aggiehawg said:

---

Quote:

---

Wow bring whole new meaning to circular reporting.

More like circular CIA spying!

---

Remember Lisa Page's testimony? She said there were discussions of how many and how valuable of their assets were they willing to burn in investigating Trump?

I'm sure that conversation happened, just not the year of 2016 she said it did. It wasn't September of 2016, it was November of 2015, IMO.

---

At this point, its an almost certainty. Great observation.

will25u said:

---

Why does the government, specifically since Trump has taken off like to make the big info drops on Friday?

I have been conditioned by TexAgs to think that dropping things on Friday is a means of lessening the impact because of the weekend?

I know there are some political shows on the weekend, but I feel the best way for people to actually see the information is to drop it early in the week and let it peculate throughout the week.

---

It's been a practice since I was there and long before me and I straddled the Clinton and 43 administrations.

I was always told that sometimes its to bury info from public, but also many times for the purpose of not trying to negatively impact markets. Giving investors time to absorb info over the weekend and not make rash moves before ordering sell offs, etc.

It's going to take a while to memorize all the allegations and information in the report that might come up, what of it can be discussed, and how exactly to phrase particular responses to avoid perjury issues if the testimony falls under that type of standard.

MouthBQ98 said:

---

It's going to take a while to memorize all the allegations and information in the report that might come up, what of it can be discussed, and how exactly to phrase particular responses to avoid perjury issues if the testimony falls under that type of standard.

---

He doesn't have to memorize everything. He can make it stipulation to his testimony that questions referring to particular matters have the corresponding pages of his report copied and given to him. Here's the packet for questions from Nadler, here's the packet for questions from Ratcliffe, etc.

Yeah, I figured if he was just going to refer back to the document then that kind of thing would be arranged.

It's going to get weird though where errors and inconsistencies or unsupportable assertions have been found in it.

Quote:

---

It's going to get weird though where errors and inconsistencies or unsupportable assertions have been found in it.

---

He'll deflect and just read from the report.

Pinche Abogado said:

---

Mueller testimony postponed until July 24th, per Fox.

---

Ha ha ha ha - We'll see. May be postponed forever

Was a reason given?

Since Mueller is going to testify at some point, my question is this. Have the D's gone and look at the unredacted version of the Mueller Report yet? Last time it was brought up right after the Report release, the answer was a resounding no.

As far as I'm concerned, the Republicans should make every question about McGahn's edited phone call with Cohens attorney.

To me, that one item renders the entire report specious,and sophist, not to mention purposefully embellishing facts to make the report show Trump culpability. It makes me furious this information isn't being regularly blasted to everybody in the country.

fasthorses05 said:

---

As far as I'm concerned, the Republicans should make every question about McGahn's edited phone call with Cohens attorney.

To me, that one item renders the entire report specious,and sophist, not to mention purposefully embellishing facts to make the report show Trump culpability. It makes me furious this information isn't being regularly blasted to everybody in the country.

---

I'd like questions about the Carter Page section, too. Why did they mention he was approached by Russian operatives looking to recruit him, but not mention he helped catch and convict them?

https://www.scribd.com/document/416666218/Nine-page-statement-from-Mike-Flynn-s-defense-team-dated-July-11th-2019-admits-Flynn-made-false-statement

New filing regarding Flynn. This is confusing to me. Anyone able to interpret this?

It goes to intent. In hindsight, knowing what he knows now, the FARA filing was flawed. However, it is Sidney's contention that at the time the FARA filing was made, Flynn didn't have sufficient information to know some statements were false and misleading.

That FARA filing was being pushed by Laufman at DOJ/NatSec. Through FISA warrants, Laufman knew they were false and likely knew that Flynn and his lawyers did not.

That's what I thought was the case. I just have a hard time coming to that conclusion from those confusing notes.

I'm assuming he was not cooperating with Barr fast enough.

I'm losing hope that justice will be done with this whole thing.

aggiehawg said:

---

I'm assuming he was not cooperating with Barr fast enough.

---

Coats and Wray have been blocking Barr, the IG, and Durham on declassification.

I suspect if Wray doesn't get the hint, he will be gone next.

Of course, Trump with the stroke of a pen can declassify anything he wants. When Barr needs something declassified, if Wray and Coats refuse without any justification, Trump should just do it himself.

The only real for not declassifying, or redacting, would be to protect intelligence methods/tech or to protect assets who would likely be imprisoned or be killed if their names get out.

They aren't getting Flynn, he's a patriot that knows too much about the Deep State and the shady Obama presidency... he will help take them down at some point... they can't cover up their lies any more.., they are getting exposed more and more each day...

will25u said:

---

---

Getting nasty

Color me surprised.

How do you spell "FISA"?

Donald Trump tweet said:

---

Andy McCabe is a major sleazebag. Among many other things, he took massive amounts of money from Crooked Hillary reps, for wife's campaign, while Hillary was under "investigation" by FBI!

---

To be fair, didn't most of Jill McCabe's 2015 campaign contributions precede McCabe's involvement in the FBI's 2016 election investigations? My problem isn't with Jill McCabe running for office or even receiving campaign contributions ... my problem is with Andy McCabe's non-recusal from all things related to the 2016 election investigations.

Totally unethical. Shame on Andy McCabe for all the grief his poor judgement caused his family.

Quote:

---

To be fair, didn't most of Jill McCabe's 2015 campaign contributions precede McCabe's involvement in the FBI's 2016 election investigations? My problem isn't with Jill McCabe running for office or even receiving campaign contributions ... my problem is with Andy McCabe's non-recusal from all things related to the 2016 election investigations.

---

It is not the 2016 election he was on the Hillary email case in 2015 when the donations were made.

Long but explanatory of the timing. HERE

aggiehawg said:

---

It is not the 2016 election he was on the Hillary email case in 2015 when the donations were made.

---

Good find.

No harm/foul until Oct 2015 .... when Jill's campaign contributions skyrocketed and Andy McCabe scribed that infamous Email to investigators concerning HRC getting the "HQ special." Even though the "HQ special" probably wasn't McCabe's call as FBI's #3 ... the fix was in when he was promoted to #2 on Feb 1, 2016 and assumed direct control of HRC's Email investigation.

Quote:

---

No harm/foul until Oct 2015 .... when Jill's campaign contributions skyrocketed and Andy McCabe scribed that infamous Email to investigators concerning HRC getting the "HQ special." Even though the "HQ special" probably wasn't McCabe's call as FBI's #3 ... the fix was in when he was promoted to #2 on Feb 1, 2016 and assumed direct control of HRC's Email investigation.

---

That was the timing I picked up on as well. He should have recused himself in October 2015 but if not then, certainly by February 2016.

benchmark said:

---

Donald Trump tweet said:

---

Andy McCabe is a major sleazebag. Among many other things, he took massive amounts of money from Crooked Hillary reps, for wife's campaign, while Hillary was under "investigation" by FBI!

---

To be fair, didn't most of Jill McCabe's 2015 campaign contributions precede McCabe's involvement in the FBI's 2016 election investigations? My problem isn't with Jill McCabe running for office or even receiving campaign contributions ... my problem is with Andy McCabe's non-recusal from all things related to the 2016 election investigations.

Totally unethical. Shame on Andy McCabe for all the grief his poor judgement caused his family.

---

Libs never recuse. Never