I guess I miss understood. I thought we were talking about a perjury charge.
Mueller dismisses top FBI agent in Russia probe for anti-Trump texts
7,729,361 Views |
49406 Replies |
Last: 2 hrs ago by Garrelli 5000
Simply put, no! They've become what they accuse Trump supporters of, a cult. Their ideology is their religion and the sheep would drink Jim's koolaid.MouthBQ98 said:
Do you think these progressive types who always see themselves as the stereotypical freedom fighter against "the man" will ever realize they have become the bad guy, the bully, the tyrants? Is it possible for them to ever comprehend it?
Thomas Jefferson: "When governments fear the people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny. The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government." "I prefer dangerous freedom over peaceful slavery."
So far, all the devastating corrupt information that has been released to the public, shows that this leftist Obama Cult, in spite of having some very intelligent members, was so comfortable in getting away with all their malfeasance that they became lazy, careless, greedy and arrogant in underestimating authorities, analogous to a crook cheating on their Federal Income Taxes for many years, getting caught and loosing everything and going to prison ! Just imagine when everything is discovered and released.
Wow a karate ***** slap from one lib to another!!
Good Day.
Current value of said degree is south of toilet paper.Quote:
(P.S. Let's not forget that Obama possess a law degree from Harvard.)
drcrinum said:
https://thefederalist.com/2020/05/08/obama-biden-oval-office-meeting-on-january-5-was-key-to-entire-anti-trump-operation/Quote:
.....January 5: Yates, Comey, CIA Director John Brennan, and Director of National Intelligence James Clapper briefed Obama on Russia-related matters in the Oval Office. Biden and Rice also attended. After the Obama briefing, the intelligence chiefs who would be leaving at the end of the term were dismissed and Yates and Comey, who would continue in the Trump administration, were asked to stay. Not only did Obama give his guidance about how to perpetuate the Russia collusion theory investigations, he also talked about Flynn's conversations with Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak, according to both Comey and Yates. Interestingly, Clapper, Comey, and Yates all said that they did not brief Obama about these phone calls. Clapper testified he did not brief Obama on the calls, Yates learned about the calls from Obama himself during that meeting, and Comey also testified he didn't brief Obama about the calls, even though the intelligence was an FBI product....
How did Obama know about Flynn's telephone conversations with Kislyak? Who was his connection in the FBI? Or is Comey/Clapper lying again?
Quote:
Rice, who publicly lied but later admitted under oath to her widespread use of unmasked intelligence at the end of the Obama administration,
I thought I missed this revelation in previous posts but it appears this reveal is possibly in the transcripts. This needs to be broadcast from all channels.
Haven't read it yet but Rice's testimony under oath is one of the transcripts released by Grennel. Assume it's in there.Quote:
Is this detailed somewhere in the transcripts? I missed this revelation...
This.aggiehawg said:Current value of said degree is south of toilet paper.Quote:
(P.S. Let's not forget that Obama possess a law degree from Harvard.)
Add in the Yale prof accusing Trump of genocide, and Ivy league degrees are looking more and more like something we should only be using as toilet paper.
Maybe, if after being confined to a 8'x12' cell dressed in an orange jumpsuit in Federal Penitentiary for a few years. But in reality probably not.MouthBQ98 said:
Do you think these progressive types who always see themselves as the stereotypical freedom fighter against "the man" will ever realize they have become the bad guy, the bully, the tyrants? Is it possible for them to ever comprehend it?
Among the latter, under pretence of governing they have divided their nations into two classes, wolves and sheep.”
Thomas Jefferson, Letter to Edward Carrington, January 16, 1787
Thomas Jefferson, Letter to Edward Carrington, January 16, 1787
Yates's transcript Page 55 says she did not brief the Obama Admin about Flynn having contacts with Kislyak:aggiehawg said:Haven't read it yet but Rice's testimony under oath is one of the transcripts released by Grennel. Assume it's in there.Quote:
Is this detailed somewhere in the transcripts? I missed this revelation...
https://www.dni.gov/files/HPSCI_Transcripts/2020-05-04-Sally_Yates-MTR_Redacted.pdf
Earlier, Page 45, she says she first learned of Flynn's contacts with Kislyak in early January 2017 from the FBI & NSD, so she really would've had time to notify Obama before the January 5 meeting.
To fully appreciate how vindictively evil Obama is toward those he considers his political enemies (though his victims never realized they were actually enemies rather than just opponents) remember that Obama had heard or had read for him the content of the Flynn-Kislyak calls and new that there was NOTHING illegal about it. He also knew that his expulsion of Russian diplospies was purely for show because he knew that Russian inteference in the presidential election was purely a contrivance to excuse the loss by Hillary Rodham Clinton, the worst major party Presidential nomionee since the Copperhead Democrats nominated George McClellan.Prognightmare said:I really do hate this MFer.Quote:
The news over the last 24 hours I think has been somewhat downplayed about the Justice Department dropping charges against Michael Flynn," Obama said during a virtual discussion with members of the Obama Alumni Association. "The fact that there is no precedent that anybody can find for someone who has been charged with perjury just getting off scot-free. That's the kind of stuff where you begin to get worried that basic not just institutional norms but our basic understanding of rule of law is at risk. And when you start moving in those directions, it can accelerate pretty quickly as we've seen in other places."
The prosecution of Flynn, Manafort, Stone, and Papadopoulas, the Meuller investigation, and the impeachment are farces wrapped in a truly pathetic charade.
From the Mollie Hemingway article yesterday, this piece has been bothering me.
But that wouldn't be an FBI product. The NSA manages that program. So either Mollie is incorrect or there was some type of a FISA on Flynn. Not necessarily a Title I, though.
So bear with me a minute. Obama imposes the sanctions. They know Flynn and Kislyak have preexisting relationship from Flynn's time at DIA. Expectation would be that Kislyak would reach out to Flynn. FBI sends a to/from 702 query to NSA. It then becomes an FBI product.
But the FBI is not the only people who conducted 702 queries. Susan Rice and Samantha Powers did as well. Which would explain how Obama knew about the contents of the call.
And that raises the question of whether the sanctions were part of a ploy?
Very curious.
FBI product? All along, I was under the impression that Flynn's call with Kislyak was intercepted because of the standing order monitoring foreign nationals on U.S. soil, meaning they were listening on Kislyak's end and Flynn was incidentally captured. And that's what Flynn understood as well.Quote:
Clapper testified he did not brief Obama on the calls, Yates learned about the calls from Obama himself during that meeting, and Comey also testified he didn't brief Obama about the calls, even though the intelligence was an FBI product.
But that wouldn't be an FBI product. The NSA manages that program. So either Mollie is incorrect or there was some type of a FISA on Flynn. Not necessarily a Title I, though.
So bear with me a minute. Obama imposes the sanctions. They know Flynn and Kislyak have preexisting relationship from Flynn's time at DIA. Expectation would be that Kislyak would reach out to Flynn. FBI sends a to/from 702 query to NSA. It then becomes an FBI product.
But the FBI is not the only people who conducted 702 queries. Susan Rice and Samantha Powers did as well. Which would explain how Obama knew about the contents of the call.
And that raises the question of whether the sanctions were part of a ploy?
Very curious.
Toilet paper in March or before that?aggiehawg said:Current value of said degree is south of toilet paper.Quote:
(P.S. Let's not forget that Obama possess a law degree from Harvard.)
No, I don't care what CNN or MSNBC said this time
Nothing is adding up, is it? Which makes me even more suspicious. Why would everyone be denying it and pointing fingers away from themselves if it wasn't part of a ploy?Quote:
McCabe (in his book) says an analyst shared info about Flynn's call with him, McCabe then briefed Comey, Comey briefed Clapper, & that Clapper briefed Obama....except how would McCabe know what Clapper did?
If the simple truth was an incidental intercept why couldn't everyone agree on that? Such a minor point unless it was part of a conspiracy to set up Flynn? Thus the dissembling.
Why are Dems so wedded to Flynn's guilt?
Aegrescit medendo
https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/6884125-Interview-Transcript-of-James-Clapper-July-17-2017.html
Clapper's testimony: Page 35
He says he never briefed Obama about Flynn's calls with Kislyak. He also says he first learned about them from his General Counsel, Bobb Litt.
Who's lying?
Clapper's testimony: Page 35
He says he never briefed Obama about Flynn's calls with Kislyak. He also says he first learned about them from his General Counsel, Bobb Litt.
Who's lying?
Because the case against Carter Page has already crumbled. The dossier was BS. If Flynn's case crumbles too why was there a special counsel?Wildcat said:
Why are Dems so wedded to Flynn's guilt?
No, I don't care what CNN or MSNBC said this time
My question is more why are they lying?Quote:
Clapper's testimony: Page 35
He says he never briefed Obama about Flynn's calls with Kislyak. He also says he first learned about them from his General Counsel, Bobb Litt.
Who's lying?
Damage control. Obama was in on it from the beginning. The January 5 meeting proves it (Rice's memo). As long as Obama was not part of it, the coup, if ever exposed, could be minimized and blamed on a small band of rouge operators. With Obama being an active participant, it exposes a much larger, well organized and directed process...a formal treasonous conspiracy...with many moving parts & participants. That's why it is taking Durham so long. It's probably such a monstrosity that it can never be exposed to the general public...it would destroy our country.aggiehawg said:My question is more why are they lying?Quote:
Clapper's testimony: Page 35
He says he never briefed Obama about Flynn's calls with Kislyak. He also says he first learned about them from his General Counsel, Bobb Litt.
Who's lying?
So you can now call me a conspiracy theorist.
Ok I thought I missed it somewhere in the previous posts but I checked and I didn't. I'd love for that to make its way into mainstream media. She was adamant and "offended" that anyone would imply that she abused that access. Can't wait to see the transcript.
Durham just hasn't found the leverage for an immunity deal, yet. Need someone to squeal. Conversely, Durham and Barr go to Trump and have him pardon someone. Then they would be forced to testify, same as immunity if they can't get them to agree to testify in exchange for immunity. Jarrett would be my target from the White House but doubt Barr would go there.Quote:
Damage control. Obama was in on it from the beginning. The January 5 meeting proves it (Rice's memo). As long as Obama was not part of it, the coup, if ever exposed, could be minimized and blamed on a small band of rouge operators. With Obama being an active participant, it exposes a much larger, well organized and directed process...a formal treasonous conspiracy...with many moving parts & participants. That's why it is taking Durham so long. It's probably such a monstrosity that it can never be exposed to the general public...it would destroy our country.
So you can now call me a conspiracy theorist.
Obama's antipathy towards Flynn has been well documented. So it's not that far fetched he would weaponize his administration to smite him. Particularly so if Flynn posed a danger to his legacy or perhaps even his freedom.
There's just too smoke around this one.
I agree, I just can't understand why Obama would open his mouth right now,, or anytime for that matter. Of course the usual suspects will willingly cover for him, but I can't imagine any benefit for this supposed "leak",, other than to blame it on Trump.
To me, the odds of being able to drag Obama into this are about 10%. I can't imagine any of these fools with direct knowledge flipping, since their hatred of Trump is probably more important than wife and kids.
To me, the odds of being able to drag Obama into this are about 10%. I can't imagine any of these fools with direct knowledge flipping, since their hatred of Trump is probably more important than wife and kids.
rocks, none of them individually are as dumb as a box of them.Cow Hop Ag said:
She is actually dumber than any single rock.
fasthorse05 said:
I agree, I just can't understand why Obama would open his mouth right now,, or anytime for that matter. Of course the usual suspects will willingly cover for him, but I can't imagine any benefit for this supposed "leak",, other than to blame it on Trump.
To me, the odds of being able to drag Obama into this are about 10%. I can't imagine any of these fools with direct knowledge flipping, since their hatred of Trump is probably more important than wife and kids.
Maybe they are flipping and 0 is trying to send a talking point. Democrats are cowards when the ***t hits the fan. They only believe their bull***t to enrich themselves.
dr, if conspiracy stuff gets you kicked off this thread, there is another thread on this forum that would welcome your contributions...drcrinum said:Damage control. Obama was in on it from the beginning. The January 5 meeting proves it (Rice's memo). As long as Obama was not part of it, the coup, if ever exposed, could be minimized and blamed on a small band of rouge operators. With Obama being an active participant, it exposes a much larger, well organized and directed process...a formal treasonous conspiracy...with many moving parts & participants. That's why it is taking Durham so long. It's probably such a monstrosity that it can never be exposed to the general public...it would destroy our country.aggiehawg said:My question is more why are they lying?Quote:
Clapper's testimony: Page 35
He says he never briefed Obama about Flynn's calls with Kislyak. He also says he first learned about them from his General Counsel, Bobb Litt.
Who's lying?
So you can now call me a conspiracy theorist.
He's already in it, courtesy of Sally Yates and Susan Rice's inane email to self. (Which is evidence of consciousness of guilt, BTW.)fasthorse05 said:
I agree, I just can't understand why Obama would open his mouth right now,, or anytime for that matter. Of course the usual suspects will willingly cover for him, but I can't imagine any benefit for this supposed "leak",, other than to blame it on Trump.
To me, the odds of being able to drag Obama into this are about 10%. I can't imagine any of these fools with direct knowledge flipping, since their hatred of Trump is probably more important than wife and kids.
Good reading today. In everybody's opinion, what's the next shoe to drop? Don't want anything to stall out.
Sullivan's decision and how he handles Van Grack.Rockdoc said:
Good reading today. In everybody's opinion, what's the next shoe to drop? Don't want anything to stall out.
Something happened or someone got to Sullivan a while back, in my opinion.
Actually, I agree. When Strzok's buddy, Judge Contreras as yanked from the case and it was reassigned to Sullivan, have to wonder if that was prearranged?Rockdoc said:
Something happened or someone got to Sullivan a while back, in my opinion.
rab79
Joined:
Jan 21, 2005
Posts:
18,047
How long do you want to ignore this user?
how about if he lies to the fbi?Bunkhouse96 said:
My point is that lying is not a crime unless he's under oath.
Featured Stories
See All
5 Thoughts: No. 13 Texas A&M 76, South Carolina 72
by Luke Evangelist
68:03
23h ago
6.1k
8:17
1d ago
5.0k
'I'm ready': Freshman Terrence Kiel II excited for the 2025 opener
by Ryan Brauninger
Presenting Texas Aggies United's 'Florida Slam Dunk' Sweepstakes!
by Texas Aggies United