aggiehawg said:

---

blindey said:

---

Ok so I just read that.

Was that a joke?

I thought they were seriously burying the lead. Until I got to the end and I realized there was no lead.

This is a pure tactical play to try to get any pressure on Manafort before judge Ellis ends their world abruptly.

Which I think Ellis will do regardless.

---

Let me see if I have this straight: Manafort tells a witness that lobbying efforts undertaken by him were in the EU, not the US, which is one the things he's charged with. So Manafort is saying he is innocent.

Is that suborning perjury? Saying he is innocent?

But I do remember Judge Berman Jackson coming unglued when Manafort tweeted that he was innocent and was going to fight the charges against him right after the Gates guilt plea was announced. Merely asserting one's innocence with no further comment apparently violates her gag order on defendants but not on Team Mueller's leaks to the press.

What a farce!

---

I guess I'm not seeing the same farce as you, hawg. On p 6 of the doc posted it says that person D1literally said they thought it was to "suborn perjury". It reads to me like D1 was trying to dodge contact from Manafort to cover their own behind.

If an actual witness tells the FBI that you called them to lie about evidence, that sounds pretty bad to me.

surprised no one has commented on priestap supposedly testifying today... isnt he the guy who should know the real deal and has apparently cut a deal already?

It's a closed door hearing, so we will have to wait for leaks or some type of formal statement or action or for a redacted transcript. I am so tired of redacted documents.

drcrinum said:

---

It's a closed door hearing, so we will have to wait for leaks or some type of formal statement or action or for a redacted transcript. I am so tired of redacted documents.

---

Plus it's with Gowdy so I'm sure he will ask a lot of tough questions...and then do nothing.

Actually if he truly has flipped this could be an enlightening meeting and will be interesting to see if Gowdy's tone shifts back to where it was last year.

drcrinum said:

---

It's a closed door hearing, so we will have to wait for leaks or some type of formal statement or action or for a redacted transcript. I am so tired of redacted documents.

---

Leaks only happen if the Democrats think they can make political hay out of it.

Hmm not much but interesting



https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1003941783137587205.html?utm_source=email&utm_medium=alert&utm_campaign=internal

Hmmmm might mean nothing but curious this is Nov 2015, Downer Maybe?

Rapier108 said:

---

drcrinum said:

---

It's a closed door hearing, so we will have to wait for leaks or some type of formal statement or action or for a redacted transcript. I am so tired of redacted documents.

---

Leaks only happen if the Democrats think they can make political hay out of it.

---

I would love to believe that, and actually used to in my much, much, younger days. Now, there's absolutely NO comparison between a Dem leaker and a Rep leaker. As a general rule of thumb, and based on empirical evidence since the fall of the Soviet Union (I don't have the stats, but I'd bet a whole lot on what they would be), the Dems will leak for ANY reason, political or not. If it injures the country, American citizens, businesses and corporations, animals, or peoples health, they'll do it, because of one thing: WE'RE EVIL.

That's the only way they can get away with what they do, and the reason no one calls them on it, as least from their side (meaning the press).

But, Republicans have had plenty of leakers over the years, and nearly all for political reasons. I just can't imagine a Republican screwing over the country they reprsent to make political hay.

I forgot about that.

I wanted to go check cspan, fox, etc., but can't until later. I just posted about leaks, but in 5 minutes went hypocritical, and want to see some damn good leaks!!

RoscoePColtrane said:

---

---

This case and subsequent media blackout of it infuriates me. Absolutely infuriates me.

RoscoePColtrane said:

---

---

Imagine if we had a legit watchdog media who would hold them accountable.

RoscoePColtrane said:

---

---

The 4th is on a Wednesday....

https://saraacarter.com/lawmakers-warn-ig-being-pressured-to-slow-roll-clinton-fbi-report/

Quote:

---

The Department of Justice and the FBI are deliberately attempting to slow roll and redact significant portions of DOJ Inspector General, Michael Horowitz's report on the bureau's handling of the Hillary Clinton investigation, according to numerous congressional officials and investigators....

---

You already knew this.

So they knew on 10-16-2015 they had FISA application concerns????

That's a year ahead of the Carter Page warrant

I can already see it now...figures being led away in handcuffs but black boxes on the screen to mask their identity. Oooh, there's a big 6 ft 8 black box, must be our boy Comey!!!

It also will be supremely ironic when the FISA abuse OIG report is released on the illegal unmasking...and it's all MASKED with redactions...ARGHHH!!!!!

Infuriating. They need to release it as is. I don't care how ugly it is. There is a stench in DC, especially in the upper levels of the FBI/DOJ that needs to be cleansed.

We need to pressure our lawmakers to understand that the greater threat to national security is the people's confidence in our elected leaders and judicial system rather than some surveillance techniques or the identity of informants.

Edited for different idea.

Misread it as a mountain of a man, when he said Mountain Man, probably meaning long bearded possibly, at least scruffy looking

Then they purposely get off texting. I hope IG has those messages.

backintexas2013 said:

---

Then they purposely get off texting. I hope IG has those messages.

---

their text are about like my dog when he see's a female dog...

they are pumping air as they text...

Maybe McCain's absence is bringing out a better Graham?

They start encrypting their conversations with private software and use by burner phones. I wonder if they mixed government business and private business on those, and how widespread that practice became.

biobioprof said:

---

aggiehawg said:

---

blindey said:

---

Ok so I just read that.

Was that a joke?

I thought they were seriously burying the lead. Until I got to the end and I realized there was no lead.

This is a pure tactical play to try to get any pressure on Manafort before judge Ellis ends their world abruptly.

Which I think Ellis will do regardless.

---

Let me see if I have this straight: Manafort tells a witness that lobbying efforts undertaken by him were in the EU, not the US, which is one the things he's charged with. So Manafort is saying he is innocent.

Is that suborning perjury? Saying he is innocent?

But I do remember Judge Berman Jackson coming unglued when Manafort tweeted that he was innocent and was going to fight the charges against him right after the Gates guilt plea was announced. Merely asserting one's innocence with no further comment apparently violates her gag order on defendants but not on Team Mueller's leaks to the press.

What a farce!

---

I guess I'm not seeing the same farce as you, hawg. On p 6 of the doc posted it says that person D1literally said they thought it was to "suborn perjury". It reads to me like D1 was trying to dodge contact from Manafort to cover their own behind.

If an actual witness tells the FBI that you called them to lie about evidence, that sounds pretty bad to me.

---

Hawg has blinders on with these matters, unfortunately.

No one objective can look at these filings and say they are a complete farce. Granted, I don't think any of us in the public can look at them and know that the allegations are true and Manafort sought to tamper with a potential witness, either. But the practice and pattern of the contacts at least raise potential concern.

Personal stuff that those ****ers said they wouldn't release which is complete bs.

I'm betting money this will be a sealed case as well

So is he rolling on people

Argggh! Liu's the DA running this right? What a complete disappointment.

backintexas2013 said:

---

So is he rolling on people

---

Nope they are hiding the truth of all he actually did, they are trying to make this gigantic breach of national security that Debbie Wassermann Schultz tried to cover up, and threatened LEO's and covered the tracks of the perps for a year maybe more. This is an absolute white wash to get this case off the docket and under the rug. It's being avoided by the MSM like radioactive sludge