oysterbayAG said:

---

Trump can't fire Rosenstein, Sessions or Mueller because the Senate Republicans have threatened him because of politics.

---

He can call their aaa into his office and chew their sss out until they don't have one. Do it in such a way as to not "obstruct Justice".

aggiehawg said:

---

Quote:

---

Who is the Investigator for the intelligence groups? Do they have an OIG department? It seems like Adm. Rogers got that ball rolling on his way out.

---

Robert Storch.

Appointed in December

Aw crap! Here we go:

Quote:

---

Earlier in his career, Mr. Storch also worked as a federal prosecutor in the Northern District of New York, most recently serving as the Deputy Criminal Chief and Counsel to the U.S. Attorney. He was also posted overseas for two years as a Department of Justice Resident Legal Advisor in Ukraine.

---

---

That guy has so much mess to wade through. Does he work with Horowitz at all? Meaning if the DOJ requests unmasking due to a faulty FISA, does the NSA have a right to refuse or do they just follow no matter what?

You nailed it. The mid-terms for the dems are beginning to look a lot like Custer at the Little Big Horn. The American people are not stupid. The establishment types inside the Beltway actually believe their stuff. The media and the true leftists believe their stuff, but that is it.

Napolitano is on crack, the lefty that posted this is relishing but in her haste to be greedy she cut off the best stuff. Nap is high as a kite this morning,

Here's the entire laughable interview

techno-ag said:

---

Line Ate Member said:

---

Hopefully after the OIG report comes out, there will be evidence of wrongdoing that those that need to be indicted will be and those that need to be impeached will have that happen as well.

I am a little worried about the report ever coming out though. Every single week, there seems to be some sort of thing that surfaces about the FBI that brings forth another round of issues. Hopefully the report win't be delayed and he has seen all of the information that the report can come out quickly.

It is pretty incredible how quickly a group can be corrupted. I am not sure how the DOJ will be able to save face without some serious restructuring of power and organization.

---

Patience. The longer it takes to come out, the worse it is on the Dems in the midterms.

---

I understand that but if they wait too long I'm worried the actual hard evidence (e-mails/texts etc) of all the wrongdoings will be suppressed with cries of "potential loss of life and muh national security" giving the slimy liberals (led by bug eyed Schiff) time to posture and ironically call it a witch hunt retribution by Trump (of course aided by the willing MSM).

I'm sure they'll also try to suppress the sworn testimonies of all the bad actors, which will give them time to smear McCabe/Page/Strozk etc. and intimate that they were coerced into lying to save themselves.

My hope is it's released with enough time to leak a lot of the hard data (Dems will try to complain but with all the leaking they've done even the uninformed sheep will roll their collective eyes at the hypocrisy). They were so brazen with their plotting I'm sure there are some nice juicy emails and texts giving LOTS of context to their "insurance policy."

I'm not confident much of the public can follow the legal minutia of this all. It has to be explained in simplified terms and then what was unlawful or unethical or improper needs to be outlined, and the harm to the public trust and rule of law made plain.

Quote:

---

That guy has so much mess to wade through. Does he work with Horowitz at all? Meaning if the DOJ requests unmasking due to a faulty FISA, does the NSA have a right to refuse or do they just follow no matter what?

---

Good question. IDK. My assumption is that if the requesting party has the required authority and access to request it, it is automatic.

For the most part, Inspector Generals stay in their own lanes, in my view. That isn't to say they can never cooperate with a fellow IG for another agency if an investigation overlaps across multiple agencies as it appears here.

Overlap? This is alphabet soup

Napolitano has really gone off of the rails here.

If Ellis does dismiss the Manafort indictment on the basis of lack of jurisdiction, the fruits of the search warrants are likely suppressed.

If after years of investigating Manafort, the Eastern District of Virginia didn't see fit to indict him, losing the evidence that Mueller (apparently) felt did justify that indictment would be a big blow to their case.

Once again, I wonder why there are no Statute of Limitations arguments here.

MouthBQ98 said:

---

I'm not confident much of the public can follow the legal minutia of this all. It has to be explained in simplified terms and then what was unlawful or unethical or improper needs to be outlined, and the harm to the public trust and rule of law made plain.

---

Yes, no doubt. I am sure I speak for most of us on this thread that we would not really understand NEARLY what is really going on without our resident legal eagles to explain. And this thread is probably one of the most accurate and timely places on the entire Internet to keep up with the breaking developments because so many of us are tracking and contributing.

aggiehawg said:

---

Napolitano has really gone off of the rails here.

---

He went off the rails a while back and has only been getting worse.

Quote:

---

I'm not confident much of the public can follow the legal minutia of this all. It has to be explained in simplified terms and then what was unlawful or unethical or improper needs to be outlined, and the harm to the public trust and rule of law made plain.

---

Plus, they have to be willing to listen.

I look at this thread almost like an engineering vs marketing scenario. Lots of technical legal minds that get into the details of all that is wrong with this case, but the court of public opinion is deeply entrenched on their respective sides and the majority who are most tuned out just go along with whatever late night hosts joke about. It is a bit like the engineers developing a product that works great for them and they love, but they have no idea how to market it to the masses.

Think our legal system can overcome the court of popular opinion? No way. It can't even overcome itself, as evidenced by how far this thing has gotten in the first place.

See also how the world says the Clinton impeachment was about sex.

See also John Roberts and Obamacare.

A huge percentage of Americans have no clue about most of the details in this thread and who is going to tell them?

Napolitano = "never-trumper" for awhile now. Wish he just take a long sabbatical and never return.

MouthBQ98 said:

---

I'm not confident much of the public can follow the legal minutia of this all. It has to be explained in simplified terms and then what was unlawful or unethical or improper needs to be outlined, and the harm to the public trust and rule of law made plain.

---

So address the nation similarly to how Netanyahu addressed the world. It may not be Trump that does it, but someone can outline and trace the dots for the American People once it is ready to go.

sam callahan said:

---

A huge percentage of Americans have no clue about most of the details in this thread and who is going to tell them?

---

I've expressed many times on here that this is my fear. Thanks to Roscoe and Hawg and others, we understand what's going on but the average Joe Schmoe only knows what they hear on the TV set. We know that the extreme left idiots and the never-Trumpers want only to see Trump gone, but what about the semi-normal left types and the slightly left-of-center types, and even the right down the middle types. Will they ever get enough to be swayed? I seriously doubt that we'll get any perp walks by HRC or Obama or anyone like that to really shake things up.

sam callahan said:

---

A huge percentage of Americans have no clue about most of the details in this thread and who is going to tell them?

---

Indictments following OIG's report will help - but only somewhat. Only an Obama "big fish" indictment or Mueller throwing in the towel will break the sound barrier.

MouthBQ98 said:

---

I'm not confident much of the public can follow the legal minutia of this all. It has to be explained in simplified terms and then what was unlawful or unethical or improper needs to be outlined, and the harm to the public trust and rule of law made plain.

---

Well, if there is one thing millennials tend to shout (even if they don't fully understand it) is DUE PROCESS.

Any American citizen can be branded "an agent of a foreign power" and spied upon, including cameras in their bedrooms, for instance. And all of their friends and their friends' friends can be unmasked and spied upon. They then can be criminally prosecuted as a direct result.

Start there.

RoscoePColtrane said:

---

hbtheduce said:

---

RoscoePColtrane said:

---

Mueller has pretty much buried himself in the past week, it may be unrecoverable. Quit watching talking heads and watch what is really going on. Every one of the pending cases are in a bad spot right now. Had Alex van der Zwaan not cut such a swift deal he'd be in position to challenge the non-sense they convicted him on. Mueller is essentially firing himself.

---

Is there any reason for Mueller to make these moves? It's been a interesting theory that the past couple moves made by the SC were to goad trump into firing RR or Mueller. They get to go down as pariahs and heroes. Plus the fall out might actually hurt trump.

Trump hasnt bit yet and I wonder if Mueller is setting up a "partisan" angle. This R judge "protected Russians", Rs in Congress "interfered in the investigation". Blah blah. He exits trying to do as much damage as possible? Idk he seems to be sandbagging the criminal side. Heck maybe he is only in place to listen to calls so Obama and Kerry can run around the world and convince other countries to #resist.

---

He has boxed himself in a corner. Rolling the dice that they could pull this garbage off, was a gamble. Odds were good, when they have the media weaponized, an AG recused and and old ally in his place. A staff dedicated to the cause over forcing Trump out of office, and the unfettered power available to him. But two unpredictable things happened. Horowitz being the watchdog he has been. And three sitting judges doing their jobs, and scrutinizing the prosecution.

The moves from here on out it is survival.

---

I believe the technical term Blindey used was "trick-f***".

If we're going to use technical terms, at least we need to be consistent.

It's an old lawyer term from back in the 80s when commercial litigation was really the wild west. A really senior lawyer that I work with at my firm uses the term frequently. And in this case, under the motivation of "getting" Trump, poor Mueller has trick****ed himself.

What about the specifics of the subpoena? has not the collusion been ruled upon by congressional investigation? Come answer any question from feelings to whatever seems too broad.

aggiehawg said:

---

From McCarthy:

Quote:

---

Plus, Kislyak was a foreign agent subject to FISA surveillance, so the FBI had recordings of his communications with Flynn and knew that Flynn had done nothing improper. (It has been presumed that Flynn's communications with Kislyak were intercepted because Kislyak, not Flynn, was the subject of a FISA warrant; now, with confirmation that Flynn was the subject of a counterintelligence investigation, we may need to revisit that presumption.)

---

Way ahead of you there, Andy, weren't we Roscoe?

A few days ago I suggested Trump should ignore DOJ for a moment and attack this on the intelligence end. Get the NSA and DNI to reveal how many FISA warrants were issued on his associates and family, plus a log of unmasking requests done during the transition on his associates and family.

---

I just had the opportunity to read the referenced Andrew McCarthy piece -- good read!

It's a little nebulous that way it is discussed, and I am not convinced that there was a separate FISA warrant on Flynn. It's quite possible that the disclosure was ambiguously stated to obscure the fact that Flynn was being monitored via a 2 hop from the Carter Page warrant. Note: the intel investigation on Flynn was never closed...so the question is: Was it ever opened? If you read McCarthy, he even questions how they could have opened a formal counterintelligence investigation on Flynn...and concludes it had a revenge motive. Plus nowhere in the past had we ever heard the slightest whisper of a FISA warrant on Flynn. I think this is something for Nunes to investigate.

aggiehawg said:

---

MouthBQ98 said:

---

I'm not confident much of the public can follow the legal minutia of this all. It has to be explained in simplified terms and then what was unlawful or unethical or improper needs to be outlined, and the harm to the public trust and rule of law made plain.

---

Well, if there is one thing millennials tend to shout (even if they don't fully understand it) is DUE PROCESS.

Any American citizen can be branded "an agent of a foreign power" and spied upon, including cameras in their bedrooms, for instance. And all of their friends and their friends' friends can be unmasked and spied upon. They then can be criminally prosecuted as a direct result.

Start there.

---

A young talented journalist could have a field day on this story with these social media comparisons.

That, in a nutshell, explains why the Mueller crew hasn't filed anything resembling a CIPA motion in Manafort's E.D. Va. case.

Whatever it is, the whole charade only keeps going if no one looks at what is really going on. Can't invite a federal judge to do that.

Rapier108 said:

---

aggiehawg said:

---

Napolitano has really gone off of the rails here.

---

He went off the rails a while back and has only been getting worse.

---

He's been off the rails since FOX pulled him for stating his claims about wire tapping Trump last year. When he came back on a week or two later, he was much subdued.

Historically, he has been Libertarian / Conservative, but someone got him bent like a pretzel. He starts out reasonable, but always ends up saying "The end is near for Trump". It's a shame, too, I always valued his opinions. Now, I just wish they'd jerk him off the set.

Quote:

---

It's a little nebulous that way it is discussed, and I am not convinced that there was a separate FISA warrant on Flynn. It's quite possible that the disclosure was ambiguously stated to obscure the fact that Flynn was being monitored via a 2 hop from the Carter Page warrant. Note: the intel investigation on Flynn was never closed...so the question is: Was it ever opened? If you read McCarthy, he even questions how they could have opened a formal counterintelligence investigation on Flynn...and concludes it had a revenge motive. Plus nowhere in the past had we ever heard the slightest whisper of a FISA warrant on Flynn. I think this is something for Nunes to investigate.

---

I consider the now-unredacted portions of the HPSCI report constitutes a "whisper" of a FISA warrant on Flynn.

Couple that with Dreeben's evasive answers to Ellis' questions about the redacted section of the August 2, 2017 Rosenstein memo. What did Dreeben say? That the redacted portions did not pertain to Manafort. Meaning other people were named.

At this point, more likely than not, Title I FISA warrants were obtained on Flynn, Manafort, Papodopoulus in addition to Page, IMO. Regarding Flynn, it may started from a two hop from Page to support the independent filing, however.

Well Grassley isn't laying down on these personal email addresses and burners

Quote:

---

I think this is something for Nunes to investigate.

---

I still want to know who the individual was that Nunes requested information on that DOJ rejected yesterday. Very curious. Implication being they are a counter-intel asset.

MooreTrucker said:

---

sam callahan said:

---

A huge percentage of Americans have no clue about most of the details in this thread and who is going to tell them?

---

I've expressed many times on here that this is my fear. Thanks to Roscoe and Hawg and others, we understand what's going on but the average Joe Schmoe only knows what they hear on the TV set. We know that the extreme left idiots and the never-Trumpers want only to see Trump gone, but what about the semi-normal left types and the slightly left-of-center types, and even the right down the middle types. Will they ever get enough to be swayed? I seriously doubt that we'll get any perp walks by HRC or Obama or anyone like that to really shake things up.

---

Here's an example....all about Stormy and Giuliani looking bad, nothing about any of this that we've been discussing here.

Giuliani's media blitz defending Trump is off to rough start

Quote:

---

Well Grassley isn't laying down on these personal email addresses and burners

---

I'm fine with term limits, as long as Grassley is exempt.

Even if its dismissed and EDNY takes up the Manafort case; can Mueller use that to pressure Manafort against Trump? Or does he lose Manafort forever?

SpreadsheetAg said:

---

Even if its dismissed and EDNY takes up the Manafort case; can Mueller use that to pressure Manafort against Trump? Or does he lose Manafort forever?

---

You mean the Eastern District of Virginia? Manafort is facing indictments in both EDVA and in DC. So, unless the DC one is also dismissed for lack of jurisdiction, Mueller still has some leverage, in theory at least. It has become fairly clear that Manafort possesses both the pocket-book and the stones not to be intimidated by Mueller.

Wow! If true, and I do believe it, it's clear that there needs to be a serious cleansing in leadership positions within the DoJ.

I think Ben Garrison always has a timely cartoon or two...