aggiehawg said:

---

Quote:

---

That said, later classification diminishes criminal intent, as opposed to administrative discipline.

---

Statute requires only gross negligence, not criminal intent.

The point here is that DOJ cannot take directly contradictory positions o the memos. Either he mishandled classified info, or he did not. Either all or most of the Comey memos contained classified info about sources and methods, or they don't. Either his leaks of same were criminal or not.

Maintaining he did not commit a crime, means the DOJ position in the FOIA case is a lie to a federal court. Repeated lies, in fact. No manner to resolve that disconnect.

---

When it comes to simple reading comprehension, a certain poster is light years beyond hopeless. He would incessantly argue that 'denial' is a river in Egypt and the Congo a native Brazilian dance. I speculate there is "no chance" for his future enlightenment.

Thanks for sharing the youtube link. That's an interesting channel.

Quote:

---

the president's nonstop depiction of Comey as the reincarnation of Lavrentiy Beria,

---

McCarthy has a point here. While Comey may have defended the three year long detention of a US citizen without charges or access to counsel in a similar to how Beria usee Lefortovo to endlessly imprison enemies of the state, Comey hasn't ordered summary executions. Also, unlike Comey, Beria never had to testify to the Politburo to exonerate the General Secretary of the party from prosecution despite mountains of evidence indicating guilt.

Ho-hum.

https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2019/07/31/assa-j31.html

Quote:

---

In a ruling published late Tuesday, Judge John Koeltl of the US District Court for the Southern District of New York delivered a devastating blow to the US-led conspiracy against WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange.
In his ruling, Judge Koeltl, a Bill Clinton nominee and former assistant special prosecutor for the Watergate Special Prosecution Force, dismissed "with prejudice" a civil lawsuit filed in April 2018 by the Democratic National Committee (DNC) alleging WikiLeaks was civilly liable for conspiring with the Russian government to steal DNC emails and data and leak them to the public.
Jennifer Robinson, a leading lawyer for Assange, and other WikiLeaks attorneys welcomed the ruling as "an important win for free speech."
The decision exposes the Democratic Party in a conspiracy of its own to attack free speech and cover up the crimes of US imperialism and the corrupt activities of the two parties of Wall Street. Judge Koeltl stated:

Quote:

---

If WikiLeaks could be held liable for publishing documents concerning the DNC's political financial and voter-engagement strategies simply because the DNC labels them 'secret' and trade secrets, then so could any newspaper or other media outlet. But that would impermissibly elevate a purely private privacy interest to override the First Amendment interest in the publication of matters of the highest public concern. The DNC's published internal communications allowed the American electorate to look behind the curtain of one of the two major political parties in the United States during a presidential election. This type of information is plainly of the type entitled to the strongest protection that the First Amendment offers.

---

The ruling exposes the illegality of the conspiracy by the US government, backed by the governments of Britain, Ecuador, Australia and Sweden and the entire corporate media and political establishment, to extradite Assange to the US, where he faces 175 years in federal prison on charges including espionage.
The plaintiff in the civil case -- the Democratic Party -- has also served as Assange's chief prosecutor within the state apparatus for over a decade. During the Obama administration, Democratic Party Justice Department officials, as well as career Democratic holdovers under the Trump administration, prepared the criminal case against him.
The dismissal of the civil suit exposes massive unreported conflicts of interest and prosecutorial misconduct and criminal abuse of process by those involved. The criminal prosecution of Assange has nothing to do with facts and is instead aimed at punishing him for telling the truth about the war crimes committed by US imperialism and its allies.
The judge labeled WikiLeaks an "international news organization" and said Assange is a "publisher," exposing the liars in the corporate press who declare that Assange is not subject to free speech protections. Judge Koeltl continued: "In New York Times Co. v. United States, the landmark 'Pentagon Papers' case, the Supreme Court upheld the press's right to publish information of public concern obtained from documents stolen by a third party."
As a legal matter, by granting WikiLeaks' motion to dismiss, the court ruled that the DNC had not put forward a "factually plausible" claim. At the motion to dismiss stage, a judge is required to accept all the facts alleged by the plaintiff as true. Here, the judge ruled that even if all the facts alleged by the DNC were true, no fact-finder could "draw the reasonable inference that the defendant is liable for the misconduct alleged."
Going a step further, the judge called the DNC's arguments "threadbare," adding: "At no point does the DNC allege any facts" showing that Assange or WikiLeaks "participated in the theft of the DNC's information."
Judge Koeltl said the DNC's argument that Assange and WikiLeaks "conspired with the Russian Federation to steal and disseminate the DNC's materials" is "entirely divorced from the facts." The judge further ruled that the court "is not required to accept conclusory allegations asserted as facts.".....

---

This is rather damning.

Why was Wiki not allowed to inspect the DNC server?

Quote:

---

The ruling exposes the illegality of the conspiracy by the US government, backed by the governments of Britain, Ecuador, Australia and Sweden and the entire corporate media and political establishment, to extradite Assange to the US, where he faces 175 years in federal prison on charges including espionage.

---

hold up! this is dead wrong.

In the DNC lawsuit, there was no allegation the "secondary" players (including wikileaks and assange) participated in the hack.

Assange is in criminal trouble over Bradley Manning because Wikileaks actively participated in helping Manning. *(allegedly)

BMX Bandit said:

---

Quote:

---

The ruling exposes the illegality of the conspiracy by the US government, backed by the governments of Britain, Ecuador, Australia and Sweden and the entire corporate media and political establishment, to extradite Assange to the US, where he faces 175 years in federal prison on charges including espionage.

---

hold up! this is dead wrong.

In the DNC lawsuit, there was no allegation the "secondary" players (including wikileaks and assange) participated in the hack.

Assange is in criminal trouble over Bradley Manning because Wikileaks actively participated in helping Manning. *(allegedly)

---

Agree. Assange and wikileaks have not been indicted on anything having to do with the DNC "hack" but rather his attempt to help Manning break a password so he/she could then access more classified information.

And the time to increase the charges against Assange for his extradition has passed.

The DNC suit against Assange was filed in April 2018. The DOJ indictment against Assange was filed & sealed in August 2018, being unsealed in November 2018.

drcrinum said:

---

Ho-hum.

---

Who would have guessed that the Soloflex guy was a constitutional conservative law student that would one day found the ACLJ? He never quite learned to stop posing.

https://www.theepochtimes.com/the-mainstream-media-wants-the-mifsud-story-to-just-go-away_3029571.html

Quote:

---

.....Now, Solomon is reporting that an audiotape containing professor Joseph Mifsud's deposition has been given to both U.S. Attorney John Durham's investigators and to the Senate Judiciary Committee.

"I can report absolutely that the Durham investigators have now obtained an audiotape deposition of Joseph Mifsud, where he describes his work, why he targeted George Papadopoulos, who directed him to do that, what directions he was given, and why he set that entire process of introducing Papadopoulos to Russia in motion in March of 2016, which is really the flashpoint the starting point of this whole Russia collusion narrative," Solomon told Fox News' Sean Hannity.

"I can also confirm that the Senate Judiciary Committee has also obtained the same deposition," he said.

Mifsud, who I have written about extensively in previous columns, is the key that turns the lock to the lid of this Pandora's box that we refer to as "Spygate."

So I'm wondering why Solomon appears to be the only mainstream reporter pursuing this Mifsud story.

I suspect it's because many DNC Media outlets, after having fallen deeply and passionately in love with the Trump-Russia collusion hoax, are reluctant to call attention to something that would be the final nail in its coffin. The last thing the mainstream media wants right now would be for Mifsud to go on the record with both Durham's investigative team and with Congress to say he was working for the FBI and was only pretending to be a Russian agent.

If Mifsud was an FBI asset sent to entrap Papadopoulos, then there are no real Russian agents anywhere in this entire Trump-Russia collusion story.

Ponder what that means for a minute......

---

If true.....

drcrinum said:

---

https://www.theepochtimes.com/the-mainstream-media-wants-the-mifsud-story-to-just-go-away_3029571.html

Quote:

---

.....Now, Solomon is reporting that an audiotape containing professor Joseph Mifsud's deposition has been given to both U.S. Attorney John Durham's investigators and to the Senate Judiciary Committee.

"I can report absolutely that the Durham investigators have now obtained an audiotape deposition of Joseph Mifsud, where he describes his work, why he targeted George Papadopoulos, who directed him to do that, what directions he was given, and why he set that entire process of introducing Papadopoulos to Russia in motion in March of 2016, which is really the flashpoint the starting point of this whole Russia collusion narrative," Solomon told Fox News' Sean Hannity.

"I can also confirm that the Senate Judiciary Committee has also obtained the same deposition," he said.

Mifsud, who I have written about extensively in previous columns, is the key that turns the lock to the lid of this Pandora's box that we refer to as "Spygate."

So I'm wondering why Solomon appears to be the only mainstream reporter pursuing this Mifsud story.

I suspect it's because many DNC Media outlets, after having fallen deeply and passionately in love with the Trump-Russia collusion hoax, are reluctant to call attention to something that would be the final nail in its coffin. The last thing the mainstream media wants right now would be for Mifsud to go on the record with both Durham's investigative team and with Congress to say he was working for the FBI and was only pretending to be a Russian agent.

If Mifsud was an FBI asset sent to entrap Papadopoulos, then there are no real Russian agents anywhere in this entire Trump-Russia collusion story.

Ponder what that means for a minute......

---

If true.....

---

It is true. I can almost guarantee it

drcrinum said:

---

https://www.theepochtimes.com/the-mainstream-media-wants-the-mifsud-story-to-just-go-away_3029571.html

Quote:

---

.....Now, Solomon is reporting that an audiotape containing professor Joseph Mifsud's deposition has been given to both U.S. Attorney John Durham's investigators and to the Senate Judiciary Committee.

"I can report absolutely that the Durham investigators have now obtained an audiotape deposition of Joseph Mifsud, where he describes his work, why he targeted George Papadopoulos, who directed him to do that, what directions he was given, and why he set that entire process of introducing Papadopoulos to Russia in motion in March of 2016, which is really the flashpoint the starting point of this whole Russia collusion narrative," Solomon told Fox News' Sean Hannity.

"I can also confirm that the Senate Judiciary Committee has also obtained the same deposition," he said.

Mifsud, who I have written about extensively in previous columns, is the key that turns the lock to the lid of this Pandora's box that we refer to as "Spygate."

So I'm wondering why Solomon appears to be the only mainstream reporter pursuing this Mifsud story.

I suspect it's because many DNC Media outlets, after having fallen deeply and passionately in love with the Trump-Russia collusion hoax, are reluctant to call attention to something that would be the final nail in its coffin. The last thing the mainstream media wants right now would be for Mifsud to go on the record with both Durham's investigative team and with Congress to say he was working for the FBI and was only pretending to be a Russian agent.

If Mifsud was an FBI asset sent to entrap Papadopoulos, then there are no real Russian agents anywhere in this entire Trump-Russia collusion story.

Ponder what that means for a minute......

---

If true.....

---

I can imagine Mifsud having been directed by one of our Western Euro countries as a possibility. That would lead Durham to the next level in his investigation. Eventually, I would think Mifsud himself or his Euro handler(s) will tie back to one of our agencies.

Yeah, other than $46,000. of Facebook ads just where are the Russians?

Can Surkov and Trubnikov still fog a mirror? If those guys that Steele claimed were his sources' sources, since Steele didn't talk to them directly, are still alive, then they are the only Russians involved and fed Steele disinformation.

But I am going to quibble a bit here. Although Mifsud ran in the same circles with FBI people, his interactions were more with intelligence agencies at the higher levels. I would think Italian intelligence brought him in as a favor to Brennan, not Comey.

Brennan was in direct contact with GCHQ (Brit intel) headed by Hannigan who promptly resigned after the election. Halper, who was on DOD's payroll, was on the other end of the push pull operation in London.

Unsure if Haspel, who was Station Chief there, was fully in the loop or not. Appears to me this operation was done by those at the top of the food chain of the intelligence community.

The reason the FBI was brought in has more to do with Fusion, GPS peddling the Steele dossier to them and the State Department.

Correct hawg. I should have said CIA/FBI asset

Quote:

---

Peter Strzok, the former FBI agent who came under fire for sending disparaging text messages about President Trump and other political figures during the 2016 election, is suing his former employer over his firing, claiming the decision was a result of "unrelenting pressure" from President Trump.

In a lawsuit filed on Tuesday, Strzok's counsel argued that he was fired unlawfully for using his protected political speech under the First Amendment, among other reasons.

Strzok was fired last August.

His firing came after DOJ Inspector General Michael Horowitz released a lengthy 500-page report last year that fiercely criticized Strzok for his conduct, saying he displayed a "biased state of mind" during a key phase of the Clinton email investigation.

Strzok, a 21-year veteran of the bureau, also faced a barrage of attacks from Trump and Republicans after an internal investigation from the DOJ revealed he had sent messages critical of the then-Republican candidate during the 2016 presidential race to then-FBI lawyer Lisa Page. The two were having an extramarital affair at the time.

---

LINK

https://thehill.com/policy/national-security/456399-strzok-key-figure-in-russia-probe-sues-fbi-doj-over-firing

Quote:

---

.....In a lawsuit filed on Tuesday, Strzok's counsel argued that he was fired unlawfully for using his protected political speech under the First Amendment, among other reasons.....

---

Why would he subject himself to discovery like that?

blindey said:

---

Why would he subject himself to discovery like that?

---

He is an idiot.

blindey said:

---

Why would he subject himself to discovery like that?

---

No idea.

blindey said:

---

Why would he subject himself to discovery like that?

---

Probably figures they already have all his emails & texts, so nothing to lose

What about using government equipment for private use? That should have got him fired.

drcrinum said:

---

Quote:

---

.....In a lawsuit filed on Tuesday, Strzok's counsel argued that he was fired unlawfully for using his protected political speech under the First Amendment, among other reasons.....

---

---

I'm guessing a little Judge shopping was done before this suit was filed. Given today's justice system, wouldn't surprise me he wins.

Sure wish the FBI would release all the texts instead of protecting him.

Strzok should already be in prison.

BMX Bandit said:

---

blindey said:

---

Why would he subject himself to discovery like that?

---

Probably figures they already have all his emails & texts, so nothing to lose

---

maybe I was not as articulate as I could have been. What I'm really trying to ask is why he would subject himself to antagonistic selective leaking and the court of public opinion?

drcrinum said:

---

https://thehill.com/policy/national-security/456399-strzok-key-figure-in-russia-probe-sues-fbi-doj-over-firing

Quote:

---

.....In a lawsuit filed on Tuesday, Strzok's counsel argued that he was fired unlawfully for using his protected political speech under the First Amendment, among other reasons.....

---

---

Yeah, lots of people have lost their jobs because of political comments, Sparky. You ain't special.

Wasn't it announced he had a book deal sometime back? Maybe that deal fell through after the Mueller Report bombed.

Quote:

---

Yeah, lots of people have lost their jobs because of political comments, Sparky. You ain't special.

---

He was government employee, so there are 1st amendment issues that aren't applicable when most are fired for political comments.

BMX Bandit said:

---

Quote:

---

Yeah, lots of people have lost their jobs because of political comments, Sparky. You ain't special.

---

He was government employee, so there are 1st amendment issues that aren't applicable when most are fired for political comments.

---

Plus he would have no expectation of privacy when he is using a government issued phone and he's most likely signed docs saying that.

BMX Bandit said:

---

blindey said:

---

Why would he subject himself to discovery like that?

---

Probably figures they already have all his emails & texts, so nothing to lose

---

Oh, I bet he has a few pair of underwear they haven't yet inspected...