Mueller dismisses top FBI agent in Russia probe for anti-Trump texts

7,603,370 Views | 49329 Replies | Last: 12 hrs ago by JFABNRGR
aggie93
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Wildcat • 2:55p, 5/19/20
AG
Wildcat said:
Again I ask, why was Flynn the holy grail in this crusade against Trump? They were determined to "get him". Even now when they have clearly failed, they are grasping at every straw to still "get him".

Why?
Not only did he know where the bodies were buried, he was the best qualified to quickly implement Trump's policies. He served in the Obama Admin and his ramp up time was going to be very short. So not only was this about trying to stop Flynn because he would find out about the Russia investigation, taking him out was a major blow to the ability of Trump to actually implement his agenda. Both goals were critical to Obama.
"The most terrifying words in the English language are: I'm from the government and I'm here to help."

Ronald Reagan
Reply Quote
8
EKUAg
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
2:56p, 5/19/20
AG
Maroon and White always! EKU/TAMU
Reply Quote
6
3 Toed Pete
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
3:01p, 5/19/20
AG
There were political reasons for obama to go after Flynn but also personal reasons (and for mccabe, too). Obama went after people that spoke out against him. Ben Carson was audited for the first time in his life after criticizing obamacare at the National Prayer Breakfast in front of obama. Also, the top banker in the industry, Jamie Dimon of Chase, criticized obama's first economic plan. Dimon stated, though he was a life-long democrat, he was now "barely a democrat". Over the next 2 years Chase got hammered by Justice in multi-billion dollar fines.

Going after Flynn was more about strategically blocking Trump than personal, but the personal was part of it, too.

obama is such a petty little *****.
Reply Quote
20
GCP12
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to will25u • 3:03p, 5/19/20
AG
will25u said:
These ****ing people
Reply Quote
5
aggiehawg
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to EKUAg • 3:04p, 5/19/20
AG
EKUAg said:
That confirms it. It was Obama. Susan Rice was covering for him in that stupid email to herself..
Reply Quote
12
will25u
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to aggiehawg • 3:07p, 5/19/20
aggiehawg said:
EKUAg said:
That confirms it. It was Obama. Susan Rice was covering for him in that stupid email to herself..
Here is a thread from Brian Cates that goes into it. Rice says Obama was asking it as a question, but in actuality, it was an "order" to not tell President Elect Trump about the investigation. There is more than the tweets I posted.



Reply Quote
6
will25u
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
3:13p, 5/19/20
Reply Quote
31
hbtheduce
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to will25u • 3:27p, 5/19/20
AG
Without a recording that is all speculation. Is it possible? Sure. But I think there might be some confirmation bias that "Obama was the bad guy, who ordered all this". Comey has plenty of motive and this email is evidence against Comey.



Reply Quote
2
1 edit
aggiehawg
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to hbtheduce • 3:41p, 5/19/20
AG
hbtheduce said:
Without a recording that is all speculation. Is it possible? Sure. But I think there might be some confirmation bias that "Obama was the bad guy, who ordered all this". Comey has plenty of motive and this email is evidence against Comey.
Yes and no. Susan Rice had no specific loyalty to Comey but she did to Obama. The timing of this email also tends to show a consciousness of guilt which is circumstantial evidence of intent. It wasn't written until two weeks later so it wasn't contemporaneous, yet purports to give exact quotes and attribution.

Further Yates was at the same meeting and her testimony is that Obama brought up the subject and specifically the Logan Act. She remembered because it shocked her so much as it was news to her.
Reply Quote
6
drcrinum
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to will25u • 3:54p, 5/19/20
will25u said:

'written to make it look like Comey is the decider...' = protect Obama.

Here's another thread leading to a similar conclusion:




Reply Quote
6
Secolobo
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
3:55p, 5/19/20
AG
lol
Can I go to sleep Looch?
Reply Quote
3
1 edit
will25u
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
4:10p, 5/19/20
BUT wait! There's more!

Reply Quote
1
1 edit
will25u
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
4:15p, 5/19/20
My one and only comment on this guy...

We have used his tweets here before, and his info has always seemed good. I am sure someone else will chime in if they had an alternate memory of him.

Reply Quote
5
Prosperdick
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to will25u • 4:27p, 5/19/20
AG
will25u said:
My one and only comment on this guy...

We have used his tweets here before, and his info has always seemed good. I am sure someone else will chime in if they had an alternate memory of him.


Death might be too good for that POS...he would think he was a martyr and I suppose get 88 virgins.
Reply Quote
9
Wildcat
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to will25u • 4:50p, 5/19/20
AG
will25u said:
My one and only comment on this guy...

We have used his tweets here before, and his info has always seemed good. I am sure someone else will chime in if they had an alternate memory of him.



They perp walk Brennan and I will make a $100 contribution to the honorable charity of your choice (note: Stardust's law school tuition is excluded).
Aegrescit medendo
Reply Quote
7
Garrelli 5000
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
4:58p, 5/19/20
AG
Full text of second rubini tweet has a lot more names. Yates, Comey, Strzok, etc.

You have to click on the text in the second tweet below the one with details of Brennan.
Staff - take out the trash.
Reply Quote
1
1 edit
captkirk
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Some Junkie Cosmonaut • 5:03p, 5/19/20
AG
ruddyduck said:
Charles Chase McGillicutty will not be pleased
Reply Quote
3
1 edit
captkirk
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to DeWrecking Crew • 5:07p, 5/19/20
AG
DeWrecking Crew said:
Because he "knows where the bodies are buried"
And he was going to figure out Crossfire Hurricane, eventually. Now its just political. The optics of him getting off is not good
Reply Quote
3
ThunderCougarFalconBird
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to drcrinum • 5:15p, 5/19/20
AG
drcrinum said:
Writ of Mandamus from Sidney Powell:

https://sidneypowell.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/Petition-filed.pdf


P.S. 36 pages long
wow. Nice brief. D.C. Cir. has no choice but to grant or get their respective noses rubbed in it by SCOTUS.
Reply Quote
18
VegasAg86
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to ThunderCougarFalconBird • 5:21p, 5/19/20
AG
blindey said:
drcrinum said:
Writ of Mandamus from Sidney Powell:

https://sidneypowell.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/Petition-filed.pdf


P.S. 36 pages long
wow. Nice brief. D.C. Cir. has no choice but to grant or get their respective noses rubbed in it by SCOTUS.
Whoever decided to use Fokker for Sullivan to support his position needs to return to law school or stop doing legal research.
Reply Quote
10
Sterling82
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
5:28p, 5/19/20
In that picture Brennen looks like he's walking to the gallos. But no way those statements are based on anything but false hope in my opinion. Maybe that was the intended inference.
Reply Quote
BMX Bandit
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
5:32p, 5/19/20
Sullivan to whatever clerk thought of that:

Nice one Fokker!!


So understood, the "leave of court" authority gives no power to a district court to deny a prosecutor's Rule 48(a) motion to dismiss charges based on a disagreement with the prosecution's exercise of charging authority. For instance, a court cannot deny leave of court because of a view that the defendant should stand trial notwithstanding the prosecution's desire to dismiss the charges, or a view that any remaining charges fail adequately to redress the gravity of the defendant's alleged conduct. See In re United States, 345 F.3d 450, 453 (7th Cir.2003). The authority to make such determinations remains with the Executive.
Reply Quote
3
aggiehawg
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to ThunderCougarFalconBird • 5:34p, 5/19/20
AG
blindey said:
drcrinum said:
Writ of Mandamus from Sidney Powell:

https://sidneypowell.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/Petition-filed.pdf


P.S. 36 pages long
wow. Nice brief. D.C. Cir. has no choice but to grant or get their respective noses rubbed in it by SCOTUS.
It was a pretty easy read as legal pleadings go. Just the right touch of humor and sarcasm. Loved the play off of the words of Chief Justice Roberts on the "judges are umpires" to wind up putting Sullivan as a baseball player "out in left field."

There are so many issues that have arisen in this tortured case that she could have easily gotten buried in the weeds chasing them all down but she kept it concise and to the ultimate point. Getting this motherf***ing case dismissed.

You think Sullivan will file his own response to Sydney? Or have Gleeson do it for him?
Reply Quote
7
BMX Bandit
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to aggiehawg • 5:37p, 5/19/20
Don't think I've heard of a judge filing in response to a mandamus. Usually it would be real party in interest, but that's Flynn.

So has to be Gleeson I'd guess
Reply Quote
1
aggiehawg
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to BMX Bandit • 5:38p, 5/19/20
AG
BMX Bandit said:
Sullivan to whatever clerk thought of that:

Nice one Fokker!!


So understood, the "leave of court" authority gives no power to a district court to deny a prosecutor's Rule 48(a) motion to dismiss charges based on a disagreement with the prosecution's exercise of charging authority. For instance, a court cannot deny leave of court because of a view that the defendant should stand trial notwithstanding the prosecution's desire to dismiss the charges, or a view that any remaining charges fail adequately to redress the gravity of the defendant's alleged conduct. See In re United States, 345 F.3d 450, 453 (7th Cir.2003). The authority to make such determinations remains with the Executive.
Do you remember back in the days when WestLaw used keynotes to use for legal research? I can't tell you how many times I found that the keynotes were misleading or just wrong after reading the opinion. I think a law clerk was pwned by a misleading summary.
Reply Quote
3
aggiehawg
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to BMX Bandit • 5:45p, 5/19/20
AG
BMX Bandit said:
Don't think I've heard of a judge filing in response to a mandamus. Usually it would be real party in interest, but that's Flynn.

So has to be Gleeson I'd guess
But I do believe Sullivan could, if he were of a mind, do so.

Gleeson's appointment is also under a vacate threat, so he sort of is also a "real party in interest" separate from Sullivan.

Good lord this criminal case is so screwed up. And we haven't even gotten to Covington & Burling, a law firm, now representing themselves pursuant to Sullivan's orders.
Reply Quote
3
BMX Bandit
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to aggiehawg • 5:45p, 5/19/20
Kid you not, had a motion filed once in which opposing attorney cited cases as Peter v Paul, 123 SW2d 345 see headnote 4
Reply Quote
5
Some Junkie Cosmonaut
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
5:50p, 5/19/20
AG
Reply Quote
12
Some Junkie Cosmonaut
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
6:04p, 5/19/20
AG
Reply Quote
1
Long Live Sully
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Some Junkie Cosmonaut • 6:19p, 5/19/20
AG
ruddyduck said:
I am headed to DC now to build the gallows.
Reply Quote
6
aggiehawg
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to BMX Bandit • 6:23p, 5/19/20
AG
BMX Bandit said:
Kid you not, had a motion filed once in which opposing attorney cited cases as Peter v Paul, 123 SW2d 345 see headnote 4
ROTFLMAO!!

Of all the things that were hard to learn in law school, citation protocols were the hardest, for me. I was of an age that when I first practiced I did pleadings and briefs by dictation. Every italicized word, every comma, every period, every parentheses. A paragraph of those was a nightmare to try to dictate. Even worse when my secretary gave me the transcripts of what they thought they heard.
Reply Quote
aggiehawg
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Long Live Sully • 6:25p, 5/19/20
AG
Cow Hop Ag said:
ruddyduck said:
I am headed to DC now to build the gallows.
Barr brought back executions at the federal level for a reason.

Hhhmm. Why do you think that was done??
Reply Quote
6
policywonk98
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Some Junkie Cosmonaut • 6:32p, 5/19/20
AG
ruddyduck said:


If this is true. Wow. These people are something else.
Reply Quote
12
aggiehawg
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to policywonk98 • 6:47p, 5/19/20
AG
policywonk98 said:
ruddyduck said:


If this is true. Wow. These people are something else.
No just run of the mill criminals that, were they on the street, would run the regular hustles and con games. Only they used their skills to make tens, hundreds, of millions, even billions.

I'd rather have the Second Gilded Age because at least those folks actually worked and produced.

Now? Not so much.
Reply Quote
5
fasthorse05
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to aggiehawg • 7:19p, 5/19/20
aggiehawg said:
policywonk98 said:
ruddyduck said:


If this is true. Wow. These people are something else.
No just run of the mill criminals that, were they on the street, would run the regular hustles and con games. Only they used their skills to make tens, hundreds, of millions, even billions.

I'd rather have the Second Gilded Age because at least those folks actually worked and produced.

Now? Not so much.
I can't agree with your comments enough.

And we kind of have a second gilded age right now. Silicon is the first brand new industry in 70 years. I'm sure Gates, Bezos, Brin, etc., would all be considered the Rockefellers and Carnegies of today, or they should be.
Reply Quote
3
First Page Last Page
Page 1121 of 1410 ▼
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.