Renteria is claiming the Russians hacked her email and the email is bogus Russian misinformation. To your point, hopefully the FBI etc can either disprove or verify that. I do have a hard time believing Lynch would put in an email "don't worry we won't dig too deep". I mean that is industrial grade stupid.
Mueller dismisses top FBI agent in Russia probe for anti-Trump texts
7,726,243 Views |
49400 Replies |
Last: 1 day ago by Im Gipper
when people believe they will never be caught, they put things like that (and much worse) in emails routinely.
Because they know the answer without asking and don't want to call attention to who might be rolling on the higher ups.
And here is another problem she may have, during the House Judiciary hearing, Rep. David Trott slammed Lynch for failing to recuse herself from the Clinton investigation despite meeting privately with Slick Willie a week before they let Hillary skate. Trott referred to rumors of her possibly staying on in a hypothetical Hillary administration, he asked if Lynch had met or spoke with anyone on Hillary's staff during the yearlong investigation, to which she replied: "I have not spoken to anyone on either the campaign or transition or any staff members affiliated with them." That is lying to Congress under oath, and this was July 12th 2016, so they are still okay on the SOL for perjury.aggiehawg said:Which agency slapped such a high classification on it and you'll find your answer. I have seen references that this email was obtained from the Russians, suggesting it was obtained through counter-intel sources/methods.Quote:
WTF is Loretta Lynch doing having a highly classified conversation with the National Political Director to HRC? Looks to me Lynch now has her second meeting on the Tarmac moment. The AG is having a highly classified conversation with the Hillary Campaign during the time she is under investigation by the DOJ/FBI. Somebody needs to explain this one away with something other than Golfing and Grandkids like with Bill Clinton.
I remember Comey making a vague reference to other classified information that had dubious origination but if it were made public would put Lynch and the DOJ in a bad light. The suggestion there is that it may be disinformation manufactured by the Russians to sow discord. As Ms. Renteria now claims.
Seems to me a to/from 702 query to the NSA could clear that up. Was it real or not? They could check the metadata to see where it was routed.
Never take a hostage you aren't willing to shoot,
Remember, America doesn’t negotiate with terrorists.
Code 7 10-42
Remember, America doesn’t negotiate with terrorists.
Code 7 10-42
I prefer my own legal lingo, "You started this game of f***-f*** Mueller."Quote:
Here's the money shot from the brief:Quote:
Quote:
The Special Counsel's requests are fashioned to deal with problems of his own making. He alone decided who and when to indict. There are no statute of limitations issues apparent from the face of the Indictment. He chose to indict a case while his investigation was apparently ongoing. He must deal with the consequences or he can dismiss the case.
But really, the common theme running through the Manafort and Russian indictments remains jurisdiction, not to mention shoddy lawyering.
It is still mind-boggling to me how a Special Counsel who is only appointed because of a conflict in DOJ investigating itself or the White House, can get away with claiming his precise jurisdiction is highly classified. There's supposed to be a crime or probable cause of a crime somewhere in that appointment. But here again Mueller is hiding behind "that's classified" in the Concord Management case. And Concord's lawyers are rightly taking him to task.
Is it possible to impeach a deputy AG?BMX Bandit said:
No one is asking Trump to declassify everything. How about a simple "I have directed DoJ to provide me everything they are withholding so I can review for national security issues with my national security team"? If DoJ does not comply, then Congress can either sanction them or seek to impeach. Trump can remain quiet and say "thats Congress"
yes.Quote:
Is it possible to impeach a deputy AG?
Have you seen any evidence she isn't industrial grade stupid?IDAGG said:
Renteria is claiming the Russians hacked her email and the email is bogus Russian misinformation. To your point, hopefully the FBI etc can either disprove or verify that. I do have a hard time believing Lynch would put in an email "don't worry we won't dig too deep". I mean that is industrial grade stupid.
I'm still torqued off about the Hillary email investigation being deemed a counter-intel investigation instead a full criminal investigation. Sure, there was an aspect to the case in determining if foreign actors had penetrated the bathroom server that would involve counter-intel sources and methods.
But the central question was a criminal one. Did she properly handle classified information? That should have been put before a grand jury but now we know they never convened a grand jury. Which then raises the question of the immunity agreements.
Were those immunity agreements ever approved by a federal court? If so, what was the judge told about the need for immunity if there was no grand jury? More lying to a federal court??
Well she did meet in private for 30 minutes with the spouse of someone her department was investigating...so point taken. She may have written that email.aggiehawg said:Have you seen any evidence she isn't industrial grade stupid?IDAGG said:
Renteria is claiming the Russians hacked her email and the email is bogus Russian misinformation. To your point, hopefully the FBI etc can either disprove or verify that. I do have a hard time believing Lynch would put in an email "don't worry we won't dig too deep". I mean that is industrial grade stupid.
Why is Feinstein talking about immigration? Are we still question the IG about his report?
I really dislike Rep Cummings, ever since he spent his time apologizing because the Republicans questioned the inviolable Internal Revenue Service.
redline248 said:
Why is Feinstein talking about immigration? Are we still question the IG about his report?
I guess the Horowitz stuff is on a different channel.
Cummings is currently speaking of "child internment camps"
So, Dems are obviously focused on what's important
So, Dems are obviously focused on what's important
I am confused about which prosecutors supposedly made the decision not to prosecute Hillary? On all of the email chains discussing the wording of Comey's July 5, 2016 statement were all FBI, not DOJ personnel.
FBI gathers the evidence and then makes a recommendation to DOJ based on the applicable statutes. There are no prosecutors in the FBI. Not their role.
FBI gathers the evidence and then makes a recommendation to DOJ based on the applicable statutes. There are no prosecutors in the FBI. Not their role.
We prosecute people as a result of counterintelligence investigations?aggiehawg said:
I am confused about which prosecutors supposedly made the decision not to prosecute Hillary? On all of the email chains discussing the wording of Comey's July 5, 2016 statement were all FBI, not DOJ personnel.
FBI gathers the evidence and then makes a recommendation to DOJ based on the applicable statutes. There are no prosecutors in the FBI. Not their role.
The greatest argument ever made against democracy is a 5 minute conversation with the average voter.
Correction, a person her department was not investigating.
According to Lynch by her own testimony she did and her team did in two different instancesaggiehawg said:
I am confused about which prosecutors supposedly made the decision not to prosecute Hillary? On all of the email chains discussing the wording of Comey's July 5, 2016 statement were all FBI, not DOJ personnel.
FBI gathers the evidence and then makes a recommendation to DOJ based on the applicable statutes. There are no prosecutors in the FBI. Not their role.
And here under a different line of questioning
Never take a hostage you aren't willing to shoot,
Remember, America doesn’t negotiate with terrorists.
Code 7 10-42
Remember, America doesn’t negotiate with terrorists.
Code 7 10-42
man, these Dems are in full spin and ignore mode.
And that's example # 3,541 of how badly the FBI screwed up the investigation. Lindsay Graham was right yesterday. This whole mess is not an example of how the FBI should ever operate.jjeffers1 said:We prosecute people as a result of counterintelligence investigations?aggiehawg said:
I am confused about which prosecutors supposedly made the decision not to prosecute Hillary? On all of the email chains discussing the wording of Comey's July 5, 2016 statement were all FBI, not DOJ personnel.
FBI gathers the evidence and then makes a recommendation to DOJ based on the applicable statutes. There are no prosecutors in the FBI. Not their role.
And now, every mistake made in the Hillary case is being repeated by Mueller with this whole blurring of the lines between COIN and criminal investigations.
OMG I see Hank Johnson in line to question Horowitz, this should be comedy central. Hopefully he won't ask about capsizing islands
Never take a hostage you aren't willing to shoot,
Remember, America doesn’t negotiate with terrorists.
Code 7 10-42
Remember, America doesn’t negotiate with terrorists.
Code 7 10-42
I can't keep track of all of the lies. Comey states very clearly that no one at the DOJ knew what he was going to say on July 5, 2016, for instance.Quote:
According to Lynch by her own testimony she did and her team did in two different instances
The Dems will have a few of the more intelligent members try to get Horowitz/Wray to say that the FBI hurt Hillary and Helped Trump.RoscoePColtrane said:
OMG I see Hank Johnson in line to question Horowitz, this should be comedy central. Hopefully he won't ask about capsizing islands
The rest will talk about child internment camps.
Hank is in the second group
Why are we still talking about Hillary Clinton's e-mails in 2018 when there are children on the border in cages suffering?
Isn't that the same thing as:
Isn't that the same thing as:
Please correct me if I'm wrong.
Horowitz has failed. All throughout his report, of which we've been banking on, there are instances of bias, but the conclusion summary is there was no bias.
Sounds like we are heading for another victory for the Swamp.
Horowitz has failed. All throughout his report, of which we've been banking on, there are instances of bias, but the conclusion summary is there was no bias.
Sounds like we are heading for another victory for the Swamp.
If Gowdy doesn't ask why Congress didn't get the "we'll stop it." text...
It is interesting listening to Horowitz split that hair. Not sure he had a choice on the intro and conclusions.
Red Fishing Ag93 said:
Please correct me if I'm wrong.
Horowitz has failed. All throughout his report, of which we've been banking on, there are instances of bias, but the conclusion summary is there was no bias.
Sounds like we are heading for another victory for the Swamp.
I don't think Horowitz failed at all. I think people that think he's a prosecutor failed and missed the point entirely.Red Fishing Ag93 said:
Please correct me if I'm wrong.
Horowitz has failed. All throughout his report, of which we've been banking on, there are instances of bias, but the conclusion summary is there was no bias.
Sounds like we are heading for another victory for the Swamp.
I don't think he wrote the summary
Never take a hostage you aren't willing to shoot,
Remember, America doesn’t negotiate with terrorists.
Code 7 10-42
Remember, America doesn’t negotiate with terrorists.
Code 7 10-42
I don't know who wrote the summary, but Horowitz vigorously defended it yesterday, and so far today.
Red Fishing Ag93 said:
Please correct me if I'm wrong.
Horowitz has failed. All throughout his report, of which we've been banking on, there are instances of bias, but the conclusion summary is there was no bias.
Sounds like we are heading for another victory for the Swamp.
Horowitz probably did as good a job as anyone could do. You need to understand that the Clinton's have a team of very determined attorneys still working behind the scenes to threaten, brow beat, bribe, whatever it takes to keep the Clintons clean. Hilary is still planning on being President.
The only way to clean up the mess is to allow and have career FBI/DOJ folks use their skills to get indictments and convictions.
The people in Washington generally and specifically are afraid of Hilary. She is ruthless and has no conscience. Think Joseph Stalin.
With slightly less bodies.Quote:
The people in Washington generally and specifically are afraid of Hilary. She is ruthless and has no conscience. Think Joseph Stalin.
For now.
He keeps referring to the fact that they don't believe the bias of the investigators influenced the prosecutors' decision not to bring charges.BQ78 said:
It is interesting listening to Horowitz split that hair. Not sure he had a choice on the intro and conclusions.
I am having a hard time squaring that.
Unless there is another ongoing investigation which will find that there were other factors responsible for influencing the prosecutors' decision not to bring charges.
Who were the prosecutors? Could they have been influenced in another way that doesn't qualify as bias? Blackmail, threats, etc.?
Featured Stories
See All
Presenting Texas Aggies United's 'Florida Slam Dunk' Sweepstakes!
by Texas Aggies United
41:06
12h ago
3.6k
Scouting Report: No. 13 Texas A&M at South Carolina
by Tom Schuberth
8:17
12h ago
3.7k
'I'm ready': Freshman Terrence Kiel II excited for the 2025 opener
by Ryan Brauninger
Stonegateag85
What do you guys do on Friday nights in off-season?
in Billy Liucci's TexAgs Premium
3