OldFashioned said:
Donald Trump and crew are under pressure because of moronic moves they've made themselves.
If Mueller finds evidence that holds up in a court of law, we might see an impeachment and jail sentence for obstruction of justice.
Looking forward to what comes next.
And the NSA was in so much disarray that they had no control over their own data base and who had access.Quote:
Yep. The Obama administration was unmasking (spying) on Republican candidates and their campaigns long before the Spring of '16.
Why is anyone reading AOL.com? And why is anyone asking Steve Bannon anything?SpreadsheetAg said:
https://www.aol.com/article/news/2018/05/23/steve-bannon-rod-rosenstein-could-be-fired-very-shortly/23441625/
aggiehawg said:Huber, I'd expect.Wildcat said:aggiehawg said:And stupid. I mean mind-numbingly stupid.Pinche Abogado said:
He is desperate.
For all the grief that Trump gets for his tweeting, Comey's and Brennan's are far worse. Nothing like drawing a target on your chest with a criminal admission on twitter. Like criminals filming themselves committing a crime and posting the film on FaceBook.
But who is going to prosecute these two?
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/21/us/politics/trump-justice-department-rosenstein.htmlQuote:
Nonetheless, Mr. Rosenstein responded by asking the department's inspector general to examine the president's allegations.
Mr. Rosenstein's supporters said his response was a deft deflection that achieved three immediate needs: It neutered a troubling request, appeared responsive to the president's demands and allowed Mr. Rosenstein to keep his job. But, some cautioned, his short-term strategy could have longer-term costs for the Justice Department's independence from the White House, which was established to prevent political meddling after Watergate.
(The meeting for which RR is not a listed participant on Thursday 24-MAY)Quote:
The department's inspector general, Michael E. Horowitz, will look into whether the F.B.I. acted inappropriately in investigating the campaign as part of an existing review into the department's decision to put Carter Page, a former Trump campaign adviser with links to Russia, under surveillance. The White House announced the new aspect of the review after a meeting on Monday between the president and top law enforcement and intelligence officials, including Mr. Rosenstein; Christopher A. Wray, the F.B.I. director; and Dan Coats, the director of national intelligence.
The officials agreed that John F. Kelly, the White House chief of staff and a supporter of Mr. Rosenstein, will set up a meeting between the officials and congressional Republicans "to review highly classified and other information they have requested."
Quote:
Supporters said that Mr. Rosenstein's decisions to refer demands for investigations of the Russia inquiry to the inspector general were astute moves that prevented criminal investigations of the department's own investigators. Opening such an investigation could create a fear within the department that if F.B.I. agents act on valid intelligence they could someday be investigated for being at odds with the White House, they said.
Quote:
Representative Devin Nunes, Republican of California and the chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, has subpoenaed the department for all documents referring to or related to the source, prompting the latest battle between Mr. Rosenstein and Mr. Trump's allies on Capitol Hill. They have asked the president to direct Mr. Rosenstein to reveal the name.
If the president or his aides direct Mr. Rosenstein to reveal the name to congressional leaders, Mr. Litt predicted, Mr. Rosenstein would be forced to comply or to resign. A Justice Department spokeswoman would not comment on the situation.
I seriously doubt 400 page document will be milquetoast. Given Horowitz' opening salvo that referred McCabe for prosecution, I'm willing to bet Act II to be similar to Act I.law-apt-3g said:
What happens to the plan if the IG report is milktoast?
Are we expecting indictments from the corrupt justice deptartment?
Are we to expect the corrupt FBI provide evidence for their crimes?
I just love how ordering his subordinates to investigate whether a crime has been committed is "political meddling."Quote:
Mr. Rosenstein's supporters said his response was a deft deflection that achieved three immediate needs: It neutered a troubling request, appeared responsive to the president's demands and allowed Mr. Rosenstein to keep his job. But, some cautioned, his short-term strategy could have longer-term costs for the Justice Department's independence from the White House, which was established to prevent political meddling after Watergate.
I suspect this goes back farther than that. Like John Roberts / Obamacare decision, and certainly the 2012 elections.jjeffers1 said:Yep. The Obama administration was unmasking (spying) on Republican candidates and their campaigns long before the Spring of '16.aggiehawg said:The problem is that the spying (or attempted infiltration) on the Trump campaign began before the alleged "hack" of the DNC computers. And who else had unfettered access to the DNC system? DWS' bestie, Imran Awan.Quote:
I am starting to seriously consider that this all traces back to Seth Rich. DNC 187's him, then has to cover his theft of Anti-Bernie emails and data with a Russian hacking narrative (this is why the server is never examined by authorities). In making the cover-up so big that it swallows the crime, they must foster the perception that the Ruskies had their fingers in the Trump campaign as well. No we are so far afield from the initial question of Rich and the DNC server. Mission Accomplished.
Did he frame Seth Rich? And get him killed in the process? That might explain Assange's involvement after Seth was murdered. Assange knew Rich was framed, perhaps?
That's horses***. FBI agents just need to follow DOJ guidelines. It is when they get out of their lanes that they could get into trouble...with their bosses.Quote:
Supporters said that Mr. Rosenstein's decisions to refer demands for investigations of the Russia inquiry to the inspector general were astute moves that prevented criminal investigations of the department's own investigators. Opening such an investigation could create a fear within the department that if F.B.I. agents act on valid intelligence they could someday be investigated for being at odds with the White House, they said.
Reading that pisses me off. How the hell does anyone with that kind of sensitive information not have a firm handle on user privileges and tracking? It's beyond belief that they can't go back and track down who was performing these illegal queries. I know you could match up IP address and computer login data to get who was probably the culprit but it takes piecing things together. IP address like Rice and the UN ambassador were probably easy to pinpoint.aggiehawg said:And the NSA was in so much disarray that they had no control over their own data base and who had access.Quote:
Yep. The Obama administration was unmasking (spying) on Republican candidates and their campaigns long before the Spring of '16.
This ties in nicely.
This is a dot-connection that I had not seen made:Stressboy said:Reading that pisses me off. How the hell does anyone with that kind of sensitive information not have a firm handle on user privileges and tracking? It's beyond belief that they can't go back and track down who was performing these illegal queries. I know you could match up IP address and computer login data to get who was probably the culprit but it takes piecing things together. IP address like Rice and the UN ambassador were probably easy to pinpoint.aggiehawg said:And the NSA was in so much disarray that they had no control over their own data base and who had access.Quote:
Yep. The Obama administration was unmasking (spying) on Republican candidates and their campaigns long before the Spring of '16.
This ties in nicely.
They had to log the actual queries to know if it was a violation. There has to be a record of the data being transmitted by the person(s) who are doing the data mining to the people using it since they probably were not using ham radio with that much data being syphoned off.
IS THAT ALSO IN THE 30,000 emails? Are there emails from the miners to Hillori with the illegally obtained data?
Why can't the NSA IG come out with recommendations for indicting contractors that had access and were suspected so you can flip them?
This stuff is going so damn slow but Trump's tweets reveal he is about to drop the hammer.
Quote:
I would suggest to everyone following this deeply complex spying and surveillance story, that it was AFTER Mike Rogers initially began blocking use of the databases for unauthorized searches (March 2016), that those political operatives (outside contractors) shifted their spying and surveillance activity.
Following this timeline it was after March 2016 when the use of human assets, CIA and FBI agents, became more of a necessary function within the process.
After March and April of 2016 is where George Papadopoulos, Carter Page, and Stefan Halper become needed by the intelligence apparatus. It was in April 2016 when Fusion-GPS, Nellie Ohr and Chris Steele became more important.
Reading that pisses me off. How the hell does anyone with that kind of sensitive information not have a firm handle on user privileges and tracking? It's beyond belief that they can't go back and track down who was performing these illegal queries. I know you could match up IP address and computer login data to get who was probably the culprit but it takes piecing things together. IP address like Rice and the UN ambassador were probably easy to pinpoint.aggiehawg said:And the NSA was in so much disarray that they had no control over their own data base and who had access.Quote:
Yep. The Obama administration was unmasking (spying) on Republican candidates and their campaigns long before the Spring of '16.
This ties in nicely.
That should be interesting.Quote:
Accordingly, please provide unredacted copies of all text messages produced to the Committee no later than June 6, 2018. Should the Department continue to refuse to provide fully unredacted copies to Congress, please provide a privilege log describing the legal basis for withholding that information from Congress.
If you read the fine details, the database is enormous/humongous, and there are avenues into the data base that were created which fall outside the realm & jurisdiction of the NSA. No details are available, but think about it for a moment. Do we not have an agency which has master spy & cyberhacking capability called the CIA? Do you think the CIA might have devised ways to obtain secret access to the NSA database of which nobody outside of the CIA & certain contractors are aware? Obama had 8 years to plant agents throughout the government, before him Bush the same (who wasn't an angel either), and before that Clinton for 8 years....and the last 4 Presidents are all globalist buddies. It's called the Deep state for a reason.Stressboy said:Reading that pisses me off. How the hell does anyone with that kind of sensitive information not have a firm handle on user privileges and tracking? It's beyond belief that they can't go back and track down who was performing these illegal queries. I know you could match up IP address and computer login data to get who was probably the culprit but it takes piecing things together. IP address like Rice and the UN ambassador were probably easy to pinpoint.aggiehawg said:And the NSA was in so much disarray that they had no control over their own data base and who had access.Quote:
Yep. The Obama administration was unmasking (spying) on Republican candidates and their campaigns long before the Spring of '16.
This ties in nicely.
They had to log the actual queries to know if it was a violation. There has to be a record of the data being transmitted by the person(s) who are doing the data mining to the people using it since they probably were not using ham radio with that much data being syphoned off.
IS THAT ALSO IN THE 30,000 emails? Are there emails from the miners to Hillori with the illegally obtained data?
Why can't the NSA IG come out with recommendations for indicting contractors that had access and were suspected so you can flip them?
This stuff is going so damn slow but Trump's tweets reveal he is about to drop the hammer.
This is what I'm afraid of. Are we so deep in our "echo chamber" here that we're missing something?aginlakeway said:OldFashioned said:
Donald Trump and crew are under pressure because of moronic moves they've made themselves.
If Mueller finds evidence that holds up in a court of law, we might see an impeachment and jail sentence for obstruction of justice.
Looking forward to what comes next.
If you are looking forward to all of that happening, you're going to be disappointed.
aggiehawg said:
McCarthy's latest:
LINK
Quote:
The Trump-Russia investigation did not originate with Page or Papadopoulos. It originated with the Obama administration.
Quote:
What would have been the reason for Lynch, Comey, and McCabe to discuss Carter Page? Well, on March 21, 2016 i.e., early spring the Trump campaign announced the candidate's foreign-policy advisory team. Trump had been spurned by the Republican foreign-policy clerisy and was under pressure to show that he had some advisers.
I saw this article days ago, and it was just too sketchy to me, so I didn't post it. There's always the possibility that it's true, but I just couldn't buy this without more real evidenseCow Hop Ag said:
No idea if credible but makes sense.
Too bad we're not getting it with the $70,000 table still redacted. Would love to see the privilege log on that.aggiehawg said:That should be interesting.Quote:
Accordingly, please provide unredacted copies of all text messages produced to the Committee no later than June 6, 2018. Should the Department continue to refuse to provide fully unredacted copies to Congress, please provide a privilege log describing the legal basis for withholding that information from Congress.
Quote:
BREAKING=> FBI Agent at Mike Flynn Interrogation Is Ready to Testify Against McCabe, Strzok and Comey!
...So Grassley wants to see the notes of these people and he wants to interview the one agent who was there who was very, very, very serious about how Flynn did not deceive. That agent that he wants to interview is the agent who went to the Inspector General and complained about the conduct of Strzok and McCabe.
