned that releasing the classified memo written by congressional Republicans would be "extraordinarily reckless" without an official review. Nevertheless, White House chief of staff John F. Kelly relayed the president's view to Attorney General Jeff Sessions though the decision to release the document ultimately lies with Congress.
Kelly and Sessions spoke twice that day in person during a small-group afternoon meeting and in a phone call later that evening, and Kelly conveyed Trump's desire, a senior administration official said.
If you have dealings with foreign crooks, you could be in deep doo-doo...has to have a foreign connection. Otherwise it doesn't apply.Rudebaeger said:
As for American citizens caught up in this, don't have to go thru the due process of law before their assets are seized ?
This EO seems too broadly written to be limited to foreign bad actors. The government could swoop in and snag anyone's assets (without due process) including any American's assets.
Read section (iii) of the EO. There is no due process. The POTUS cannot just make his own rules/laws and then enforce them w/o going thru Congress
This bothers me greatly.
It should bother you. O did a hell of a lot of this, and no one paid attention to it. I remember the "tell on your co-worker" mantra for the intelligence agencies. I hate it.Rudebaeger said:
As for American citizens caught up in this, don't have to go thru the due process of law before their assets are seized ?
This EO seems too broadly written to be limited to foreign bad actors. The government could swoop in and snag anyone's assets (without due process) including any American's assets.
Read section (iii) of the EO. There is no due process. The POTUS cannot just make his own rules/laws and then enforce them w/o going thru Congress
This bothers me greatly.
You mean this one?friscodick said:
I'm now in the affair is a cover up camp. They are simply using it as a ruse to explain their covert actions.
Also she looks like a cat lady and not in a good way. Actually I don't think there is a good way.
