Yes, the significance of that date didn't escape me. Nor did it escape Steele, either. He remembered that specific date for a reason and we all know what that reason was. He was tipped off it was going public in a big way and he would likely be under a preservation order from his own government or have MI6 folks knocking on his door shortly.

Sterling82 said:

---

nortex97 said:

---

He wiped it the same day as the inauguration, when rice wrote herself the "do everything by the books" memo. The FBI helped create the fraud they weren't duped at all.

---

Yeah, if the FBI plans to use the "we were duped defense" it will be the most embarrassing day in the history of the bureau.
On another note, what's the word on the supposed indictments hitting twitter? Fake?

---

I still don't believe the indictments are happening. It would be great if they did, but the hopes basically come down to John Solomon being right about this timing and he was pretty far off last time (horowitz).

I was mistaken above though, I thought it was inauguration day when it was wiped, not the day Comey was trying to set Trump up/get the fake dossier into the press (Jan 5). I'm cautiously pessimistic by nature but appreciate folks like hawg who are more optimistic.

Quote:

---

I was mistaken above though, I thought it was inauguration day when it was wiped, not the day Comey was trying to set Trump up/get the fake dossier into the press (Jan 5). I'm cautiously pessimistic by nature but appreciate folks like hawg who are more optimistic.

---

It isn't really optimism as it is a level of confidence and trust in Barr's backbone and sense of justice. If he's using words like "travesty" and "outrage" and the like, he's on the right side in my view.

And once again, Barr oversees Durham. If Barr sees a legitimate need for Durham to appropriate more DOJ employees, including prosecutors, you can be damned sure he wouldn't do that lightly. As AG, he has to allocate resources across the entire DOJ. He doesn't seem to be the type of administrator to indulge in vanity projects.

https://thefederalist.com/2020/04/24/newly-filed-court-documents-include-exculpatory-evidence-for-michael-flynn/

Quote:

---

New court documents filed under seal include significant exculpatory information about Michael Flynn, President Donald Trump's former National Security Adviser, an FBI official familiar with the situation told The Federalist on Friday. The new documents, which were filed under seal by the Department of Justice Friday, allegedly include exonerating evidence about Flynn, who pleaded guilty to lying to federal investigators about his conversations with foreign diplomats as Trump's top incoming foreign policy adviser and is currently attempting to withdraw his plea, as well as evidence of malfeasance by the FBI during its investigation of Flynn.

According to the FBI official who spoke to The Federalist, FBI general counsel Dana Boente led the charge internally against DOJ's disclosure of the new materials. Boente, who briefly served as acting Attorney General after Trump became president, personally signed off on one of the federal spy warrants against former Trump campaign affiliate Carter Page. The new documents, which were filed under a protective order by DOJ on Friday, will reflect poorly on the FBI, the official told The Federalist. It is not clear when, or even if, those documents will be unsealed and made available to the public for review.

Because the documents were filed under seal, The Federalist has not been able to review them independently. Neither the Department of Justice nor the White House responded to requests for comment about the newly filed court documents or their legal or political implications......

---

Just a teaser at this point.

aggiehawg said:

---

Quote:

---

I was mistaken above though, I thought it was inauguration day when it was wiped, not the day Comey was trying to set Trump up/get the fake dossier into the press (Jan 5). I'm cautiously pessimistic by nature but appreciate folks like hawg who are more optimistic.

---

It isn't really optimism as it is a level of confidence and trust in Barr's backbone and sense of justice. If he's using words like "travesty" and "outrage" and the like, he's on the right side in my view.

And once again, Barr oversees Durham. If Barr sees a legitimate need for Durham to appropriate more DOJ employees, including prosecutors, you can be damned sure he wouldn't do that lightly. As AG, he has to allocate resources across the entire DOJ. He doesn't seem to be the type of administrator to indulge in vanity projects.

---

Again, respectfully I think the continuing obfuscation/finger pointing at an institutional level from DoJ is something Barr could easily fix if he were the 'white hat' you see him as. And the assertion that "if we have charges we can convict people of" is typical beltway double talk, given that DC insiders are never charged with crimes that a similar standard would easily see charge/conviction for plebe citizens.

It's all been a shell game, imho, and Barr has known since around day 1 what happened, but no one has been indicted. I would just cite my 4/13 post on this thread (which was a small quote from sundance);

Quote:

---

AG Bill Barr has to keep feeding the purveyors of investigative hope-pr0n as a method to keep the pitchforks at bay, while simultaneously trying to figure out how to do nothing of substance so he can preserve the institutions. Remember, the DC system operates on an entirely different legal principle when it comes to internal investigations within the bubble.

As a result we get AG Barr saying "if John Durham can find evidence of criminal conduct"; where "criminal" in DC is defined around a DC-exclusive legal theory of "intent" that doesn't apply anywhere else in the country. [examples: see Hillary Clinton; or see IG Horowitz saying he couldn't find intent.]

If John Q Public violated a law, the FBI would break down our door in a no-knock raid and use the violation as leverage to get us to break. The FBI would not sit around debating whether John intended to violate the law; they'd deal with that aspect after the raid and the pressure on us to fork over $250,000 in a legal effort to defend ourselves. [example: see Roger Stone]

But in the DC-tier of justice, where administrating the law is subject to the internal rules that don't apply outside the bubble, everything must be filtered through "intent". When intent is transparently obvious, the DC legal theory moves to the second filter where collateral damage to the institutions must be weighted. [example: see James Wolfe]

AG Bill Barr has no intention on prosecuting any former individual or entity, regardless of their political hierarchy and/or level of participation, in the matrix of the coup effort against Candidate/President Trump. unless the DC-exclusive legal hurdles are met.

---

We are 5 months from the election. I'm highly skeptical Barr is really intent on the DoJ prosecuting/indicting anyone prior to November 3rd. If he had even the slightest good motive, he'd have ended by Jan 1 this year the DoJ practice of over-classifying information to protect the institution, and himself declassified the Mueller scope memo's.

In fact, even if some tokens are indicted, there will be enough fog/obfuscation by the fake news now that nothing in the pre-trial phase will even be public before then.

I do wish I had more confidence in two people; Barr and Fauci, but I can't overcome the timelines/facts/history to believe them.

I agree. At best, there will be some internal IOUs drafted and they'll let bygones be bygones. Politics in America sucks.

Totally separate thought: that Italian journalist is money. He puts thousands of our MSM lemmings to shame.

Jensen, the US Attorney from the Eastern District of Missouri, is involved.

I know what sovereign immunity is, and I'm sure there are various deviations, but every time I see another piece of information supporting the good guys, and implicating the bad guys, I want Page, Papa, Flynn, etc. to make the lawsuit for as much as the bailout.

will25u said:

---

---

At some point, someone in the group of Wray's supervisors must ask themselves exactly what his obstructionism brings to the table.

If there is another Grenell-type out there, then this would seem to be a perfect time to replace someone who is more concerned with protecting the FBI's reputation than in finding out what went wrong.

aggiehawg said:

---

Sigh. You know? At some point Wray's foot dragging becomes conspiracy to obstruct justice and actual obstruction of justice, itself. Not sure what all he has done since there is little transparency with Wray but he's got to be damn close to that line. And withholding Brady can result in jail time under Sullivan's standing order. It is criminal contempt of court, not to mention a deprivation of civil rights under color of law.

---

And as the cry always is that "Comey is a republican! Mueller is a republican! Burr is a republican!" it will be that "Wray was Trump's guy!" as if we think that justifies his crimes. It's time for the whole agency to be torn down.

aggiehawg said:

---

will25u said:

---

---

Sigh. You know? At some point Wray's foot dragging becomes conspiracy to obstruct justice and actual obstruction of justice, itself. Not sure what all he has done since there is little transparency with Wray but he's got to be damn close to that line. And withholding Brady can result in jail time under Sullivan's standing order. It is criminal contempt of court, not to mention a deprivation of civil rights under color of law.

---

Whether Wray is responsible or not, this is a pretty damning statement about the prosecution's actions, no?

It's obvious at this point Wray needs to go, but he likely has too many GOP backers in the Senate which would prevent Trump from replacing him.

If Trump fires him, Schiff and Nadler will start Impeachment 2.0 within a week.

Quote:

---

Whether Wray is responsible or not, this is a pretty damning statement about the prosecution's actions, no?

---

If Sullivan actually enforces his damn order, it is. If he doesn't, then it's not. Sigh.

Back when I was practicing if I ever defied a federal judge in that manner, my happy ass would have been taken into custody in the courtroom. Although, in the days before email, my office would have likely received a fax from the magistrate advising me to bring a toothbrush with me when I came to court that day, just in case. That never happened to me but it did to a colleague of mine. The warning was essentially, "You pissed off the Judge big time. Prepare to try to tap dance your way out of it but bring a toothbrush in case you can't." My colleague was a very good tap dancer that day.

nortex97 said:

---

We are 5 months from the election. I'm highly skeptical Barr is really intent on the DoJ prosecuting/indicting anyone prior to November 3rd. If he had even the slightest good motive, he'd have ended by Jan 1 this year the DoJ practice of over-classifying information to protect the institution, and himself declassified the Mueller scope memo's.

In fact, even if some tokens are indicted, there will be enough fog/obfuscation by the fake news now that nothing in the pre-trial phase will even be public before then.

I do wish I had more confidence in two people; Barr and Fauci, but I can't overcome the timelines/facts/history to believe them.

---

I agree to a point but the thing that makes me wonder about what is going on is that if Trump was not happy with Barr, he would let everyone know that. Trump has said very little about Rosenstein and Wray and we know both have been awful (Rosenstein has been treasonous and Wray is covering up crimes of the FBI). So why has Trump been silent about all of this when that goes against his nature?

I don't know the answer but it is disappointing that we are not that far from the election and still nothing. And if Trump loses the election there is zero chance of any justice.

aggiehawg said:

---

Quote:

---

Whether Wray is responsible or not, this is a pretty damning statement about the prosecution's actions, no?

---

If Sullivan actually enforces his damn order, it is. If he doesn't, then it's not. Sigh.

Back when I was practicing if I ever defied a federal judge in that manner, my happy ass would have been taken into custody in the courtroom. Although, in the days before email, my office would have likely received a fax from the magistrate advising me to bring a toothbrush with me when I came to court that day, just in case. That never happened to me but it did to a colleague of mine. The warning was essentially, "You pissed off the Judge big time. Prepare to try to tap dance your way out of it but bring a toothbrush in case you can'

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

." My colleague was a very good tap dancer that day.

---

---

Under attorney job description, I assume being a tap dancer is in the top five.

BTW, I can't get Wray's boy next door FBI picture out of my mind, knowing who I believe him to be.

Quote:

---

I don't know the answer but it is disappointing that we are not that far from the election and still nothing. And if Trump loses the election there is zero chance of any justice.

---

Don't forget the lame duck period. Barr and Durham could open multiple cans of whup ass with indictments before they let the door hit them in the butt. And that might be a factor in the strategy. All systems go after the election, irrespective of the results of the election.

Yes, I'm kind of reaching there but my mind works in mysterious ways and were I in Barr's situation, I'd weigh the timing as Mueller did. Only Mueller timed them for maximum political damage to Trump while he was meeting with Putin in Helsinki, for instance.

In case Trump loses, Barr is lighting a match in a gasoline soaked DOJ as he is leaving.

Quote:

---

Under attorney job description, I assume being a tap dancer is in the top five.

---

They are all basically the same. Quick thinking on your feet since one must stand when addressing the court.

Being a legal cunning linguist is always first and foremost, irrespective of gender.

"Legal cunning linguist".

I see what you did there.

https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2020/04/24/flynn-defense-files-supplement-for-motion-to-dismiss-new-evidence-of-mueller-blackmail-using-threat-against-flynn-jr/

It's a long Sundance read but well worth it. You'll see what this new material in the Flynn case means and how it reflects upon Rosenstein & Wray -- Rosenstein authorized the investigation of Flynn Jr. in his second secret memo to Mueller, so they could coerce Flynn into a guilty plea -- Wray made Boente (of FISA abuse fame) the FBI legal counsel to coverup the corrupt activities of Mueller involving the 40 FBI agents assigned to Mueller. Oh yes, Rosenstein = Wray = POS. & of course, there's McCabe, who edited Flynn's 302 & who most likely leaked to the press Flynn's phone calls with Kislyak. Lots of documentation in the article.

aggiehawg said:

---

Quote:

---

Under attorney job description, I assume being a tap dancer is in the top five.

---

They are all basically the same. Quick thinking on your feet since one must stand when addressing the court.

Being a legal cunning linguist is always first and foremost, irrespective of gender.

---

You know, after 2 1/2 years of your writing expertise, I'd love to know the number of times someone in "a court somewhere" wandered away thinking "I'm pretty sure she just slammed my ass with that comment, but I'll have to go back and check the transcript"!

Apparently, I'd have to throw Grenell into that select group.

DAMN!

Just finished reading CTH article. It serves no purpose to get as pissed as I normally would, but the one thing that will stay with me are the 50, or so, employees and agents who are STILL in their jobs. Even if they're not indicted, at least fire their ass for reason, and add lots of big, mean, adjectives to their employee file.

Lawyers are great at adding adjectives and big, mean, nasty words.

https://www.scribd.com/document/444791080/Flynn-Declaration

Worth a read. General Flynn's Declaration.

TacosaurusRex said:

---

---

Not exactly news. Mueller blackmailed people. We have known that he made up crimes to do that.

It's not exactly as Posobeic would have you believe. Read Flynn's Declaration above, Item 16.
For 'leverage'.