If true, Jeb should be thankful he lost.

You never get a second chance to make a first impression. Anyone want to start your relationship with a judge the way Team Mueller has? Don't see much going well for them in this one.

That timeline would coincide with Brennan taking over at CIA in 2013.

RoscoePColtrane said:

---

---

Timeline to get Strzok to London seems mighty compressed for the alleged start date.

Did they effectively try to deceive the judge?

captkirk said:

---

Cepe said:

---

drcrinum said:

---

Quote:

---

They'll apparently let anyone into the FBI these days. Even Columbia University law professors who didn't pass a full FBI background check.

All you have to do is be friends with the director. And you too can have access to classified documents and government secrets.

Welcome to 1920 2018.

James Comey leaked his Trump memos to Daniel Richman and recently claimed he was a specially-appointed FBI agent. However, True Pundit has learned Richman never passed a full FBI background check used to vet candidates for FBI employment, federal law enforcement sources said.

Former FBI agent Michael McMahon, an expert on FBI vetting, called Richman's mystery appointment to the FBI and lack of vetting "very strange."

"National Security is in the spotlight, and the DOJ / FBI are all too well-aware of this," McMahon said. "If the American people were to know of the FBI's shoddy policies and practices with regard to background checks and vetting, there would be great outrage among the masses."

Specifically, federal sources said, Richman's relatives, associates, and colleagues at Columbia University as well as previous places of employment were never questioned to ascertain Richman's characteristics and integrity. Also a number of federal computer and electronic sweeps were never conducted on Richman, sources said.

It would almost seem that the federal government was not aware Richman was any type of employee until Comey publicly announced it weeks ago....


Lawmakers are only beginning to raise questions about Richman's status. (See Letter below article) Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, said the information about Richman and his special FBI status first emerged during closed-door testimony by Comey's former chief of staff James Rybicki before the House oversight and judiciary committees....

---

https://www.scribd.com/document/379492664/2018-05-01-Goodlatte-Gowdy-to-Sessions-Rosenstein-Re-Richman-Due-5-15#from_embed

Hmmmm..... Comey's a POS.

---

It was a dumb move by Comey. I think he was trying to block the attack that he gave classified information to non-FBI people but it is going to backfire because this guy was never an employee.

---

Even if he was FBI, he leaked it to the press, so wouldn't he be guilty instead of Comey?

---

I can't answer that. As an interesting corollary, Huma Abedin was a 'special employee' of similar status.

RoscoePColtrane said:

---

---

Let the left's smearing of Horowitz begin.

drcrinum said:

---

blindey said:

---

RoscoePColtrane said:

---

So busted.... Ellis should have fun with this. Doesn't get Manafort off, but the handling things from here on out with Ellis should be entertaining.

---

I think it increases the likelihood that the super-double-secret-probation memo gets unsealed and docketed.

---

Is it possible that Mueller is looking for a lifeline now that his investigation is in shambles? Meaning, he's hoping the judge says you have no authority to be going after Manafort -- Rosenstein exceeded his authority -- case dismissed. Oh, and by the way, Rosenstein's appointment of a SC did not meet established procedures. Close down your office and go home.

---

I'm going 2 completely different directions with your question. Are you asking:

1) is Mueller hoping for the scenario you described to happen so he can sell the result to the media/DC insiders as an out of control right-wing Trump supporting judge interfering with his duties or

2) is Mueller really hoping that Ellis will read the memo and agree that he's got standing?

In either event, I suspect that Ellis will issue some sort of memorandum opinion that gives a yes or no answer on standing and then goes into detail on the rights of the accused, etc. I suspect he will determine whether there really is some legal reason that the memo should not be available to the public.

I also suspect that his answer will be "no" and that the underacted memorandum will be attached to the opinion the judge issues with an explanation that can be summed up as, "the government can't hide why it thinks it properly delegated its prosecutorial authority under the color of national security when the real reason is that this was done after the fact when your investigation exceeded what you already told the public."

MouthBQ98 said:

---

Did they effectively try to deceive the judge?

---

Depends on the definition of effectively you are using.

VegasAg86 said:

---

RoscoePColtrane said:

---

---

Let the left's smearing of Horowitz begin.

---

Whats crazy is the stupid MSM will smear Hororitz and just further erode their base as they do it!

blindey said:

---

I also suspect that his answer will be "no" and that the underacted memorandum will be attached to the opinion the judge issues with an explanation that can be summed up as, "the government can't hide why it thinks it properly delegated its prosecutorial authority under the color of national security when the real reason is that this was done after the fact when your investigation exceeded what you already told the public."

---

I would be delighted to see the judge render such a ruling.

MouthBQ98 said:

---

Did they effectively try to deceive the judge?

---

effective would have been he not catch you doing it.

I would just say tried, not too effectively.

VegasAg86 said:

---

RoscoePColtrane said:

---

---

Timeline to get Strzok to London seems mighty compressed for the alleged start date.

---

Probably part of calling an audible when Trump was the nominee instead of Jeb! or anyone else.

Humor an old country boy. Why did the IG have to give the implicated parties a heads up preview of the report? It just gives them and their complicit media time to spin before it goes public.

ItsHappening.gif !!

Rockdoc said:

---

Humor an old country boy. Why did the IG have to give the implicated parties a heads up preview of the report? It just gives them and their complicit media time to spin before it goes public.

---

Pretty sure they get it with an understanding that if it's leaked you're going to prison. And doubt they get the full report each, likely only their portion of relevance. If that were not the case it would be on CNN already.

VaultingChemist said:

---

---

Tweet that was quoted:

I'm going with Manafort, Flynn, Page, Papa, and Stone.

I am still interested in knowing what kind of surveillance was approved after the infamous Russian lawyer meeting.

VaultingChemist said:

---

---

As soon as the Flynn case is dropped (or he wins), Trump should ask for Chris Wray's resignation and nominate Flynn for FBI director.

VaultingChemist said:

---

---

Popcorn time!

jjeffers1 said:

---

VaultingChemist said:

---

---

As soon as the Flynn case is dropped (or he wins), Trump should ask for Chris Wray's resignation and nominate Flynn for FBI director.

---

Remember this:

https://www.sltrib.com/news/politics/2017/12/21/that-infamous-moscow-dinner-where-michael-flynn-and-jill-stein-sat-with-putin-utahs-rocky-anderson-was-there-too/

Quote:

---

That infamous Moscow dinner where Michael Flynn and Jill Stein sat with Putin? Utah's Rocky Anderson was there, too.

---

Rockdoc said:

---

Humor an old country boy. Why did the IG have to give the implicated parties a heads up preview of the report? It just gives them and their complicit media time to spin before it goes public.

---

Many of the impacted parties are no longer at the FBI/DOJ and so they won't be reviewing.

RoscoePColtrane said:

---

It's extremely difficult to make any sane person believe there was any lack of intent, when you first lie about the existence of the server to begin with. Then you go through the amount of manipulations to conceal the existence, then attempt to deliberately filter this content through your attorneys, then bleach bit the hard drives after they have been subpoenaed for preservation, swear under oath you have turned over ALL the work related emails, only to be exposed later to be untrue, and continue to lie under oath to cover the original lies under oath.

It's just really really hard to buy the "I didn't intend to" excuse, when you went through all the painstaking manipulations to do exactly that.

---

There was a column in the New York Post that discussed the Clinton's house in DC and how it had a SCIF for dealing with classified emails. The article was about an allegation she had her maid print out classified documents for her. I guess there is dispute as to whether the maid had access, but the telling part is the SCIF in the house. The "didn't know any better" defense is an absolute lie.

Quote:

---

Clinton entrusted far more than the care of her DC residence, known as Whitehaven, to Santos.

Santos also had access to a highly secure room called an SCIF (sensitive compartmented information facility) that diplomatic security agents set up at Whitehaven, according to FBI notes from an interview with Abedin.

https://nypost.com/2016/11/06/clinton-directed-her-maid-to-print-out-classified-materials/

---

Wow things aren't looking too good for team lib.

Tuned into CNN and looked at NPRs website to see signs of lib despair. They are continuing on with how bad things look for Trump.

Rockdoc said:

---

Wow things aren't looking too good for team lib.

---

I think there have been a few white-hat retaliatory leaks today in response to that black-hat NYT hit piece yesterday.

Do you have the retraction of the retraction about the mole?

RoscoePColtrane said:

---

Rockdoc said:

---

Humor an old country boy. Why did the IG have to give the implicated parties a heads up preview of the report? It just gives them and their complicit media time to spin before it goes public.

---

Pretty sure they get it with an understanding that if it's leaked you're going to prison. And doubt they get the full report each, likely only their portion of relevance. If that were not the case it would be on CNN already.

---

I think you answered the "why", I just remember reading the TCTH, and the entire explanation of the OIG report and subsequent rollout process. It seemed to me they do it that way to make sure they have their ass covered 100% with facts, no opinion, or conjecture. They do use an NDA, but I think that if they see it before rollout, bring up any mistatement of facts, and get them corrected, then it's quite a bit more professional.

Candidly, it would be the first professional action by the DOJ in about 10 years.

backintexas2013 said:

---

Do you have the retraction of the retraction about the mole?

---

jjeffers1 said:

---

VaultingChemist said:

---

---

As soon as the Flynn case is dropped (or he wins), Trump should ask for Chris Wray's resignation and nominate Flynn for FBI director.

---

I don't know if he'll have time.

How can you juggle that many lawsuits against the DOJ/DNC/State Dept. etc., AND run the new DOJ. But, since conflicts of interest, aren't of interest anymore, then I guess he can!!!

Thanks.