will25u said:

---

eeing this reported by multiple people on Twitter. Haven't found audio yet...

---

The moment is almost here...

I know Catherine is a great reporter and probably one of the least biased but come on! We knew this whole thing was a hoax from the moment we read the Steele Dossier. Never even remotely resembled a real intelligence product from an intelligence professional.

And yes, I have had occasion to read intelligence reports. (Long story about a routine case I was handling that became not routine and led to EMP and the Air Force in the very early 80s. And then another case that I am still not at liberty to mention. Banking related.)

https://justthenews.com/government/federal-agencies/inspector-general-report-says-treasury-dept-allowed-reject-dems-request

Quote:

---

Office of the Inspector General for the Treasury Department has found that the department "properly" processed a request from House Democrats to hand over President Trump's tax returns the department denied the request by the Ways and Means Committee.

The IG memo additionally signed off on the actions of Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin, who oversaw the process.

Deputy Inspector General Richard Delmar wrote that Mnuchin's denial of the committee's request was based on an opinion from the Justice Department's office of legal counsel.

In April of last year, House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Richard Neal (D-Mass.) requested six years of President Trump's personal and business tax returns from the IRS. The Treasury and Internal Revenue Service rejected the request, leading to the inspector general's investigation, in addition to a lawsuit that has not yet been resolved.

"From the beginning, Democrats have insisted that something must be awry if they didn't immediately get their way. But that's not how checks and balances work and it's not how the process of congressional oversight works," said Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), the chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, who requested that the IG report's findings be made public.

---

will25u said:

---

---

Hopefully not for process crimes. It's a different rabbit trail if Crossfire Hurricane, FISA warrants, Mueller, etc, etc, etc. were ALL missing credible predicates. Been saying this for almost a year .... Conspiracy to Defraud the United States - US Code 923. 18 U.S.C. 371.

Quote:

---

Hopefully not for process crimes. It's a different rabbit trail if Crossfire Hurricane, FISA warrants, Mueller, etc, etc, etc. were ALL missing credible predicates. Been saying this for almost a year .... Conspiracy to Defraud the United States - US Code 923. 18 U.S.C. 371.

---

Although process crimes will be included, need to refrain from the exaggerated creative ways that Team Mueller used that statute.

Sedition laws are better suited, IMO.

aggiehawg said:

---

Quote:

---

Hopefully not for process crimes. It's a different rabbit trail if Crossfire Hurricane, FISA warrants, Mueller, etc, etc, etc. were ALL missing credible predicates. Been saying this for almost a year .... Conspiracy to Defraud the United States - US Code 923. 18 U.S.C. 371.

---

Although process crimes will be included, need to refrain from the exaggerated creative ways that Team Mueller used that statute.

Sedition laws are better suited, IMO.

---

If I'm not mistaken, US sedition/treason statutes have a much higher bar with their "by force" provision.

Back at you, darlin'.



Hope you are not offended by that. Southern and use terms of endearment often, IRL.

The only people colluding with Russia were Trump's political foes

You can never offend me Mrs. Hawg. You have all my respect.

Let's assume the subpoenas being issued by the GJ is correct. I'll also assume all of these folks have been interviewed by Durham. If the people testifying in front of the GJ make any statements different from their Durham interview, will they be culpable for perjury?

And gracias,Prog. I really hope the wind is at your back.

will25u said:

---

---

I hope they submit a lot more of the questionable redactions to him.

drcrinum said:

---

---

I thought it was already clear we didn't need Mueller.

Sydney retweeted this /21 points/. He seems to think Ukraine as opposed to Italy above.

Prognightmare said:

---

I read this thread but don't contribute much because this isn't my element and we have very knowledgeable people on here. I just prefer to keep my mouth shut instead of removing all doubt. .

That being said, I try to temper my anticipation of justice coming that I've felt today. I'll be surprised if anyone is prosecuted and if Trump isn't re-elected this will die with a whimper.

I pray that I'm wrong.

I wish all of you and your's a Happy Easter.

---

There will be indictments. There will be justice. Patience, and Happy Easter indeed.

Secolobo said:

---

Sydney retweeted this /21 points/. He seems to think Ukraine as opposed to Italy above.

---

Quote:

---

This language struck a familiar chord: Elsewhere in the IG report, Inspector General Michael Horowitz's team noted inconsistencies between what they were told and what other evidence established.

---

So, lie to an FBI agent and you go to prison. FBI agents lie to the IG, no big deal? Hopefully those are agents that can be pressured into flipping on the big boys.

benchmark said:

---

aggiehawg said:

---

Quote:

---

Hopefully not for process crimes. It's a different rabbit trail if Crossfire Hurricane, FISA warrants, Mueller, etc, etc, etc. were ALL missing credible predicates. Been saying this for almost a year .... Conspiracy to Defraud the United States - US Code 923. 18 U.S.C. 371.

---

Although process crimes will be included, need to refrain from the exaggerated creative ways that Team Mueller used that statute.

Sedition laws are better suited, IMO.

---

If I'm not mistaken, US sedition/treason statutes have a much higher bar with their "by force" provision.

---

Oh I agree about the actual charge of sedition but my point is the conspiracy to commit sedition, to deprive citizens of their Constitutional rights and those type of charges.

I have a distaste for the broad use of 18 U.S.C 371 because of the way Team Mueller twisted the statute.

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1248836043752775680.html

Interesting.

Sorry if I missed this.

I don't trust Grassley, Miss Lindsey, or Barr. I still think it's all a sham.

Quote:

---

Everyone seems to be overlooking the obvious Why were these footnotes classified four months ago when the report came out? Who classified them? There are no protected "sources or methods"; and the only reason for the redactions was to protect the corrupt interests of the DOJ.

With that said, I find no reason to celebrate the un-redaction of redacted information that should never have been classified in the first place. Factually, the information revealed by the footnote declassification was already well known. Worse still, the interpretation of the information within the footnotes is propaganda, purposeful 'misinformation'.

Additionally, if these declassified footnotes are an example of a new DOJ shift to allow sunlight; as in: some newly discovered interest in truthfulness; then why are the Lisa Page and Peter Strzok text messages still redacted? Why is the Susan Rice memo on inauguration day still redacted? And, more importantly, more tellingly, why is the DOJ still hiding the 'scope memos' that authorized Mueller's investigation?

---

The only things that give me pause in my pessimism are (a) Solomon seeming upbeat, and (b) Obama has kept his cake hole shut about this largely for a few years now. Still, I have a very strong distrust for the treason that has been ongoing within the DoJ and FBI for over a decade now. Both institutions need to be gutted and replaced, not just some 'set an example' stuff.

I'm okay with Grassley, from the standpoint I believe he genuinely wants justice. Miss Lindsey appears to enjoy the fruits of his elected position waaaay too much to say something bad about his friends, which I'm certain they wouldn't reciprocate.

I do believe Barr wants, and will obtain justice---kind of. I believe there will be indictments of 9-10 people in Sypgate and Bidengate, but the other 50 to 75 perps will get away unscathed. I understand some of the 50 to 75 I speak of, may have cut a deal, but that's a two way street and cutting a deal still requires some punishment for cooperation, like not keeping your job.

Point being, I want a post legal landscape like Iwo Jima,(meaning no trees or plants alive, just moonscape) and I know I won't get it. You're a damned good poster, so it's concerning your beliefs lead you to feel this way.

Thx, it could in fact be a conspiracy case that will lead to broad indictments, but there are many reasons/factors limiting the likelihood of that. Here is the insight of a very good insider (retired FBI SA Mark Wauck) to the prospects in light of Barr's most recent interview (Ingraham):

Quote:

---

Here are what I think are the important points we can take from what Barr said.

First of all, it seems apparent that the Durham investigation has completed most of its evidence gathering--whether documentary or through interviews. That doesn't mean the investigation is finished. There is also the question of putting together a prosecutive case, and that will probably involve complicated negotiations with the lawyers for the persons being investigated. That, in turn, could lead to further substantive investigation. But the bottom line is that at this point Barr appears confident that he knows what happened and, most likely, who were behind it. As Barr says, this is a "sprawling" case.

Second, Barr several times refers to things that "they" did. Not things that "were done." So, multiple human perpetrators. That points toward the strong likelihood that a conspiracy case is being pursued that will encompass an attempt to "sabotage the presidency." As Barr says, this is a "sprawling" case. And this case is very much focused on developing a criminal prosecution of the conspirators.

Third, Barr says that, while Durham's "primary focus" is not on preparing a report, a report will "probably" result from Durham's investigation. That's important. IMO, the American people deserve a report that lays out the narrative of how a group of highly placed federal government operatives conspired to "sabotage the presidency." Such a report would be unusual coming from a prosecutor, but this is an unusual case that goes to the heart of our constitutional order. The American people deserve to have a report that they can read and readily understand, rather than having to glean the narrative from complicated testimony, court proceedings, and documents written in bureacratic language and, possibly, released without full context. The release of the Papadopoulos interview is a down payment, as are no doubt the firings of corrupt Deep State operatives such as Dan Coats, Michael Atkinson, and others.

Fourth, there is a twofold key in what Barr tells. He tells us that Crossfire Hurricane--"this investigation of [Trump's] campaign"--was inititated "without any basis." That means that Crossfire Hurricane was initiated without proper predication and was an unlawful investigation. I think we will see confirmed what we've always known, that Crossfire Hurricane was initiated for the purpose of developing a narrative that could derail and sabotage a presidential election. But, that baseless investigation nevertheless served as the predication for what Barr says he has found "even more concerning": "... what happened after the campaign--a whole pattern of events while [Trump] was president ... to sabotage the presidency."

From this I think we can readily gather why this Durham investigation is so "sprawling." What happened after the campaign? The attempt to frame Michael Flynn and to sabotage the presidency through the frame job on Flynn, at the very inception of the administration, to tar it as "colluding" with Russia, rather than conducting foreign policy. The continued renewals of the Carter Page FISA, known to be fraudulent, which implicate the highest levels of the FBI and of DoJ--McCabe, Comey, Yates, Boente, Rosenstein, and many more. The bogus Intelligence Community Assessment, the development of which we're told Durham has spent so much time examinging.

And lastly but far from least, the entire Mueller Witchhunt--which, as framed by Rod Rosenstein, purported to be a continuation of the baseless FBI investigation, Crossfire Hurricane. The release of the Papadopoulos transcript not only is a dagger in the heart of the predication for Crossfire Hurricane and the Carter Page FISA, a dagger in the heart of the FBI's role in the conspiracy. It is also a dagger that, along with the final FISA renewal, we may learn is directed at Team Mueller through its pursuit of George Papadopoulos.

---

A broad conspiracy charge (or multiple conspiracies) with cooperating witnesses involving cabinet level officials and top DoJ and Intelligence staff is what I'd love to see, but is that is not something I've read as remotely likely.

Quote:

---

The only things that give me pause in my pessimism are (a) Solomon seeming upbeat, and (b) Obama has kept his cake hole shut about this largely for a few years now. Still, I have a very strong distrust for the treason that has been ongoing within the DoJ and FBI for over a decade now. Both institutions need to be gutted and replaced, not just some 'set an example' stuff.

---

The way that I rationalize it is that certain notes, names, phrases were redacted to protect people, places, times and methods, up until a few months ago. People doing that restriction, for the most part, have found themselves on the outside looking in, and very unceremoniously.

Now, as these same redactions are breeching the top screen, some people, places and times are being redacted, while some still remain...methods and people still being investigated, keeping them hidden minimizes their tendency to bolt for freedom / reach of the law and Durham...

Correct or not, at least it keeps me in a hopeful frame of mind...and not very far from your position, either.

aggiehawg said:

---

Oh I agree about the actual charge of sedition but my point is the conspiracy to commit sedition, to deprive citizens of their Constitutional rights and those type of charges.

I have a distaste for the broad use of 18 U.S.C 371 because of the way Team Mueller twisted the statute.

---

Still not there yet on seditious conspiracy ... can't find a way around the 'by force' poison pill. On Mueller ... the 371 conspiracy statute was really Mueller's only hope for a 'collusion' crime. Nothing there there.... so Mueller moved on to Obstruction of Justice. What a POS.

I like 18 USC 371 because it fits the Fusion GPS conspiracy so well. i.e. co-conspirators Glenn Simpson, Shearer, Blumenthal, Winer, Ohrs, etc. (to name a few out of maybe dozens). If these boneheads can't be indicted for conspiring to defraud the government, I'd like to hear a legal argument for why not.

Not so sure about building conspiracy cases around the bigger fish like Brennan, Clapper, and Comey. I suspect a lot of firewalls and skimpy paper trails. That said, it only takes 2 to form a conspiracy ... and there's always the catchall perjury and Obstruction of Justice crimes.

benchmark said:

---

aggiehawg said:

---

Oh I agree about the actual charge of sedition but my point is the conspiracy to commit sedition, to deprive citizens of their Constitutional rights and those type of charges.

I have a distaste for the broad use of 18 U.S.C 371 because of the way Team Mueller twisted the statute.

---

Still not there yet on seditious conspiracy ... can't find a way around the 'by force' poison pill. On Mueller ... the 371 conspiracy statute was really Mueller's only hope for a 'collusion' crime. Nothing there there.... so Mueller moved on to Obstruction of Justice. What a POS.

I like 18 USC 371 because it fits the Fusion GPS conspiracy so well. i.e. co-conspirators Glenn Simpson, Shearer, Blumenthal, Winer, Ohrs, etc. (to name a few out of maybe dozens). If these boneheads can't be indicted for conspiring to defraud the government, I'd like to hear a legal argument for why not.

Not so sure about building conspiracy cases around the bigger fish like Brennan, Clapper, and Comey. I suspect a lot of firewalls and skimpy paper trails. That said, it only takes 2 to form a conspiracy ... and there's always the catchall perjury and Obstruction of Justice crimes.

---

Good points. And since Fusion and their operatives were outside of government, that statute would fit them better. (So might FARA, for that matter.)

I think the argument becomes more problematical with government employees. Director of the FBI is defrauding the FBI and DOJ? That's kind of my sticking point. But I do see the validity of your argument for use of that statute as opposed to conspiracy to commit sedition.

Prognightmare said:

---

I read this thread but don't contribute much because this isn't my element and we have very knowledgeable people on here. I just prefer to keep my mouth shut instead of removing all doubt. .

That being said, I try to temper my anticipation of justice coming that I've felt today. I'll be surprised if anyone is prosecuted and if Trump isn't re-elected this will die with a whimper.

I pray that I'm wrong.

I wish all of you and your's a Happy Easter.

---

I have a similar attitude.

I also do need to keep my mouth shut also to remove doubt.

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1249363013292851201.html

Interesting thread analyzing remarks Brennan made in the past. They (CIA) apparently were spying on the Trump Campaign/Transition Team without legal authority.

Quote:

---

.....But now we know that Mueller's team had reports and evidence of a Russian disinformation campaign and ignored the question of whether Russia interfered in the 2016 election by feeding Steele fake intel, prompting an FBI investigation into the Trump presidential campaign. If it wasn't clear before, it should be clear now: Mueller was either incompetent or a political hack--or both......


But now we know that not only did the government misrepresent Steele's "source network," it misrepresented the existence of a primary sub-source "source network."

This revelation has a second and broader implication than further evidence of FISA abuse: The complete lack of a "source network" undermines the entire basis for the Crossfire Hurricane investigation and the special counsel probe......

---

Professor Cleveland destroys Mueller. Worth a read.

So not only Mueller is a POS (thanks aggiehawg) but that Horowitz isn't far behind?

Quote:

---

But the declassified footnote contradicts the IG's conclusion that "the Primary Sub-source used a network of sub-sources to gather the information that was relayed to Steele." "When interviewed by the FBI," the report reads, "the Primary Sub-source stated that he/she did not view his/her contacts as a network of sources," but individuals "with whom he/she had conversations about current events and government relations."

---