whatthehey78 said:

---

will25u said:

---

OK. I have two questions. Please help me understand.

1. OK, people have been putting this information together with public data. The people don't have nearly the visibility of members of Congress/DOJ/FBI, etc. We KNOW there was corruption all around during the Obama years. So why is nothing happening? Maybe it is, and we just aren't privy to it YET. Horowitz/Huber?

2. (This may not be relevant to the Mueller Invest)Why do we give the power to these people with no true oversight? They(Congress) are their own gatekeepers in most of their benefits(maybe not the best word). They control their pay, how little they work, term limits, etc. And WE THE PEOPLE have very little control over what they do. Why would they implement term limits on themselves when it lessens their power? I feel like I can do nothing but just watch our corrupt government and hate it.

Sorry if the second question is a derail, if so just ignore it. But the first one I am really curious about.

---

Not really an attempt to provide an answer to your questions...but, IMHO the players (elected officials) have learned how to "game" the system so as to benefit themselves and "be damned" the rest of us. They go to DC under the false pretense of helping America when, in fact they go their solely to enrich themselves. It (the system) apparently IS rigged. The swamp needs draining...PLEASE let it be so.

---

This gets to the main reason I will probably vote for Trump again in 2020. We need the Supreme Court to enforce separation of powers. For 40 years or so, Congress has avoided legislating but punting anything controversial to the administrative agencies. Gorsuch and Kavanaugh (along with Thomas and Alito) seem reasonably likely to reign in the power of Administrative Agencies. Roberts seems something of a wildcard on that issue.

Why is this important--this is one of the major ways our system has become rigged. Bureaucrats make the controversial decisions--bureaucrats who never come up for vote, are protected by civil service laws, and routinely receive high paying jobs as lobbyists (or others who interface directly with government). Pelosi, McCarthy, McConnel and Schumer-or any other member of Congress-don't have to defend their votes (except Supreme Court nominees in the Senate) to constituents because they never votes on anything really controversial ("I didn't vote for that, it was Health and Human Services' decision"; a.k.a. "we have to pass it before we can know what's in it").

aggiehawg said:

---

The fallout of the tango on the tarmac spun events OOC. Read Lisa Page's testimony. It was already determined that no charges would be brought against Clinton in early May, 2016, at the latest. Comey was already circulating his draft statement that he eventually read at the July 5th presser. Page also testified that early on, the DOJ was essentially blocking the FBI from gaining access to the laptops of Cheryl Mills and Heather Samuelson. They were Hillary's lawyers who sorted out her personal emails from her State Department emails (supposedly) and the FBI thought they might be able to recover the deleted emails forensically. DOJ for whatever reasons, were very slow to move on that request, nearly six months.

Page also testified extensively that there was a back and forth with DOJ over the statute in question, 18 U.S.C. 793(f) being unconstitutional in the view of DOJ and thus it would be against DOJ rules to even bring the matter before a grand jury for the purposes of indicting her. (However, that same 'unconstitutional' statute was used to issue search warrants and subpoenas.)

So, in a nutshell, the FBI was informed that DOJ was not inclined to prosecute early on, no matter what.

But then the Lynch/Bill tango on the tarmac hit the news. The appearance of impropriety was too great and Lynch kind of semi-recused herself but not really. Had she fully recused herself, her deputy, Sally Yates would presumably take the lead. But Comey intervened, improperly and against DOJ Guidelines.

So you have every reason to be confused. It was a mess.

---

Great summary.

Just think of the implications if Comey had kept a lower profile by following DOJ guidelines ... and kicked the HRC ball back to DOJ (presumably Yates) in a clever way to force DOJ to choose between 'gross negligence' and 'extremely careless.' Probably the same HRC outcome ... but Comey (and McCabe) would've looked 'clean' and may have survived well into 2018 running the 'Russia investigation' instead of Mueller.

Quote:

---

Just think of the implications if Comey had kept a lower profile by following DOJ guidelines ... and kicked the HRC ball back to DOJ (presumably Yates) in a clever way to force DOJ to choose between 'gross negligence' and 'extremely careless.' Probably the same HRC outcome ... but Comey (and McCabe) would've looked 'clean' and may have survived well into 2018 running the 'Russia investigation' instead of Mueller.

---

Having spent all of yesterday reading Lisa Page's transcripts, I'm convinced the outcome would have been the exact same-no charges. Further, if Comey hadn't written the letter to Congress about the Weiner laptop right before the election? Maybe Hillary wins?

But if Trump hadn't named Sessions as AG and there had been an effective AG in office, Comey's Russia investigation would have likely been shut down way before now and no Special Counsel would have ever been appointed.

But obviously, it just isn't Comey's nature to be a wallflower. He's too much of a Diva.

Well this is ironic. In Andy McCarthy's latest he suggests that Team Mueller intentionally charged Manafort under the wrong statutes to lessen his jail time.

Without getting too far into the weeds here I'll just summarize. With each of the charges made against Manafort, there are specific conspiracy statutes that directly apply, instead of the general conspiracy statute. Each of those specific statutes carry stiffer sentencing guidelines, than the one Mueller charged under. (And BTW, what Team Mueller did was specifically against DOJ Guidelines.)

McCarthy explains it thusly:

Quote:

---

Nevertheless, if you want to know why Manafort faced comparatively limited prison time today, blame Special Counsel Mueller. Under federal law, conspiracies to commit money laundering and witness tampering should have carried an aggregate 40 years of statutory exposure. That would have enabled the judge to impose a stiff guidelines sentence of between 210 and 262 months. But the special counsel invoked the wrong conspiracy statutes to spare Manafort greater punishment.


When the prosecutor bends the rules to be lenient, it signals to the court that leniency is in order.

---

Read the rest

Rocky Rider said:

---

The system requires personal integrity to function well. Generally speaking the politicians, civil servants, and media of our era lack integrity.

---

With respect, I think the system is set up to be the exact opposite. Our framers expected people to act with enlightened self interest. They included accountability (voting) and separation of powers so that enlightened self interest meant serving your constituents or state--at least to a substantial degree.

Congress, with the help of the Courts, has partially abrogated separation of powers through the administrative state, eliminating accountability in key areas. Because of this, enlightened self interest of the political class has been reduced to speech making (inflaming constituencies against the "other"), posturing, and wealth acquisition.

Quote:

---

Congress, with the help of the Courts, has partially abrogated separation of powers through the administrative state, eliminating accountability in key areas. Because of this, enlightened self interest of the political class has been reduced to speech making (inflaming constituencies against the "other"), posturing, and wealth acquisition.

---

I remember when I took an administrative law class in law school how remarkably broad their administrative authority truly was with little to no oversight. And that was nearly 40 years ago.

aggiehawg said:

---

Quote:

---

Congress, with the help of the Courts, has partially abrogated separation of powers through the administrative state, eliminating accountability in key areas. Because of this, enlightened self interest of the political class has been reduced to speech making (inflaming constituencies against the "other"), posturing, and wealth acquisition.

---

I remember when I took an administrative law class in law school how remarkably broad their administrative authority truly was with little to no oversight. And that was nearly 40 years ago.

---

You'd be absolutely shocked now.

I'm sure I would.

https://www.theepochtimes.com/nellie-ohr-testimony-confirms-her-work-for-the-cia_2836812.html


Jeff Carlson has seen the Nellie Our transcripts, the source of the above article.
Not a whole lot here IMO. She started working for Fusion GPS in September 2015, having been unemployed when she started. However, her early work experience included a number of years as a private contractor for the CIA. Most of the article details Open Source Works, the CIA agency where she worked. There are minimal details about her relationship with Glenn Simpson, & none about what she did for Fusion GPS.

Quote:

---

quote:

In 2010, Nellie Ohr was listed as a participant on a June 2010 DOJ Report, Expert Working Group Report on International Organized Crime.

Ohr was described as "Nellie Ohr, Researcher, Open Source Works, Washington DC."

---

Quote:

---

quote:

Listed on the same page were her husband, Bruce Ohr and Glenn Simpson, who was at the time a "Senior Fellow, International Assessment and Strategy Center."

---

Quote:

---

Documents filed with the Supreme Court and unsealed on Wednesday revealed definitively, and for the first time, that Special Counsel Robert Mueller is the party seeking a grand jury subpoena and subsequent contempt citation against an unnamed, government-controlled foreign corporation that has resisted prosecutors' efforts at every turn.

Fox News has previously reported on strong indications that Mueller's office was behind the case, although neither his office nor lawyers for the unnamed overseas company would provide confirmation.

<snip>

"Earlier this year, Special Counsel Robert Mueller served a grand jury subpoena on is a 'foreign state' as the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act defines the term," the unsealed filing, written by lawyers for the unknown corporation, reads. "From the outset, argued that it is immune under the FSIA from complying with, a criminal subpoena because American courts lack criminal jurisdiction over foreign states. The Special Counsel has argued from the outset that the FSIA does not apply to criminal proceedings and that, if it does, the statute's exceptions can support criminal jurisdiction over a foreign state."

In January, the Supreme Court issued an unsigned order refusing to dismiss a contempt citation from a federal judge against the corporation for failure to comply with Mueller's subpoena.

---

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/confirmed-mueller-seeking-subpoena-contempt-citation-against-foreign-corporation

My guess would be a Russian bank, several of which are state owned.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/top-prosecutor-on-mueller-probe-stepping-down

Andrew Weissmann leaving the DOJ. Some say this means the investigation is wrapping up.

aggiehawg said:

---

Quote:

---

Andrew Weissmann will leave to teach at New York University while working on various public service projects and preventing wrongful convictions, NPR reported.

---

That's rich, coming from him.

---

Well, he should know if anyone does.

Sort of like a reformed "white hat" hacker teaching web security?

Things are starting to move fast.

Quote:

---

U.S. District Court Judge Royce Lamberth ordered the discovery after a lawsuit was brought by conservative watchdog Judicial Watch, which is seeking to uncover "whether the Benghazi scandal was one reason for keeping Mrs. Clinton's email secret."

The conservative group announced Wednesday that Justin Cooper, a former Clinton Foundation adviser who played a role in setting up and administering the former secretary of state's unauthorized private email server, will answer questions under oath and in-person on Thursday.

Eight other dates for depositions of former Obama officials and Clinton aides were also announced, including Jake Sullivan, a former adviser and deputy chief of staff to Clinton, who will answer questions on April 16.

Other officials do not have to give in-person testimony but are required to answer written questions under oath. Those officials include former United Nations Ambassador and national security adviser Susan Rice, and Ben Rhodes, who served as Obama's deputy national security adviser.

---

LINK

Meanwhile, both Christopher Steele's and David Kramer's (McCain guy) depositions are to be released today.

Quote:

---

Sperry: BREAKING: James Comey sent his agents to seize the Trump Tower server that Democrats falsely claimed was "back-channeling" w a Russian bank, but he never seized the DNC server that Dems claimed was hacked by Trump & Putin to conduct his own forensic investigation to confirm claim

---

FBI seized Trump's server? I thought they just investigated.

https://dougcollins.house.gov/sites/dougcollins.house.gov/files/06.27.18%20Interview%20Of%20Peter%20Strzok.pdf

Egad! 312 pages, but it does not include the classified part of his testimony.

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1106031716928499712.html

Short thread by Techno_Fog on the latest Concord Management hearings. Lawyers may find it 'amusing'. I included the last image to 'whet your whistle':

Quote:

---

Short thread by Techno_Fog on the latest Concord Management hearings. Lawyers may find it 'amusing'. I included the last image to 'whet your whistle':

---

I have said since the day they filed that monstrosity of an indictment that counter intelligence operations don't translate well into criminal indictments, absent espionage and terrorism. Just a dumb move by Team Mueller all around brought on by their absolute belief no one would show up to contest the charges. When their kabuki theater indictment was challenged, they have been hemming and hawing and tap dancing their little hearts out ever since.

This case will go nowhere and will be quietly dismissed at some point.

Grassley's letter:
https://www.grassley.senate.gov/sites/default/files/2019-02-27%20CEG%20to%20Treasury%20%28SARs%20Buzzfeed%29.pdf

This is interesting. The leaked SARs related to Rinat Akhmetshin, a Russian lobbyist linked to Fusion GPS, the Magnitsky Act, & Veselnitskaya. The leaked SARs were provided to BuzzFeed who in turned wrote an inflammatory article about the Trump Tower meeting, casting suspicion on Trump Jr & the purpose of the meeting. Clearly this was the Deep State in action against Trump. If you read Grassley's letter, there is definitely criminal activity involved. You can read the BuzzFeed article here:

https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/emmaloop/trump-tower-meeting-russian-lobbyist-akhmetshin-suspicious-p

P.S. I don't know if this is related to the leaks by Natalie Sours-Edwards or it solves somebody else.

420-0 House wants Mueller report be made public.

https://thehill.com/homenews/house/434021-house-votes-for-mueller-report-to-be-made-public

will25u said:

---

420-0 House wants Mueller report be made public.

https://thehill.com/homenews/house/434021-house-votes-for-mueller-report-to-be-made-public

---

House doesn't get to make that determination, do they?

captkirk said:

---

will25u said:

---

420-0 House wants Mueller report be made public.

https://thehill.com/homenews/house/434021-house-votes-for-mueller-report-to-be-made-public

---

House doesn't get to make that determination, do they?

---

The AG does.

captkirk said:

---

will25u said:

---

420-0 House wants Mueller report be made public.

https://thehill.com/homenews/house/434021-house-votes-for-mueller-report-to-be-made-public

---

House doesn't get to make that determination, do they?

---

Not really, since there is no Independent or Special Counsel law at the moment. By federal regulation, the report goes to AG Barr. And he decides which parts if any are provided to Congress and/or the public.

captkirk said:

---

will25u said:

---

420-0 House wants Mueller report be made public.

https://thehill.com/homenews/house/434021-house-votes-for-mueller-report-to-be-made-public

---

House doesn't get to make that determination, do they?

---

Does this indicate that the Dems really don't know what (we think) is in it?

Quote:

---

Fired FBI agent Peter Strzok told Congress last year that the agency "did not have access" to Clinton Foundation emails that were on Hillary Clinton's private server because of a consent agreement "negotiated between the Department of Justice attorneys and counsel for Clinton."

That agreement was revealed in newly released congressional transcripts from Strzok's closed-door testimony at the House Judiciary Committee on June 27, 2018.
When asked by then-majority general counsel Zachary Somers if "the Clinton Foundation was on the server", Strzok testified that he believed it was "on one of the servers, if not the others." But Strzok stressed that due to an agreement between the DOJ and Clinton, they were not allowed to search Clinton Foundation emails for information that could help in their investigation.

---

LINK

How convenient. So the links to pay-for-play was in the FBI's hands but they never looked at them, even though Clinton Foundation emails were pertinent to her time at the State Department and whether she had also placed classified information therein.

But since DOJ had already said the mishandling statute was unconstitutional and they wouldn't file charges, why bother?

drcrinum said:

---

---

Am I the only one that thinks this is great news?!

Quote:

---

Am I the only one that thinks this is great news?!

---

Well it is and it isn't. Once someone leaves DOJ, Horowitz's ability to speak with them is gone. But if what is more important is just having him write a report and get the dirty laundry out there, even if DOJ doesn't pursue charges, then yes, it is great news. (And also might have something to do with Rosenstein's leaving.)

There is no doubt in my mind that its much better for Trump if the entire Mueller report is made public.

Everything needs to be out in the open before Trump launches his massive counter-attack against the deep state.

Don't know if gatewaypundit is legit or not...

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2019/03/breaking-confirmed-obamas-cia-doj-and-fbi-started-targeting-the-trump-campaign-in-2015-long-before-what-comey-claimed-july-2016/

Quote:

---

The pieces of the coup to undermine the Constitution of the United States of America are coming undone. Evidence from various sources now confirms that Obama's CIA, DOJ and FBI illegally spied on the Trump team starting in 2015 and then built a coup to prevent him from winning the election and later remove him from office!

As we reported on June 4, 2018, the US Senate released over 500 pages of information related to the Spygate scandal. Hidden in the information were unredacted Strzok Page texts that show the FBI initiated actions to insert multiple spies in the Trump campaign in December 2015.

---

TurkeyBaconLeg said:

---

There is no doubt in my mind that its much better for Trump if the entire Mueller report is made public.

Everything needs to be out in the open before Trump launches his massive counter-attack against the deep state.

---

Really depends on how Mueller crafts his report. This was essentially a counter intelligence operation using sources and methods that are not ever exposed. Why Team Mueller is trying to twist themselves into pretzels in the Concord Management case to avoid discovery.

If Mueller opts to include those sources and methods in some detail, Barr will have no choice but to heavily redact it.

Just something to keep in mind.