The Farkas interview. Had to be about Page and the other surveillance that FISA Title I warrant facilitated.FriscoKid said:aggiehawg said:Here's an interesting question. Assuming that meeting even took place (White House logs suggest otherwise) was Comey directed to withhold information from the dossier that related to Carter Page?? For fear that would alert Trump to the FISA warrant?scottimus said:
NEW THEORY ON MEETING AND CC OF REID, CURTIS
I just heard someone suggest that maybe Reid "witnessed" the meeting and this was Susan's attempt to "shut him up" or get out in front of any reporting that may have happened. Something that she forgot about until her last moments of "cleaning things up."
Just another idea I hadn't heard yet.
What was the interview?
"If they knew how we were getting the information they would shut it down. We had to unmask and distribute as fast as possible."
I don't see Rice ever reaching hero status...unless, she falls on her own sword...literally.texrover91 said:
Rice hands maybe dirty, but she will bring down Obama and HRC. She flipped. Yates should be worried - she hasn't been mentioned in a while. I think the MYE (mid year exam) was about the trump/Russia plan pre/post election, not Hilary/emails, but Russiagate will get back to that
Rice may be dirty but she and Flynn will be the heroes
That's what I'm seeing currently but who knows what happens
A tingle just shot up my legaggiehawg said:
Buzzfeed has been sued. They are trying to cover their azzes before they go the way of Gawker and are sued out of business.
Quote:
One name recently linked to the dossier is Daniel Jones, a former investigator for Democratic California Sen. Dianne Feinstein when she chaired the Senate Intelligence Committee.
Jones was named in the January letter that Grassley sent to Clinton campaign and DNC officials seeking communications with a list of people linked to the dossier. Jones, who worked for Feinstein until Dec. 2015, also appears to have links to Steele as well as to Warner.
In his text messages with Warner, Waldman wrote that "[Steele] said he will also speak w Dan Jones whom he says is talking to you."
"I pointed out there is no privilege in that discussion although Dan is a good and very trustworthy guy," he added later.
"I encouraged him to engage with you for the sake of the truth and of vindication of the dossier," added Waldman.
"[Steele] said Dan Jones is coming to see you," Waldman wrote later. "I suggest you explain to Dan why a call is the necessary first step rather than a letter from your perspective."
Jones, who operates the Penn Quarter Group, a consulting firm, did not respond to a voice mail or private message on Twitter.
The libs think this is it. They've got Trump now because not only of Porter, but because they've blown the Russia, Russia, Russia narrative wide open and Trump is going down.blindey said:
Can you give updates for those of us unable to watch?
Yep. They've got him this time.Rapier108 said:The libs think this is it. They've got Trump now because not only of Porter, but because they've blown the Russia, Russia, Russia narrative wide open and Trump is going down.blindey said:
Can you give updates for those of us unable to watch?
aggiehawg said:All roads lead back to the Clintons.RoscoePColtrane said:
And let's not forget that the Australian diplomat that reportedly Papadopoulos drunk bragged to was the money procurement contact for the Clinton Health Access Initiative (CHAI) Alexander Downer actually is the person that signs off on the distribution of a billion A$ in funding to CHAI.
Total coincidence he happens to be the one that runs into a drunk Papadopoulos in London and it triggers an investigation into the future POTUS.
What a waste of money.blindey said:
Oh. I forgot. Etcetera is a paid leftist shill.
Exactly! Point on.SpreadsheetAg said:I wonder if it was only to herself or if others were BCC'd. Those names would not show up on the outgoing or incoming address list. You could however, subpoena each person named in that email for that specific date and time to see if they were BCC'd - that might help explain some things.stetson said:GCP12 said:
Wow, Q is right, these people really are stupid.
If she just e-mailed it to herself - that is a CYA and a bad lie.
If she BCC'd others - it's a "lets get on the same sheet of music" email and points to conspiracy.
Then Paul Ryan will appoint Hillary as VP and resign so she can take her place as the rightful election winner.aginlakeway said:Yep. They've got him this time.Rapier108 said:The libs think this is it. They've got Trump now because not only of Porter, but because they've blown the Russia, Russia, Russia narrative wide open and Trump is going down.blindey said:
Can you give updates for those of us unable to watch?
Next up ... get rid of Pence, for some yet to be determined reason ...
Yep. Don't interact with him.blindey said:
Oh. I forgot. Etcetera is a paid leftist shill.
loletcetera said:
The ongoing Senate Intel Committee hearing with Wray, Coates, and Pompei is worth paying attention to.
aginlakeway said:Yep. They've got him this time.Rapier108 said:The libs think this is it. They've got Trump now because not only of Porter, but because they've blown the Russia, Russia, Russia narrative wide open and Trump is going down.blindey said:
Can you give updates for those of us unable to watch?
Next up ... get rid of Pence, for some yet to be determined reason ...
Hmmm... I wonder if they can make it to 6 months.Quote:
Secret documents detailing special prosecutor Ken Starr's investigation of President Bill Clinton will reportedly be unsealed following a federal court's ruling Monday and could be used as a roadmap for Special Counsel Robert Mueller's probe into possible collusion between President Donald Trump's campaign and Russia.
Chief Judge Beryl A. Howell, of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, stated that the court would release some of the documents, per CNN's request, but that the court will also review other documents and determine if those will be made public.
Among other things, the documents reportedly describe how Starr's team and Clinton's attorneys negotiated for six months before the president sat down for an interview under oath.
Again with this? Well, what are they? Give us an example. I'll take a heavily redacted example. Anything to bolster this claim of "grave concerns" would be appreciated. Barring that, gfy. Your agency has been exposed and simple denials aren't going to cut it. It's pathetic.Quote:
Christopher Wray: "We had then and continue to have now grave concerns about the accuracy of the memorandum, because of omissions."
Quote:
The judge who accepted Flynn's guilty plea was Rudolph Contreras. Mysteriously, just days after taking Flynn's plea, Judge Contreras recused himself from the case. The press has been remarkably uncurious about this development. No rationale for the recusal has been offered, no explanation for why, if Judge Contreras had some sort of conflict, the recusal came after the guilty plea, not before.
We can note that Contreras is one of the eleven federal district judges assigned to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court. We do not know if Judge Contreras signed one or more of the FISA warrants the Justice Department sought for Trump campaign figures Carter Page and Paul Manafort (or even if signing a FISA warrant would constitute grounds for a conflict in Flynn's case). We can note, however, that Contreras is one of just three FISA court judges who sits in the District of Columbia, where it is likely the Trump-Russia FISA warrants were sought.
When Judge Contreras pulled out, Flynn's case was reassigned to Judge Emmet G. Sullivan. We now know that one of Judge Sullivan's first actions on the case was to file an order directing Mueller to provide Flynn with any evidence in the special counsel's possession that is favorable to Flynn, whether on the issue of guilt or of sentencing. Significantly, the order stresses that if Mueller has such evidence but believes it is not "material" and therefore that Flynn is not entitled to disclosure of it, Mueller must show the evidence to the court so that Judge Sullivan may decide whether to mandate its disclosure.
Now, it could be that this is just Judge Sullivan's standard order on exculpatory information, filed in every case over which he presides. But it is noteworthy that Flynn had already pled guilty, and in the course of doing so had agreed to Mueller's demand that he waive "the right to any further discovery or disclosures of information not already provided" in addition to forfeiting many other trial and appellate rights. (See plea agreement, pp. 6-7.) It certainly appears that Sullivan's order supersedes the plea agreement and imposes on the special counsel the obligation to reveal any and all evidence suggesting that Flynn is innocent of the charge to which he has admitted guilt.
Could this provide General Flynn with factual grounds of which he was previously unaware to seek to have his plea vacated? Would he have a viable legal basis to undo the plea agreement that he and his lawyer signed on November 30? We do not know at this point.
All we can say is that Flynn's sentencing has just been postponed until May.
Closer to the election.Quote:
All we can say is that Flynn's sentencing has just been postponed until May.
drcrinum said:
Well, we know that Strzok changed some 302s. Whose? It may not be just a coicidence that Comey made a statement to the effect that Flynn hadn't lied...there was just a misunderstanding. Then later Mueller charged Flynn with lying. The interview was not recorded, so it's the agent's word against the defendant. Who else was present at the interview with Flynn besides Strzok? Would be interesting if it was Preistap, someone who may have flipped.
drcrinum said:
Well, we know that Strzok changed some 302s. Whose? It may not be just a coicidence that Comey made a statement to the effect that Flynn hadn't lied...there was just a misunderstanding. Then later Mueller charged Flynn with lying. The interview was not recorded, so it's the agent's word against the defendant. Who else was present at the interview with Flynn besides Strzok? Would be interesting if it was Preistap, someone who may have flipped.
That is a name that has been purposely masked and remained so all this time. Gritz spoke about him in a podcast and said that he had contradicted Strzok's account of what went on. This unknown agent's account aligned more along with what Comey said under oath originally when he was still FBI Chief. Reportedly he is working with the IG and is key. That 302 has been withheld from congress, but the IG reportedly has all the 302's that the committees are still waiting on. Likely in that 1.2 million document dump they trucked over to the HPSCI.drcrinum said:
Well, we know that Strzok changed some 302s. Whose? It may not be just a coicidence that Comey made a statement to the effect that Flynn hadn't lied...there was just a misunderstanding. Then later Mueller charged Flynn with lying. The interview was not recorded, so it's the agent's word against the defendant. Who else was present at the interview with Flynn besides Strzok? Would be interesting if it was Preistap, someone who may have flipped.
Still waiting for an answer: What is it you think Wray has done that is cause for termination?RoscoePColtrane said:FriscoKid said:RoscoePColtrane said:
Wray needs to go. Pure swamp
You must have seen the hearing today.
Listening on the radio
It is painfully obvious that Wray is trying to salvage a sinking, burning ship with a mutiny on one side and foot soldiers of a previous captain on the other.. The sails are torn, the hull is breached, and leaks are everywhere. Either he joins the original crew or sinks the ship, in my opinion.,,,and lets everyone deal with the sharks.etcetera said:Still waiting for an answer: What is it you think Wray has done that is cause for termination?RoscoePColtrane said:FriscoKid said:RoscoePColtrane said:
Wray needs to go. Pure swamp
You must have seen the hearing today.
Listening on the radio
