Mueller dismisses top FBI agent in Russia probe for anti-Trump texts

7,578,474 Views | 49320 Replies | Last: 2 days ago by fasthorse05
RoscoePColtrane
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Whiskey Tango Foxtrot

Never take a hostage you aren't willing to shoot,
Remember, America doesn’t negotiate with terrorists.
Code 7 10-42
Rockdoc
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Victims? Please.
Garrelli 5000
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
RoscoePColtrane said:

Whiskey Tango Foxtrot




That's a special kind of ocasio- Cortez stupid.
Staff - take out the trash.
RoscoePColtrane
How long do you want to ignore this user?
The left is so out of joint they don't know who to blame. They blame Rand Paul for giving Trump the idea? They are losing their minds, claiming he's infringing on their 1st amendment rights, you name it.

Like Trump has been sitting around twiddling his thumbs, and Rand Paul waltzes in and says "Hey Don let's pull some SCs today." Trump's like "Why didn't I ever think of that?" Rand Paul feels empowered and will vote for Kavanaugh and Trump has political cover for turning the screws on these knuckleheads and starts a little payback. CNN and MSNBC are hilarious.

I think is was GCP12 earlier that mentioned the last question at today Press Briefing. "Are Obama and Biden next?" and then he had the perfect troll answer for Sanders, "Anything is possible", that would have sent the left into orbit.
Never take a hostage you aren't willing to shoot,
Remember, America doesn’t negotiate with terrorists.
Code 7 10-42
VegasAg86
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
RoscoePColtrane said:

Whiskey Tango Foxtrot




She's already established herself as an idiot. Nothing surprising here.
🤡 🤡 🤡
aggiehawg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Rockdoc said:

Victims? Please.
Uhmm, well we know Carter Page's civil rights were violated. Under a two hop system, no telling how many other American s' civil rights were also violated.

Plus, given the aggressive nature of Comey's FBI, it is hard to believe that Carter Page was the only one who was the target of a FISA I warrant.
VegasAg86
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Now that we know for certain Rosenstein signed a FISA application on Carter Page, how is he not conflicted out of supervising the Mueller investigation? Seems far more conflicted than Sessions to me.
🤡 🤡 🤡
RoscoePColtrane
How long do you want to ignore this user?
VegasAg86 said:

Now that we know for certain Rosenstein signed a FISA application on Carter Page, how is he not conflicted out of supervising the Mueller investigation? Seems far more conflicted than Sessions to me.
Rosey probably should be more worried about presenting false evidence to the FISC seriously.
Never take a hostage you aren't willing to shoot,
Remember, America doesn’t negotiate with terrorists.
Code 7 10-42
akm91
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
RoscoePColtrane said:

aggiehawg said:

RoscoePColtrane said:

aggiehawg said:

"Aisle" dear, not "isle."

BTW, nuns actually slapped palms, not the top of the hands. That would leave bruises. The palm would not but hurt just as much.
Never had a nun do it but I had a teacher that used a ruler on the back of the hand on a regular basis. bruises be damned. Spent my first 8 grades in a one room school house and Ms Bridges took no guff from anyone.
Back of the hands hurt a hell of a lot worse, especially with bamboo rod.
RoscoePColtrane
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Over and under on when Trump releases the less redacted versions of the FISA warrant?

3 weeks?
Never take a hostage you aren't willing to shoot,
Remember, America doesn’t negotiate with terrorists.
Code 7 10-42
RoscoePColtrane
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Never take a hostage you aren't willing to shoot,
Remember, America doesn’t negotiate with terrorists.
Code 7 10-42
kag00
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Since when is it a right to have security clearance? Especially when you are not even employed by the federal get. All political appointments should have clearance pulled once they leave. It can always be reinstated later.
Sarge 91
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
titan said:


On a more general note, foresaw next to no perp walks fairly early, at least of very high ranking schemers in this cabal against President Trump. With 80% redacted documents going around, any still think there will be alot of swampers and Democrats yet snared, or will Trump be lucky to avoid some drummed up crime charge no one cares about -- along the lines of Beria's `name the man, find the crime' kind of fake judicial system??

As have said before will settle for the Leftist-MSM clique being pushed even more out of power in the mid-terms, but pretty skeptical of anything else with so much wobblies on the Republican side. Why are stern AGs so hard to find?


First Jive Dude: Shiiiiit, maaaaan. That honky muf' be messin' mah old lady... got to be runnin' cold upside down his head, you know?
[Subtitle: GOLLY, THAT WHITE FELLOW SHOULD STAY AWAY FROM MY WIFE OR I WILL PUNCH HIM]
Second Jive Dude: Hey home', I can dig it. Know ain't gonna lay no mo' big rap up on you, man!
[Subtitle: YES, HE IS WRONG FOR DOING THAT]
First Jive Dude: I say hey, sky... subba say I wan' see...
Second Jive Dude: Uh-huh.
First Jive Dude: ...pray to J I did the same-ol', same-ol'!
[Subtitle: I KNEW A MAN IN A SIMILAR PREDICAMENT, AND HE ENDED UP BEING SORRY]
Second Jive Dude: Hey... knock a self a pro, Slick! That gray matter backlot perform us DOWN, I take TCB-in', man!
[Subtitle: DON'T BE NAIVE ARTHUR. EACH OF US FACES A CLEAR MORAL CHOICE]
First Jive Dude: Hey, you know what they say: see a broad to get dat booty yak 'em...
First Jive Dude/Second Jive Dude: ...leg 'er down a smack 'em yak 'em!
[Subtitle: EARLY TO BED, EARLY TO RISE, MAKES A MAN HEALTHY, WEALTHY AND WISE]
First Jive Dude: COL' got to be! Y'know?
[Subtitle: HOW TRUE!]
First Jive Dude: Shiiiiit.
[Subtitle: GOLLY]
drcrinum
How long do you want to ignore this user?


The warrant docs to search Hillary's emails:
https://www.politico.com/f/?id=00000164-2f53-d8b4-aff7-ef5fea910000

drcrinum
How long do you want to ignore this user?

drcrinum
How long do you want to ignore this user?


https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1021600910122708993.html


Short interesting thread on Carter Page.
RoscoePColtrane
How long do you want to ignore this user?
And he wants to know why he's getting his ticket punched

Never take a hostage you aren't willing to shoot,
Remember, America doesn’t negotiate with terrorists.
Code 7 10-42
aggiehawg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Well technically, he was right because Page was no longer associated with the campaign at the precise moment they obtained the warrant.

But the look back portion of the two hop under Title I enabled them to access communications from when he was associated with the campaign.
RoscoePColtrane
How long do you want to ignore this user?
This idiot

Never take a hostage you aren't willing to shoot,
Remember, America doesn’t negotiate with terrorists.
Code 7 10-42
ThunderCougarFalconBird
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
RoscoePColtrane said:

This idiot


That's seriously the talking point they're leading with? "These hyper-partisan hacks have to keep their clearances in case people they viscerally hate want advice on how to do their jobs"?

I've been loathe to use the term "unhinged" but this narrative -- in addition to everything else we've seen -- is making me reconsider.
aggiehawg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
blindey said:

RoscoePColtrane said:

This idiot


That's seriously the talking point they're leading with? "These hyper-partisan hacks have to keep their clearances in case people they viscerally hate want advice on how to do their jobs"?

I've been loathe to use the term "unhinged" but this narrative -- in addition to everything else we've seen -- is making me reconsider.
Like Obama called Condi Rice every week, sure, whatever. The real reason they are howling about maybe losing their SC is because they can no longer legally receive classified information through leaks from holdover staff. It is not illegal since they still have the highest clearance. Remove that and many of those staffers would reconsider leaking anything to them.
MouthBQ98
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
It also kills much of their value regarding post-government employment by news or political strategy organizations. If they can't get unobtainable data that they can hint at or dance around to help direct organizations onto the "trail" without directly leaking anything, they don't get nearly as many big paydays from the private sector.
tsuag10
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Definitely a pretty weak talking point. If Swallowswell's comment has any substance to it, I would ask why these has-been experts can't just be read-in on a case-by-case basis if their help is needed.....?

That would make too much sense for govt. folk.
RoscoePColtrane
How long do you want to ignore this user?
tsuag10 said:

Definitely a pretty weak talking point. If Swallowswell's comment has any substance to it, I would ask why these has-been experts can't just be read-in on a case-by-case basis if their help is needed.....?

That would make too much sense for govt. folk.
Not sure why it even matters to the left anyway. Ben Rhodes was Obama's Deputy National Security Advisor for EIGHT years with NO SECURITY CLEARANCE ever. Saw everything that went on in the Oval office. It's the only reason he's not on that list too, because he never had one to revoke.

Let this soak in as Deputy National Security Advisor, Rhodes had legal authority to unmask U.S. citizens.
Never take a hostage you aren't willing to shoot,
Remember, America doesn’t negotiate with terrorists.
Code 7 10-42
tsuag10
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
RoscoePColtrane said:

tsuag10 said:

Definitely a pretty weak talking point. If Swallowswell's comment has any substance to it, I would ask why these has-been experts can't just be read-in on a case-by-case basis if their help is needed.....?

That would make too much sense for govt. folk.
Not sure why it even matters to the left anyway. Ben Rhodes was Obama's Deputy National Security Advisor for EIGHT years with NO SECURITY CLEARANCE ever. Saw everything that went on in the Oval office. It's the only reason he's not on that list too, because he never had one to revoke.

Let this soak in as Deputy National Security Advisor, Rhodes had legal authority to unmask U.S. citizens.
If that's true about Rhodes, someone like Hannity should blow the lid off of that. The MSM wet their pants worrying about Kushner's clearance status.

Wasn't Rhodes one of the "masterminds" behind the Iran deal?
fasthorse05
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Hawg, Roscoe, couldn't they (Clapper, Brennan, etc.) just go to a computer in a government building that allows all top secret information to be reviewed. I understand it's easier to get it from true believers at the NSA, CIA, etc., but I'm also sure there are plenty of computers in DC that allow that information to be seen.

How did we find out about Hillary's complete lack of security on her computers? Does anyone know how incredibly long that had been going on, or does Bill still have top level access? I know Hillary did from her days at State, but I don't know if it was SCIF. IF she didn't, then I'm sure she piggy backed off Bill's clearance.
Hate is how progressives sustain themselves. Without hate, introspection begins to slip into the progressive's consciousness, threatening the progressive with the truth: that their ideas and opinions are illogical, hypocritical, dangerous, and asinine.
This is backed by data.
fasthorse05
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Rhodes is a mastermind allright, but not at anything that matters except deceipt and manipulation.
Hate is how progressives sustain themselves. Without hate, introspection begins to slip into the progressive's consciousness, threatening the progressive with the truth: that their ideas and opinions are illogical, hypocritical, dangerous, and asinine.
This is backed by data.
aggiehawg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
fasthorses05 said:

Hawg, Roscoe, couldn't they (Clapper, Brennan, etc.) just go to a computer in a government building that allows all top secret information to be reviewed. I understand it's easier to get it from true believers at the NSA, CIA, etc., but I'm also sure there are plenty of computers in DC that allow that information to be seen.

How did we find out about Hillary's complete lack of security on her computers? Does anyone know how incredibly long that had been going on, or does Bill still have top level access? I know Hillary did from her days at State, but I don't know if it was SCIF. IF she didn't, then I'm sure she piggy backed off Bill's clearance.
I honestly don't know how their "need to know" would be assessed and by whom in regards to access.

I do remember when Sandy Berger was allowed access to classified materials in the National Archives and stole documents though when the 9/11 Commission was investigating what the Clinton administration did with Osama Bin Laden.


RoscoePColtrane
How long do you want to ignore this user?
fasthorses05 said:

Hawg, Roscoe, couldn't they (Clapper, Brennan, etc.) just go to a computer in a government building that allows all top secret information to be reviewed. I understand it's easier to get it from true believers at the NSA, CIA, etc., but I'm also sure there are plenty of computers in DC that allow that information to be seen.

How did we find out about Hillary's complete lack of security on her computers? Does anyone know how incredibly long that had been going on, or does Bill still have top level access? I know Hillary did from her days at State, but I don't know if it was SCIF. IF she didn't, then I'm sure she piggy backed off Bill's clearance.
In a nutshell, no they can't just walk in and log on.

Here's the rub.

Current holdovers and loyalists that still have access, can "legally" share things they saw or know with them, because they still have clearance. That's where a majority of the leaks come from. The point of access is restricted by their clearance being inactive. "Inactive" Status restricts access, but doesn't control them viewing content, if that makes sense. They no longer have a smart chipped ID key card, so they could be let in on a visitors pass and walked in by someone with "active" status TS for instance, and that person could technically share classified info with them. Without an official ID then couldn't enter a SCIF or anything.

Never take a hostage you aren't willing to shoot,
Remember, America doesn’t negotiate with terrorists.
Code 7 10-42
MooreTrucker
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
RoscoePColtrane said:

This idiot


And notice that he, of course, goes straight for the "feels" with the "makes you less safe" and "doesn't care about you" nonsense.
aggiehawg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
MooreTrucker said:

RoscoePColtrane said:

This idiot


And notice that he, of course, goes straight for the "feels" with the "makes you less safe" and "doesn't care about you" nonsense.
Subtext being we need protection from Trump and Brennan, Clapper, Comey and their ilk are the only ones who can do that.
Lot Y Tailgate
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
RoscoePColtrane said:

tsuag10 said:

Definitely a pretty weak talking point. If Swallowswell's comment has any substance to it, I would ask why these has-been experts can't just be read-in on a case-by-case basis if their help is needed.....?

That would make too much sense for govt. folk.
Not sure why it even matters to the left anyway. Ben Rhodes was Obama's Deputy National Security Advisor for EIGHT years with NO SECURITY CLEARANCE ever. Saw everything that went on in the Oval office. It's the only reason he's not on that list too, because he never had one to revoke.

Let this soak in as Deputy National Security Advisor, Rhodes had legal authority to unmask U.S. citizens.


Do right wing trash blogs even claim this? They seem to only claim that he was at one point possibly denied interim clearance during the transition.
lcraggie
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Erica is a d-bag with very limited mental capacity. Total oxygen thief, glad California is collapsing on their failed policies.
Rangers Lead the Way, NSDQ


RoscoePColtrane
How long do you want to ignore this user?
tsuag10 said:

RoscoePColtrane said:

tsuag10 said:

Definitely a pretty weak talking point. If Swallowswell's comment has any substance to it, I would ask why these has-been experts can't just be read-in on a case-by-case basis if their help is needed.....?

That would make too much sense for govt. folk.
Not sure why it even matters to the left anyway. Ben Rhodes was Obama's Deputy National Security Advisor for EIGHT years with NO SECURITY CLEARANCE ever. Saw everything that went on in the Oval office. It's the only reason he's not on that list too, because he never had one to revoke.

Let this soak in as Deputy National Security Advisor, Rhodes had legal authority to unmask U.S. citizens.
If that's true about Rhodes, someone like Hannity should blow the lid off of that. The MSM wet their pants worrying about Kushner's clearance status.

Wasn't Rhodes one of the "masterminds" behind the Iran deal?
Him not having clearance is absolutely true and well known.

Congress became aware that he hadn't had even an interim the entire time he was in the White House working as the DNSA for Obama, from the hacked emails of John Podesta, who has TS clearance but he secured his emails with the password "password.

During the ramping up of the transition to the Trump Administration Congress wanted answers from Comey.

Reportedly he never responded to the request











Never take a hostage you aren't willing to shoot,
Remember, America doesn’t negotiate with terrorists.
Code 7 10-42
Lot Y Tailgate
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
If it is so true and well known, why don't your links say that he never had a clearance?
First Page Last Page
Page 545 of 1410
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.