NM

Htown isn't a lawyer. Nor does he have a JD. FYI.

aggiehawg said:

---

Htown isn't a lawyer. Nor does he have a JD. FYI.

---

I'm sorry I must have clicked on the wrong post, that was directed at BMX, trifocals and computer screens suck

NM I thought that was BMX replying to me, now I've screwed up twice on the same post

RoscoePColtrane said:

---

Quote:

---

At 5:10 Ellis asked if he would be able to finish his cross-examination by 5:15, Kevin Downing said he would be more "efficient" if he had the weekend to prepare.

Ellis told him that, despite anything he may have said implying otherwise, Downing is "not limited" in using the fact that Cindy Laporta testified under immunity from prosecution.

"She said on the stand she took responsibility, but she didn't get prosecuted," Ellis said. "I don't know if there were professional consequences that's for you to find out."

"Court is adjourned until 9:30 AM Monday"

---

---

To the other lawyers on the thread - I have had trials where the judge seemed to know that my side was going to win, and the judge made every evidentiary ruling favoring the other side, even going so far as to appear to be chastising me and favoring the opposition. All seemingly to prevent the other side from preserving any appellate points. Could that be what Ellis is doing here?

Sarge 91 said:

---

RoscoePColtrane said:

---

Quote:

---

At 5:10 Ellis asked if he would be able to finish his cross-examination by 5:15, Kevin Downing said he would be more "efficient" if he had the weekend to prepare.

Ellis told him that, despite anything he may have said implying otherwise, Downing is "not limited" in using the fact that Cindy Laporta testified under immunity from prosecution.

"She said on the stand she took responsibility, but she didn't get prosecuted," Ellis said. "I don't know if there were professional consequences that's for you to find out."

"Court is adjourned until 9:30 AM Monday"

---

---

To the other lawyers on the thread - I have had trials where the judge seemed to know that my side was going to win, and the judge made every evidentiary ruling favoring the other side, even going so far as to appear to be chastising me and favoring the opposition. All seemingly to prevent the other side from preserving any appellate points. Could that be what Ellis is doing here?

---

Sure. No judge likes to be overruled.

Ellis stated early on this was a politically motivated prosecution to get Manafort to squeal for impeachment material on Trump. He is fully aware of what the game is here. He can't do much to change that fact other than ensure Manafort gets the most fair of a trial possible in his courtroom.

He won't cut the defense team much slack either, I'd expect.

https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/4636157-Buzzfeed.html

Very limited though, a simple yes/no answer in an affidavit from the Government (pp. 24-25):
1) Prior to January 10, 2017, did the FBI possess the December 13, 2016 Steele Dossier memo?
2) Did McCain give the FBI the Dossier (minus the December 13, 2016 memo) on or about December 9, 2016?
3) Did Clapper, Rogers, Brennan and/or Comey brief Obama about the allegations in the Dossier prior to January 10, 2017?

https://www.defenseone.com/technology/2018/08/how-russian-hackers-amplified-seth-rich-conspiracy-until-it-reached-donald-trump-and-cia/150263/?oref=DefenseOneTCO

(original article -- very long and detailed):
https://www.computerweekly.com/news/252445769/Briton-ran-pro-Kremlin-disinformation-campaign-that-helped-Trump-deny-Russian-links

New information. The Russians (GRU) apparently altered the time stamps on Gruccifer 2 documents to frame an inside copying job, specifically to point a finger at Seth Rich. With the new information, even Binney has changed his mind. In addition to setting up the fake Gruccifer 2, GRU set up fake twitter & websites to provide further confusion. The original article even mentions that details in the Mueller indictment apparently could only have been obtained via US cyber hacking GRU. So this new info strongly supports the Mueller indictment of the 13 Russians.
(The original article is way over my head.)

Don't read the article. You'll just get **ssed off. Strzok is an evil ************.

drcrinum said:

---

https://www.defenseone.com/technology/2018/08/how-russian-hackers-amplified-seth-rich-conspiracy-until-it-reached-donald-trump-and-cia/150263/?oref=DefenseOneTCO

(original article -- very long and detailed):
https://www.computerweekly.com/news/252445769/Briton-ran-pro-Kremlin-disinformation-campaign-that-helped-Trump-deny-Russian-links

New information. The Russians (GRU) apparently altered the time stamps on Gruccifer 2 documents to frame an inside copying job, specifically to point a finger at Seth Rich. With the new information, even Binney has changed his mind. In addition to setting up the fake Gruccifer 2, GRU set up fake twitter & websites to provide further confusion. The original article even mentions that details in the Mueller indictment apparently could only have been obtained via US cyber hacking GRU. So this new info strongly supports the Mueller indictment of the 13 Russians.
(The original article is way over my head.)

---

Just not buying that a 39-year-old programmer named Tim Leonard has more savvy in meta data and the manipulation of meta data than Bill Binney.

And anything coming out of the UK in the form of intelligence is suspect. Those Limey *******s assisted Barry Soltero to spy on our current POTUS. Eff them and the boat the had to row out of here.

aggiehawg said:

---

Htown isn't a lawyer. Nor does he have a JD. FYI.

---

And that matters because...
For the record, neither is Roscoe.

RoscoePColtrane said:

---

Just not buying that a 39-year-old programmer named Tim Leonard has more savvy in meta data and the manipulation of meta data than Bill Binney.

And anything coming out of the UK in the form of intelligence is suspect. Those Limey *******s assisted Barry Soltero to spy on our current POTUS. Eff them and the boat the had to row out of here.

---

Read the original article. Leonard didn't figure it out -- the info was provided to him (presumably by GRU). The author (Duncan Campbell) of the article is a senior fellow at Sussex University and worked with Computer Weekly on this; Binney visited Campbell in the UK and investigated this info.

HTownAg98 said:

---

aggiehawg said:

---

Htown isn't a lawyer. Nor does he have a JD. FYI.

---

And that matters because...
For the record, neither is Roscoe.

---

Talk about pretending to be someone you are not? Email TexAgs. They know who I am. And they know my degree history. They can confirm I was a practicing attorney, licensed in two states.

Lord knows the Association of Former Students followed me to the point where they told an abusive ex-boyfriend my location and he went after me again two years after I graduated.

Why I will never be a member.

drcrinum said:

---

RoscoePColtrane said:

---

Just not buying that a 39-year-old programmer named Tim Leonard has more savvy in meta data and the manipulation of meta data than Bill Binney.

And anything coming out of the UK in the form of intelligence is suspect. Those Limey *******s assisted Barry Soltero to spy on our current POTUS. Eff them and the boat the had to row out of here.

---

Read the original article. Leonard didn't figure it out -- the info was provided to him (presumably by GRU). The author (Duncan Campbell) of the article is a senior fellow at Sussex University and worked with Computer Weekly on this; Binney visited Campbell in the UK and investigated this info.

---

I did same answer still applies. Not Buying it.

I've never ever claimed to be an attorney. I'm just a masochist that enjoys reading court opinionsfollowing cases, and I follow a bunch of attorneys on twitter to figure out what those opinions actually mean. You're free to think my opinions aren't worth the bits my posts are taking up on a server. But I haven't been wrong on a lot of the Mueller saga.

HTownAg98 said:

---

I've never ever claimed to be an attorney. I'm just a masochist that enjoys reading court opinionsfollowing cases, and I follow a bunch of attorneys on twitter to figure out what those opinions actually mean. You're free to think my opinions aren't worth the bits my posts are taking up on a server. But I haven't been wrong on a lot of the Mueller saga.

---

Jesus you need to chill.

I had replied to your post to me, thinking you were someone else who is a lawyer. My answer to that post was directed to someone who is a lawyer but I didn't mention them by name. Dixie just brought it to my attention that you weren't an attorney not knowing my old dumb blind ass was responding to the wrong person. Once I realized what I'd done I edit my post to NM.

And for the record I never claimed to be a lawyer either.

HTownAg98 said:

---

aggiehawg said:

---

HTownAg98 said:

---

aggiehawg said:

---

Htown isn't a lawyer. Nor does he have a JD. FYI.

---

And that matters because...
For the record, neither is Roscoe.

---

Talk about pretending to be someone you are not? Email TexAgs. They know who I am. And they know my degree history. They can confirm I was a practicing attorney, licensed in two states.

Lord knows the Association of Former Students followed me to the point where they told an abusive ex-boyfriend my location and he went after me again two years after I graduated.

Why I will never be a member.

---

You must have misread something, because I've never claimed you aren't an attorney. I know you are. And I respect your expertise and opinions. However I don't know why you took a shot at me, to the same person that has been outed here as being a pathological liar.

---

You really cannot follow why I did that? Roscoe addressed a reply to you appreciating your status as a licensed attorney. I informed him you were not. He edited and apologized for the error. He meant to address that post to BMX, not you.

Clearer now?

drcrinum said:

---

https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/4636157-Buzzfeed.html

Very limited though, a simple yes/no answer in an affidavit from the Government (pp. 24-25):
1) Prior to January 10, 2017, did the FBI possess the December 13, 2016 Steele Dossier memo?
2) Did McCain give the FBI the Dossier (minus the December 13, 2016 memo) on or about December 9, 2016?
3) Did Clapper, Rogers, Brennan and/or Comey brief Obama about the allegations in the Dossier prior to January 10, 2017?

---

You know what's strange about this if you read their brief in it's entirety. It sounds like they are insinuating that they (Buzzfeed) got the copy of the dossier from someone inside the government, and they want someone to confirm what they got is what, is what the FBI got.

Not sure if they realize they are outing who leaked it to them. My bet is Clapper

Sorry I unintentionally drug you into this Dixie.

His post was edited before I ever saw it. If I'd seen it, I certainly would have told him that I'm not an attorney. So this is all a big miscommunication. My apologies.

HTownAg98 said:

---

His post was edited before I ever saw it. If I'd seen it, I certainly would have told him that I'm not an attorney. So this is all a big miscommunication. My apologies.

---

Well, let's assume that was a mistake on your part.

I am not defending Roscoe, Barnes or whoever he or she is, I'm defending myself. Accuse me of lying again? Lawyers disagree on interpretations of the law. That is why it is an adversarial system. Both sides get to be heard.

Try to disparage me and silence my opinion relying on IANALs like yourself? Shame on you.

RoscoePColtrane said:

---

You know what's strange about this if you read their brief in it's entirety. It sounds like they are insinuating that they (Buzzfeed) got the copy of the dossier from someone inside the government, and they want someone to confirm what they got is what, is what the FBI got.

Not sure if they realize they are outing who leaked it to them. My bet is Clapper

---

Neither McCain nor Kramer would have had the December 13, 2016 memo since Kramer went to London in November 2016 & McCain gave his copy to Comey on/about December 9, 2016. The big question is: When did the FBI receive the December 13, 2016 memo? The person who may know this answer is Bruce Ohr, since he was passing info via Nellie/Fusion GPS. But, regarding your guess: If the FBI had the December 13, 2016 prior to January 10, 2017, then I agree with you = Clapper was the leaker. If the FBI did not have possession of the December 13, 2016 memo prior to January 10, 2017, then BuzzFeed had to obtain it's copy from Fusion GPS.

HTownAg98 said:

---

I have never ever ever accused you of being a liar, much less tried to silence you. I honestly do not know why you would think that of me. I respect your statements about the technicalities of the law. You have a wealth of knowledge, and I greatly appreciate your explanations on procedure and other boring things about law most people don't care about.

However, I sometimes disagree on your opinions of the investigation.

---

Dear, I do read other threads besides this one. And disagree with me all you want. But you are IANAL status.

Pardon me if I no longer take your posts seriously and believe you are not just a troll.

The many faces of Barnes provides endless entertainment. Sometime this Barnes character overplays his roles a bit.

Since the deleted post was meant for me, can I get an explanation on what my question regarding a missing key paragraph of an article has to do with being a lawyer?

It's gonna be ok. Really.

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1025396812809732097.html

Short interesting thread. Good point: Why did the Russians just go after emails and then post them on Wikileaks, when they could have installed Ransomware and extorted the DNC for many millions or virtually destroyed all of the DNC's data (causing major damage)?

drcrinum said:

---

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1025396812809732097.html

Short interesting thread. Good point: Why did the Russians just go after emails and then post them on Wikileaks, when they could have installed Ransomware and extorted the DNC for many millions or virtually destroyed all of the DNC's data (causing major damage)?

---

That's an outstanding point. I'm sure there are some wonderful animal rescue charities that Tom Steyer's and Soros's money could benefit.

drcrinum said:

---

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1025396812809732097.html

Short interesting thread. Good point: Why did the Russians just go after emails and then post them on Wikileaks, when they could have installed Ransomware and extorted the DNC for many millions or virtually destroyed all of the DNC's data (causing major damage)?

---

that's the point I've been making all along. Why on earth would the Russian government steal these emails and just hand them over to Julian Assange? Makes absolutely zero sense.