I know that was rhetoricaljjeffers1 said:
What national security interest is served by redacting that?
That link goes to a different thread now. Still interesting, but not what's shown here.RoscoePColtrane said:
Interesting thread.
https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1019704443003076609.html?utm_source=direct_message&utm_medium=alert&utm_campaign=internal
Drumf fits as well. Any 5 letter nameMouthBQ98 said:
Would Cohen or Flynn fit? I think Flynn has long been dealt with at that point. Cohen is 5 letters and maybe a possible fit, but charged with what at that point in a hypothetical discussion, and that would pretty clearly not warrant name redaction.
SorryMooreTrucker said:That link goes to a different thread now. Still interesting, but not what's shown here.RoscoePColtrane said:
Interesting thread.
https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1019890747955240961.html
Cuomo is a tired brood mare and needs to just STFURapier108 said:
Cuomo has ordered an investigation of Trump and the Trump Foundation, which everyone knew was coming.
They'll make up some charges , and probably issue an indictment of Trump just before the midterms.
Funny how that works huhdrcrinum said:
Who knows. It may be the new "Russian collusion"Lot Y Tailgate said:
"Page Immunity" is going to be the new "IG Report Bomb." Okay.
Quote:
...It is no longer in dispute that they held an animus for Donald Trump, who was a subject of their Russia probe, or that they openly discussed using the powers of their office to "stop" Trump from becoming president. The only question is whether any official acts they took in the Russia collusion probe were driven by those sentiments.
The Justice Department's inspector general is endeavoring to answer that question.
For any American who wants an answer sooner, there are just five words, among the thousands of suggestive texts Page and Strzok exchanged, that you should read.
That passage was transmitted on May 19, 2017. "There's no big there there," Strzok texted.
The date of the text long has intrigued investigators: It is two days after Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein named special counsel Robert Mueller to oversee an investigation into alleged collusion between Trump and the Russia campaign.
Since the text was turned over to Congress, investigators wondered whether it referred to the evidence against the Trump campaign.
This month, they finally got the chance to ask. Strzok declined to say but Page, during a closed-door interview with lawmakers, confirmed in the most pained and contorted way that the message in fact referred to the quality of the Russia case, according to multiple eyewitnesses.
The admission is deeply consequential. It means Rosenstein unleashed the most awesome powers of a special counsel to investigate an allegation that the key FBI officials, driving the investigation for 10 months beforehand, did not think was "there."....
Not much of a surprise to us following this thread. We've known that for months and months.drcrinum said:
http://thehill.com/hilltv/rising/397902-opinion-one-fbi-text-message-in-russia-probe-should-alarm-every-americanQuote:
...It is no longer in dispute that they held an animus for Donald Trump, who was a subject of their Russia probe, or that they openly discussed using the powers of their office to "stop" Trump from becoming president. The only question is whether any official acts they took in the Russia collusion probe were driven by those sentiments.
The Justice Department's inspector general is endeavoring to answer that question.
For any American who wants an answer sooner, there are just five words, among the thousands of suggestive texts Page and Strzok exchanged, that you should read.
That passage was transmitted on May 19, 2017. "There's no big there there," Strzok texted.
The date of the text long has intrigued investigators: It is two days after Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein named special counsel Robert Mueller to oversee an investigation into alleged collusion between Trump and the Russia campaign.
Since the text was turned over to Congress, investigators wondered whether it referred to the evidence against the Trump campaign.
This month, they finally got the chance to ask. Strzok declined to say but Page, during a closed-door interview with lawmakers, confirmed in the most pained and contorted way that the message in fact referred to the quality of the Russia case, according to multiple eyewitnesses.
The admission is deeply consequential. It means Rosenstein unleashed the most awesome powers of a special counsel to investigate an allegation that the key FBI officials, driving the investigation for 10 months beforehand, did not think was "there."....
Yup!
That's pretty damning. Let's hope we're finally at the beginning of the end.drcrinum said:
http://thehill.com/hilltv/rising/397902-opinion-one-fbi-text-message-in-russia-probe-should-alarm-every-americanQuote:
...It is no longer in dispute that they held an animus for Donald Trump, who was a subject of their Russia probe, or that they openly discussed using the powers of their office to "stop" Trump from becoming president. The only question is whether any official acts they took in the Russia collusion probe were driven by those sentiments.
The Justice Department's inspector general is endeavoring to answer that question.
For any American who wants an answer sooner, there are just five words, among the thousands of suggestive texts Page and Strzok exchanged, that you should read.
That passage was transmitted on May 19, 2017. "There's no big there there," Strzok texted.
The date of the text long has intrigued investigators: It is two days after Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein named special counsel Robert Mueller to oversee an investigation into alleged collusion between Trump and the Russia campaign.
Since the text was turned over to Congress, investigators wondered whether it referred to the evidence against the Trump campaign.
This month, they finally got the chance to ask. Strzok declined to say but Page, during a closed-door interview with lawmakers, confirmed in the most pained and contorted way that the message in fact referred to the quality of the Russia case, according to multiple eyewitnesses.
The admission is deeply consequential. It means Rosenstein unleashed the most awesome powers of a special counsel to investigate an allegation that the key FBI officials, driving the investigation for 10 months beforehand, did not think was "there."....
Yup!
The trial in Virginia doesn't need Tony Podesta's testimony really. It's the DC one where his company is an unindicted co-conspirator.drcrinum said:
here's the document:aggiehawg said:The trial in Virginia doesn't need Tony Podesta's testimony really. It's the DC one where his company is an unindicted co-conspirator.drcrinum said:
Something doesn't smell right about this. Seems like Mueller is gaming the system to the Podesta's benefit. If Judge Ellis grants the limited immunity but it is under seal until the witness is called?
Just because it is under seal doesn't mean the immunity goes away. It is still a court approved limited immunity even if they are not called.
aggiehawg said:Apparently, nothing. Techno has the same suspicions as I do about Podesta being involved in the EDVA case...at all.RoscoePColtrane said:
What am I missing Dixie?
Here is his reasoning?
Immunity is immunity when court approved. Binding on other courts.
Something stinks.
Time for a second Special Counsel if that actually happens.GCP12 said:
Almost time for me to lose it as promised...
