Quote:

---

When are heads going to roll? The FBI/DOJ is just giving Congress a big "nanny nanny boo boo". I can't believe they have let it go on this long.

---

Neither can I. We have a real Constitutional crisis here and virtually no one is paying attention to it. The Deputy Attorney General is giving the middle finger to Congressional overseers. The folks that are elected to be our watchdogs, by "our" I mean the American people.

Without that critical check and balance the Executive Branch can and will run amok as it did under Obama. If there wasn't the Mueller investigation out there I have to believe Trump would have already fired Sessions and Rosenstein for their obstinacy against Constitutionally mandated oversight.

I too believe Rosenstein has threatened Congressional staffers with retaliation using his office. That's abuse of his office and he deserves to be impeached but won't be. Dem lawmakers see him as defending Obama with his obstruction. They'll never go along with tossing him to the curb.

I have been toying with the idea of Manafort's lawyers listing Rosenstein as a defense witness along with Peter Strzok and Lisa Page. Team Mueller's filing in Judge Ellis' court was a preemptive move to try and stop that from happening, methinks. (Not necessarily the defense calling those precise witnesses but that's who I would try to call.)

aggiehawg said:

---

I am so tired of the games that are being played by DOJ and the FBI. Who has the info? DOJ has, no wait the FBI does, no wait DNI Coates has it.

There is no reason why Congresscritters and Senators with the required security clearance cannot see the EC that started Crossfire Hurricane in a SCIF if it is so damned Top Secret.

If the concern here is that the reputation of the FBI and DOJ will be sullied it can't be anymore sullied than it is right now. Rip the bandaid off instead of pulling it off hair by hair.

---

I suggest Congress enact a law requiring agencies under their oversight release unredacted documents upon request. If documents are not released or are altered, lost(destroyed) severe criminal penalties are issued immediately. A system of open courts and prosecutors specifically designed to handle these violations would be enacted in this legislation to investigate, prosecute and try the offenders.

aggiehawg said:

---

I am so tired of the games that are being played by DOJ and the FBI. Who has the info? DOJ has, no wait the FBI does, no wait DNI Coates has it.

There is no reason why Congresscritters and Senators with the required security clearance cannot see the EC that started Crossfire Hurricane in a SCIF if it is so damned Top Secret.

If the concern here is that the reputation of the FBI and DOJ will be sullied it can't be anymore sullied than it is right now. Rip the bandaid off instead of pulling it off hair by hair.

---

Just treading water for 19 more weeks ... their problems disappear with Adam Schiff running HPIC. Ditto Feinstein running the Senate Judiciary committee.

Trump needs an insurance policy for releasing docs if Congress can't deliver before mid-terms.

Quote:

---

I suggest Congress enact a law requiring agencies under their oversight release unredacted documents upon request. If documents are not released or are altered, lost(destroyed) severe criminal penalties are issued immediately. A system of open courts and prosecutors specifically designed to handle these violations would be enacted in this legislation to investigate, prosecute and try the offenders.

---

Actually, I think our entire system of classifying information needs to be revamped. As it is now, only the originating agency can declassify information. We have so many agencies that have classification authority with no central authority (I'd say DNI was supposed to be in that role) investigators wind up chasing their tails as DOJ says, "Not us, we didn't classify that, etc."

BTW, and for what it's worth, I guarantee you Lisa Barsoomian is involved in her husbands shenanigans somehow. It's likely it's with attorney-client privilgege, but she's involved.

Barsoomian's postion, and the people she represents, mean she has staggering amounts of information regarding Clinton e-mail, Weiner lap top, etc.

aggiehawg said:

---

Quote:

---

I suggest Congress enact a law requiring agencies under their oversight release unredacted documents upon request. If documents are not released or are altered, lost(destroyed) severe criminal penalties are issued immediately. A system of open courts and prosecutors specifically designed to handle these violations would be enacted in this legislation to investigate, prosecute and try the offenders.

---

Actually, I think our entire system of classifying information needs to be revamped. As it is now, only the originating agency can declassify information. We have so many agencies that have classification authority with no central authority (I'd say DNI was supposed to be in that role) investigators wind up chasing their tails as DOJ says, "Not us, we didn't classify that, etc."

---

Anyone on the oversight committees would have required security clearances so classifications become moot.

Also, any leaks by the committee's members would carry severe criminal penalties.

Something has to be done, I am not a lawyer but this is getting ridiculous, dangerous and threatens our form of government with its checks and balances.

richardag said:

---

I suggest Congress enact a law requiring agencies under their oversight release unredacted documents upon request. If documents are not released or are altered, lost(destroyed) severe criminal penalties are issued immediately. A system of open courts and prosecutors specifically designed to handle these violations would be enacted in this legislation to investigate, prosecute and try the offenders.

---

Congressional Participation in Article III Courts: Standing to Sue

Quote:

---

In 2008 the House Judiciary Committee, acting on a resolution from the full House of Representatives, was able to convince the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia that it had standing to sue the White House for its failure to make subpoenaed witnesses and documents available. In its decision, the court emphasized the distinction between suits brought by individual congressional plaintiffs asserting abstract and diffuse injuries and suits brought by organs of Congress alleging institutional harms. In 2013, the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform was similarly successful, with a different judge for the District Court for the District of Columbia adopting the same reasoning as the 2008 case, holding that the Committee had standing to sue to enforce a congressional subpoena, in part because the suit was authorized by the House.

---

Congress already has the power to take it to a Federal court.

aggiehawg said:

---

Quote:

---

I suggest Congress enact a law requiring agencies under their oversight release unredacted documents upon request. If documents are not released or are altered, lost(destroyed) severe criminal penalties are issued immediately. A system of open courts and prosecutors specifically designed to handle these violations would be enacted in this legislation to investigate, prosecute and try the offenders.

---

Actually, I think our entire system of classifying information needs to be revamped. As it is now, only the originating agency can declassify information. We have so many agencies that have classification authority with no central authority (I'd say DNI was supposed to be in that role) investigators wind up chasing their tails as DOJ says, "Not us, we didn't classify that, etc."

---

And this also raises a question to part on the response by the DOJ/FBI to the requests. FBI say's it will respond by separate, classified letter regarding request No. 9 of the subpoena, which is seeking "all docs & comms referring or relating to proposed, recommended, or actual FISA coverage on the Clinton Foundation"

Did I read that right? FISA coverage of the Clinton Foundation? Was that a tease or a misdirection? I find that response very damn curious.

FBI also says "only the request for FBI documents pertaining to eight (8) potential custodians and relating to Christopher Steele, the Steele dossier and certain FISA applications remains outstanding." Why do they remain outstanding? Why the delays? There has to be something they are sitting on to deal with the optics of their agency's credibility that is going down in flames.

Quote:

---

And this also raises a question to part on the response by the DOJ/FBI to the requests. FBI say's it will respond by separate, classified letter regarding request No. 9 of the subpoena, which is seeking "all docs & comms referring or relating to proposed, recommended, or actual FISA coverage on the Clinton Foundation"

Did I read that right? FISA coverage of the Clinton Foundation? Was that a tease or a misdirection? I find that response very damn curious.

FBI also says "only the request for FBI documents pertaining to eight (8) potential custodians and relating to Christopher Steele, the Steele dossier and certain FISA applications remains outstanding." Why do they remain outstanding? Why the delays? There has to be something they are sitting on to deal with the optics of their agency's credibility that is going down in flames.

---

On the FISA and Clinton Foundation issue, I would expect there was some incidental capture of communications since it deals with so many foreign contacts. And if those contacts are with people (non-American citizens) OCONUS, fair game. (Which, if you think about it may be the way the Lynch/Renteria email was obtained from a Russian.)

I seriously doubt that Comey's FBI and Lynch's DOJ would jointly apply for a FISA warrant on any Clintonite, unless they were looking for blackmail material to keep their phoney baloney jobs once she was elected President.

But that letter raises more questions than it answers.

aggiehawg said:

---

RoscoePColtrane said:

---

---

Oohh! There's a smoking gun.

---

No bias, right?

Not the best or only solution, but the electorate should "kick them ALL (every last elected DC official) to the curb". Send an unmistakable message to every existing/prospective politician that we, the deplorable, ignored and non-elite are beyond 'fed up' with their pervasive corruption and partisanship.

Before I 'sign off', can someone explain to this Ag, why/how did the MSM become so singularly biased? Personally, IMHO...Watergate and the Washington Post's role in the revelations derived therefrom, plus the MSM's role in reporting during Viet Nam were the worst things (politically/socially) to happen in the modern era.

Both gave the MSM a sense of power they had earned...BUT have greatly abused ever since. They've come to see themselves as "King Makers" and the ONLY bastion of 'what is/isn't' regardless whether it is fact or truth, or neither.

Fact - Nixon deserved his fate. Fact - Viet Nam (my war) was unnecessary and misguided. Fact - MSM lives a fantasy that they and they alone...are the only true visionaries while the rest of us (deplorables) are sheep, incapable of reason or independent thought.

If 'Red Pill' scenario is real...it's way over due! Perhaps...too late.

PS - WHY hasn't some/several wealthy Repuclicans/Independents/Libetarians acquired one/some of the MSM???

Prognightmare said:

---

---

Oooh, another deadline for them to ignore. I'll believe it when I see it.

Wow it must be really hard for all these republican legislators to walk around without a spine. Cowards!

The document that started all the Clinton Email mess, whatever happen to this cut and dry explanation of her wrong doing



And Then



And Then again

"not a criminal referral, a security referral," being the operative words there.

VaultingChemist said:

---

Four out of 40 emails contained classified information. That computes to over 3000 classified emails out of the 30,000, and possibly 60,000 out of the 600,000.

That is a lot of classified information that was seen by foreign governments' cyber spies. Did Hillary do that intentionally for donations to the CF?

---

I think so. Maybe someone with the power to lock her traitorous ass up should ask her that question under oath.

VaultingChemist said:

---

Four out of 40 emails contained classified information. That computes to over 3000 classified emails out of the 30,000, and possibly 60,000 out of the 600,000.

That is a lot of classified information that was seen by foreign governments' cyber spies. Did Hillary do that intentionally for donations to the CF?

---

Have to have the "quid" for a quid pro quo. That was her quid.

Now there is some confusion as to her signing the OF 109 Separation form after she left the State Dept

"H R Clinton" is her real signature? Really?

Here's her executed NDA for SCI

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1010940585392340993.html



Was there a FISA warrant/application directed at the Clinton Foundation???

I believe every bit of that thread. Her husband sold classified milling and missile technology to the Chicoms, so it's not much of a leap to believe she would run the same play.

When I saw that plane 2-3 years ago, I was nearly certain they had obtained major chunks of our technology. I would assume there are 20-30 people who have some information about the whole episode.

I'd be completley, and totally shocked, if this ever came to an investigation. I suspect Trump probably has some knowledge of it, but he's got other fish to fry. I know there's an investigation into the CF by the DOJ, but it would make me feel a hell of a lot better to know who was in charge of it. I'm so damned jaded, that I don't trust hardly anyone in the DOJ, FBI, or State. That's probably only about 100,000 employees.

Edit: I know I contradicted myself concerning the "investigation". I need to make clear that I'm speaking about the sale, misuse, and theft, of proprietary information from the US to the Chinese by the Clintons.

fasthorses05 said:

---

When I saw that plane 2-3 years ago, I was nearly certain they had obtained major chunks of our technology. I would assume there are 20-30 people who have some information about the whole episode.

I'd be completley, and totally shocked, if this ever came to an investigation. I suspect Trump probably has some knowledge of it, but he's got other fish to fry. I know there's an investigation into the CF by the DOJ, but it would make me feel a hell of a lot better to know who was in charge of it. I'm so damned jaded, that I don't trust hardly anyone in the DOJ, FBI, or State. That's probably only about 100,000 employees.

Edit: I know I contradicted myself concerning the "investigation". I need to make clear that I'm speaking about the sale, misuse, and theft, of proprietary information from the US to the Chinese by the Clintons.

---

Oh you made perfect sense, because it brings back vivid memories of David Ng Lap Seng, the Billionaire Chinese National that was funneling millions to the Clinton's through Charlie Trie, a long time associate of Bill and Hillary dating back to Little Rock. There was controversy all around that, but it magically went away after John Ashe president of the UN general assembly accused of accepting the bribes from David Ng Lap Seng, was killed by a barbell weight while working out last month. He was also under investigation at the time. He was set to testify before the Senate Committee and was facing an upcoming jury trial. The NYC ME office officially reported that Ashe died of injuries (specifically, traumatic asphyxia, and laryngeal fractures) suffered when a barbell he was lifting from a bench dropped on his neck while working out in his home garage. Clinton dirty business once again ending up on a slab in the morgue.