Yep. He only comes on this thread for one reason.akm91 said:
Looks like our resident troll got the talking points.
Yep. He only comes on this thread for one reason.akm91 said:
Looks like our resident troll got the talking points.
I believe Threadreaderapp was on top of this a couple of months ago. If my memory serves, this isn't a surprise, at least to readers of this thread.drcrinum said:
http://thehill.com/376858-australian-diplomat-whose-tip-prompted-fbis-russia-probe-has-tie-to-clintonsQuote:
Australian diplomat whose tip prompted FBI's Russia-probe has tie to Clintons
The Australian diplomat whose tip in 2016 prompted the Russia-Trump investigation previously arranged one of the largest foreign donations to Bill and Hillary Clinton's charitable efforts, documents show.
Former Australian Foreign Minister Alexander Downer's role in securing $25 million in aid from his country to help the Clinton Foundation fight AIDS is chronicled in decade-old government memos archived on the Australian foreign ministry's website....
Downer, now Australia's ambassador to London, provided the account of a conversation with Trump campaign adviser George Papadopoulos at a London bar in 2016 that became the official reason the FBI opened the Russia counterintelligence probe.
But lawmakers say the FBI didn't tell Congress about Downer's prior connection to the Clinton Foundation. Republicans say they are concerned the new information means nearly all of the early evidence the FBI used to justify its election-year probe of Trump came from sources supportive of the Clintons, including the controversial Steele dossier....
No it isn't. Still have to wonder though. If Papadops info was that the Russians had Hillary's bathroom server emails why wouldn't he let the Clintons know that it was a possibility? Or did he? And that's where all of the Russia/Trump crap started?Quote:
I believe Threadreaderapp was on top of this a couple of months ago. If my memory serves, this isn't a surprise, at least to readers of this thread.
I don't doubt Brennan was incompetent, but only because I believe his zealotry led him to have goals other than a normal CIA director. Not necessarily treaonous, although I wouldn't put it past him due to his marxist past, but HIS goals didn't mesh with the Directors job description. At the very least, his goals were put above his duties.aggiehawg said:So you are opting for the "Brennan was incompetent" angle? Can't really argue with that possibility.etcetera said:The briefing by Hannigan was pre-election. The article implies Hannigan's visit was in August or September 2016, but the article didn't list a specific date.Quote:
You would have to know the contents of the call to know if it was illicit. Also at what point was these conversations? Pre-election vs post election? Who made these calls?
As to whether the contents of the intercepted communications were "illicit", it seems highly improbable the head of British intelligence would have flown to the US to give an in-person briefing to the CIA Director unless the information was of a serious nature.
And to protect HUMINT sources as well.MouthBQ98 said:
Or they wanted to keep the means and process of obtaining it off the written record to evade legal restrictions or detection.
Iirc, she was the beautiful redhead Russian spy. Can't help but wonder how many hundreds of spies and operatives from Russia and China are currently living and working in the US.Quote:
...the 10 Russian spies whose thwarted plot had to be hidden to salvage the Uranium One deal in 2010, including the notorious Anna Chapman
etcetera said:Iirc, she was the beautiful redhead Russian spy. Can't help but wonder how many hundreds of spies and operatives from Russia and China are currently living and working in the US.Quote:
...the 10 Russian spies whose thwarted plot had to be hidden to salvage the Uranium One deal in 2010, including the notorious Anna Chapman
aggiehawg said:Not if the surveillance was illegal. Couldn't be used in a criminal court and would subject the "spies" to criminal sanctions themselves.Quote:
If there were transcripts of something illicit they would have leaked OR Mueller would have already indicted Trump. No way they let trump survive a year in office with actual evidence of collusion in the NSA database.
Quote:
FBI agent Peter Strzok was told of possible breach into Clinton's server but didn't follow up, sources say
During the final months of the Clinton email investigation, FBI agent Peter Strzok was advised of an irregularity in the metadata of Hillary Clinton's server that suggested a possible breach, but there was no significant follow up, according to two sources with knowledge of the matter.
Sources told Fox News that Strzok, who sent anti-Trump text messages that got him removed from the ongoing Special Counsel Robert Mueller's Russia probe, was told about the metadata anomaly in 2016, but Strzok did not support a formal damage assessment.
One source said: "Nothing happened."
Fox News is told the Justice Department Inspector General, Michael E. Horowitz, is aware of the allegations.
Comey is such a weaselQuote:
In his July 2016 statement, Comey said: "With respect to potential computer intrusion by hostile actors, we did not find direct evidence that Secretary Clinton's personal e-mail domain, in its various configurations since 2009, was successfully hacked. But, given the nature of the system and of the actors potentially involved, we assess that we would be unlikely to see such direct evidence."
Comey said hostile actors got access to private accounts of Clinton's close contacts. He also said Clinton's use of personal email was widely known, her email address was readily apparent and she used the account while travelling overseas where hostile nations and sophisticated hackers operate.
"Given that combination of factors, we assess it is possible that hostile actors gained access to Secretary Clinton's personal e-mail account," Comey said at the time.
That statement by Brennan highlighted in the quote has been eating on me, and I finally have found enough evidence to call him a liar. This text message from Bongino in reply to one by Brennan brought it to light:aggiehawg said:
From the Mayer article:This makes absolutely no sense to me. Steele's sources were Russian. That's the purview of the CIA. They also were talking with British intelligence. Why not at least try to get some confirmation from CIA Russian assets? Or ask British intel to check with their Russian assets?Quote:
Inevitably, though, word of the dossier began to spread through Washington. A former State Department official recalls a social gathering where he danced around the subject with the British Ambassador, Sir Kim Darroch. After exchanging cryptic hints, to make sure that they were both in the know, he asked the Ambassador, "Is this guy Steele legit?" The Ambassador replied, "Absolutely." Brennan, then the C.I.A. director, also heard the rumors. (Nunes reportedly plans to examine Steele's interactions with the C.I.A. and the State Department next.) But Brennan said recently, on "Meet the Press," that he heard just "snippets" about the dossier "in press circles," emphasizing that he didn't see the dossier until well after the election, and said that "it did not play any role whatsoever" in the intelligence community's appraisal of Russian election meddling. Brennan said of the dossier, "It was up to the F.B.I. to see whether or not they could verify any of it."
Yet, in August 2016, Obama and Biden are briefed about the Russians allegedly trying to influence the election in Trump's favor. But the dossier is never mentioned? The one that actually named the Russians supposedly running the computer operations?
Quote:
C.I.A. Had Evidence of Russian Effort to Help Trump Earlier Than Believed
...The former officials said that in late August -- 10 weeks before the election -- John O. Brennan, then the C.I.A. director, was so concerned about increasing evidence of Russia's election meddling that he began a series of urgent, individual briefings for eight top members of Congress, some of them on secure phone lines while they were on their summer break.
Rumors, possibly somebody related to the dossier, possibly Russian/Ukrainian.backintexas2013 said:
I don't remember seeing this at all
"
15) The latest wildcard is the fake news report that Mulehead is investigating a murder related to the investigation--but not the Shawn guy. Obviously this is Seth Rich. "
Nor Sessions.hbtheduce said:
It is interesting the Mueller has never earned a nickname from Trump....
Not only has he not earned a nickname, but Trump has never called him out personally. This is part of my reasoning for still holding out hope Mueller is actually doing what he should be.hbtheduce said:
It is interesting the Mueller has never earned a nickname from Trump....
drcrinum said:Rumors, possibly somebody related to the dossier, possibly Russian/Ukrainian.backintexas2013 said:
I don't remember seeing this at all
"
15) The latest wildcard is the fake news report that Mulehead is investigating a murder related to the investigation--but not the Shawn guy. Obviously this is Seth Rich. "
http://www.palmerreport.com/analysis/murder-robert-mueller-trump-russia/8567/
Good Lord...talk about wild conjecture. I also love the line "what if Mueller finds the murderer?" Where is Angela Lansbury when you need her.Quote:
So this represents yet another unfortunate milestone spelling out just how uniquely treacherous the Trump-Russia scandal is in United States history. So what happens when or if Mueller finds the murderer?Circumstantial evidence in most or all of the mysterious deaths connected to the Trump-Russia scandal has always pointed back to Russian President Vladimir Putin and his underlings. Is Robert Mueller planning to get a U.S. grand jury to indict Putin for murder? Obviously, he couldn't be brought to trial. But it would be a stunning turn of events. And yet we now know that Mueller is indeed investigating an alleged murder that Putin probably ordered.
'Lurch' for Mueller ... and 'Panda Ears' for Sessionshbtheduce said:
It is interesting the Mueller has never earned a nickname from Trump....
Quote:
There are other things I came to know about Mueller. Like how he cannot stand this guy (McCabe). I am told how, as FBI Director, he would take reports from Andy's underlings while he made him wait outside because he "did not trust the weasel."
Andy should be worried. VERY WORRIED.
Had to put out hay watching it on delay right nowaggiehawg said:
Good interview with Gowdy and Goodlatte a few minutes ago on FNC Special Report.
Ball is in Sessions' court, now.
No can do, muchacho. The powers of the Inspector General's office are set out and limited by statute.RoscoePColtrane said:
I never considered the subpoena limitations of Horowitz, but he could be granted the power I suppose as granting him prosecutorial powers as well. That would eliminate their concern, if that's their only concern.
boulderaggie said:Nor Sessions.hbtheduce said:
It is interesting the Mueller has never earned a nickname from Trump....