aggiehawg said:

---

RoscoePColtrane said:

---

Cepe said:

---

RoscoePColtrane said:

---

Cepe said:

---

Even if sessions is replaced can the new person reign in Mueller? Is it as simple as rescinding the authorization letters or res coping with a new directive or has the train already left the station?

---

They just fire him on the spot. He was illegally appointed by definition. No crime was committed to justify it, and even Rosenstein said it himself he saw nothing criminal and appointed one anyway.

---

That is the most expedient way for sure but does that work politically? I think Trump would be hammered by the public no matter how justified he makes it.

It seems to date trump has stayed away from that solution because most of the electorate doesn't understand what's going on.

---

And what political flack is he going to take besides a bunch of crying? They cry all day every day anyway. When Mueller is fired for cause they'll get over it when they eventually realize there is nothing they can do about it. It you're worried about bad press that's laughable, it's bad 24/7

---

Judge Ellis is the wild card here. If he is as fired up as it appears he is, at the next hearing he can insist that Mueller and not his lackeys appear in his court, even Rosenstein for that matter. Some judges do not appreciate it when the junior flunkies are dispatched to take the beating and possible contempt charges. (If that is where there this headed, that is.)

Ellis did throw Mueller a life-line, CIPA. Those procedures would not be in open court, instead ex parte in camera communications and the use of the SCIF in the courthouse. Doesn't mean Ellis couldn't sanction Mueller or Rosenstein, however, if he finds they have been less than candid in his court.

---

Hopefully the judge is not on the favor train and the ex-parte is an honest review.

Wait a minute. What was Nunes really asking for?

Quote:

---

The Department of Justice also shot back on Sunday, released the letter sent to Nunes on May 3, which addressed the classified information Nunes had requested. It appears from the letter Nunes had asked for information on a specific individual, not yet named and considered by DOJ to be a very valuable person for a counterintelligence operation.

"Disclosure of responsive information to such requests can risk severe consequences, including potential loss of human lives, damage to relationships with valued international partners, compromise of ongoing criminal investigations, and interference with intelligence activities," stated the May, 3 letter from Assistant Attorney General Stephen Boyd.

---

LINK

I think Sara Carter is reading the tea leaves wrong. In the April 30 letter Nines request the original document that prompted Russia investigation unredacted. He sent one on April 4th and they sent him the redacted version.

aggiehawg said:

---

Wait a minute. What was Nunes really asking for?

---

Apparently something important based on DOJ's go f-yourself reply and Nunes' threat to hold Sessions in contempt.

RoscoePColtrane said:

---

I think Sara Carter is reading the tea leaves wrong. In the April 30 letter Nines request the original document that prompted Russia investigation unredacted. He sent one on April 4th and they sent him the redacted version.

---

But that's not what the Boyd letter references. That was about a specific person in counter-intel that Nunes requested info about.

Maybe it isn't Mueller related?

Why doesn't Nunes call Sessions up and say "Hey Jeff, dafuq is going on here?!"

Kinda what I was thinking. Do these people not talk to each other?

I need to get to my computer to look at that letter

Tailgate88 said:

---

Why doesn't Nunes call Sessions up and say "Hey Jeff, dafuq is going on here?!"

---

That's what makes me think it is Mueller related. He can't talk to Sessions, has to deal with Rosenstein.

aggiehawg said:

---

RoscoePColtrane said:

---

I think Sara Carter is reading the tea leaves wrong. In the April 30 letter Nines request the original document that prompted Russia investigation unredacted. He sent one on April 4th and they sent him the redacted version.

---

But that's not what the Boyd letter references. That was about a specific person in counter-intel that Nunes requested info about.

Maybe it isn't Mueller related?

---

Ok I don't have the 4/24 letter it's classified evidently, but I was under the understanding it was wanting the Electronic Communication (EC) related to the opening of the FBI's Russia counterintelligence probe. That's different from the Scope letter that's in Ellis' court. They did get a redacted version on the EC on 4/10 but he wanted the redactions removed. Him and Gowdy viewed the redacted EC in a SCIF on 4/10

I'm thinking he has an idea what's under the black spots and named a specific name I guess, and the DOJ is balking at the request. But my real issue us Nunes is a member of the Gang of Eight, he's got clearance to see anything except executive privilege seals. Even if it has to be under SCIF conditions, his access is nearly unlimited. Something is very fishy about that.

Quote:

---

I'm thinking he has an idea what's under the black spots and named a specific name I guess, and the DOJ is balking at the request. But my real issue us Nunes is a member of the Gang of Eight, he's got clearance to see anything except executive privilege seals. Even if it has to be under SCIF conditions, his access is nearly unlimited. Something is very fishy about that.

---

Indeed it is fishy. Seems like they are playing Valerie Plame 2.0. But it also says DNI Coates and the White House agree to withhold that information.

Separation of powers problem, in my view. Why?

Are the Brits trying to protect Steele or one of his sources?

Or is this just the standard boilerplate? "National security," "human lives at stake," yada yada yada.

I must have been mistaken (correcting my spread sheet), they saw the EC unredacted on 10/3, but Nunes found out there was no intelligence from the Five Eyes network


I think this interview explains what he's looking for.

Quote:

---

We don't understand, we've never understood. We don't have access to these finished intelligence products, and we've never seen one. We thought maybe one went through a different channel that was kept really secret... well, in fact, after our investigators reviewed this, there was no Five Eyes intelligence product, as has been reported. There was no product. And I think that is a major problem...

At the highest level, what is this about? A counterintelligence operation that was at the height of the political campaign, where you opened up an investigation, using these intelligence services to spy on the other campaign, it is really serious stuff...

I can tell you we now longtime associates of Hillary Clinton, including Sidney Blumenthal and Corey Shearer, were actively giving information to the State Dept. that was making its way to the FBI... So we know this was at least from two witnesses, and so we're trying to piece all that together.

There was no official intelligence that was used to start this investigation, we know that Sidney Blumenthal and others were pushing information into the State Department.

---

aggiehawg said:

---

I'm thinking he has an idea what's under the black spots and named a specific name I guess, and the DOJ is balking at the request. But my real issue us Nunes is a member of the Gang of Eight, he's got clearance to see anything except executive privilege seals. Even if it has to be under SCIF conditions, his access is nearly unlimited. Something is very fishy about that.
Indeed it is fishy. Seems like they are playing Valerie Plame 2.0. But it also says DNI Coates and the White House agree to withhold that information.

Separation of powers problem, in my view. Why?

Are the Brits trying to protect Steele or one of his sources?

Or is this just the standard boilerplate? "National security," "human lives at stake," yada yada yada.

---

It says in "consultation with". Does that necessarily mean "agreed with" withholding?

If the White House did agree to withholding, which reasons given for withholding make any sense?

Loss of human life. (I doubt this, putting Arkanicide jokes aside)

Damage to relations with valued international partners. ( possible, but President Trump wants this witch hunt ended and I doubt he fears ruffling a few international feathers)

Compromise ongoing criminal investigation (This one raises very interesting implications)

Interference with intelligence activities. (Not sure about this one unless there is a recent counter intelligence investigation ongoing that benefits the White House)

Or the White House only agreed to withholding information to make sure there is no appearance of obstruction.

Quote:

---

It says in "consultation with". Does that necessarily mean "agreed with" withholding?

If the White House did agree to withholding, which reasons given for withholding make any sense?

---

Trump can declassify it anyway. So I must assume they at least grudgingly agreed with it.

delete

Levin is going to "investigate the cabal of Comey, Mueller, and Rosenstein" on his show tonight on Fox.

Uhhmm? I need a translation on the Datto stuff, please? What did I just try to read?

aggiehawg said:

---

Uhhmm? I need a translation on the Datto stuff, please? What did I just try to read?

---

Datto Inc is the Backup of the server they lost the custody paperwork on. I think she just trying to point out no issues with the chain of custody and reportedly it's being completely reviewed and it consists of 7 hard drives.

Thank you so much!

I don't need any help feeling mentally slow, but was that Klingon, or pure Antartican?

RoscoePColtrane said:

---

aggiehawg said:

---

Uhhmm? I need a translation on the Datto stuff, please? What did I just try to read?

---

Datto Inc is the Backup of the server they lost the custody paperwork on. I think she just trying to point out no issues with the chain of custody and reportedly it's being completely reviewed and it consists of 7 hard drives.

---

Does it show there were multiple invasions of the server by foreign actors when Hill was Sec/State??

Hopefully it's just copies of the Datto stuff, right? If they gave it over to Comey it would likely achieve the same fate as the IRS laptops and HRC everything she touches.

Adam Ag 98 said:

---

Hopefully it's just copies of the Datto stuff, right? If they gave it over to Comey it would likely achieve the same fate as the IRS laptops and HRC everything she touches.

---

Datto uses a dual redundancy system, regardless if they turned over actual drives of one of the backups, they have another backup.

Hawg in that # 21 report it mentions multiple invasions from multiple parties

Also shows she had Malware on her server dating back to 2009, like they never ran any kind of security on it whatsoever, it was wide open to the world

ccatag said:

---

Remember when the liberals would parrot how smart, superior, and qualified Hillary was all the damn time?

---

Even after Comey basically called her a moron. No intent because she's just that stupid.

Quote:

---

Hawg in that # 21 report it mentions multiple invasions from multiple parties

---

But Comey assured us they couldn't determine a breach had occurred.

aggiehawg said:

---

Quote:

---

Hawg in that # 21 report it mentions multiple invasions from multiple parties

---

But Comey assured us they couldn't determine a breach had occurred.

---

Yeah well here is incident 1 and 2, good ole Comey such a pillar of truth

Justice shouldn't only occur, but it should be swift. Justice delayed is justice denied.

Also didn't Rosenstein persomally tell President Trump he wasn't a target? Dude is as slimy as Comey.

Contreras? Uhmm, no. He's under Chief Justice Roberts and the Supervisory FISC Judge Collyer. Not DOJ.

Makes no sense.

aggiehawg said:

---

Contreras? Uhmm, no. He's under Chief Justice Roberts and the Supervisory FISC Judge Collyer. Not DOJ.

Makes no sense.

---

That was my impression as well (potential loss of lives, etc.), but...

Several people I follow on twitter agree with The Last Refuge:
REX @_VachelLindsay_
Stealth Jeff @drawandstrike

I guess we will find out sooner, not later.

Rockdoc said:

---

Kinda what I was thinking. Do these people not talk to each other?

---

Mr Magoo doesn't want to do much outside of cracking down on illegal immigrants and potheads, both of which I support.

Unfortunately for him, and us, his job involves a little more than that.

His appointment to AG was President Trump's worst mistake. Then again, I don't think any of us realized just how worthless the entire GOP Senate is...which is where this bozo came from.