whatthehey78 said:

---

If I understand (?), Judge Sullivan has a deadline of the 29th for the mandamus hearing and or dismiss or rule on Flynn's case. If I have that right...is that the 29th of Sept. or Oct.?

---

will25u said:

---

Pretty bad take. But Rubin is a mouthpiece for the DNC.

---

whatthehey78 said:

---

Okay...one more time, the 29th of Sept. or Oct.?????? Next Tuesday or a month from now? TIA!

---

VegasAg86 said:

---

whatthehey78 said:

---

Okay...one more time, the 29th of Sept. or Oct.?????? Next Tuesday or a month from now? TIA!

---

lol, oops. September.

---

whatthehey78 said:

---

Okay...one more time, the 29th of Sept. or Oct.?????? Next Tuesday or a month from now? TIA!

---

pacecar02 said:

---

The IG

I dont understand how he came to the conclusion that there was no evidence of bias in the FBI or SC investigations.

Would someone have had to to email explicitly and say "with repect to my bias against the president i want to investigate and convict Flynn".

---

aggiehawg said:

---

whatthehey78 said:

---

Okay...one more time, the 29th of Sept. or Oct.?????? Next Tuesday or a month from now? TIA!

---

TUESDAY! OF NEXT WEEK.

Just razzing you. DOJ, Sidney and the execrable Gleeson had given Sh** head Sullivan several dates for the hearing. The last date they listed as agreeable was 29th...which is of course the one Sullivan chose in his Minute Order setting the hearing. (Yet another example of his bad faith.)

---

cap-n-jack said:

---

And they are going to fight like hell to make sure it goes away. This is what scares me about this election. They will do anything not to lose. We have to vote and win in #'s that are insurmountable.

---

FriscoKid said:

---

If Trump doesn't win then this all goes away.

---

ccatag said:

---

FriscoKid said:

---

If Trump doesn't win then this all goes away.

---

That is the same thought I have. Trump needs a second term.

---

TacosaurusRex said:

---

Just effing do it already.

---

Quote:

---

See if you can follow this: In an effort to depict Donald Trump as if he were in an espionage conspiracy with the Kremlin, the Obama administration used bogus information, from a man the FBI suspected was an actual Russian spy, to brand as a suspected Russian spy a former U.S. naval intelligence officer who had actually been a CIA informant.

Your head spinning? Mine too.

And that's just the beginning. It turns out that Igor Danchenko, the man the FBI suspected of being an actual Russian spy, initially provided the bogus information about the American, Carter Page, through a former British spy, Christopher Steele. Through a couple of cut-outs, Steele had been retained by the Clinton campaign to dig up or, alas, to make up Russian dirt on Trump. Through his private intelligence business in London, Steele was known to be working for Russians oligarchs, while Danchenko was on Steele's payroll. That is, the Clinton campaign, and ultimately the Obama administration, colluded with Russians for the purpose of accusing Donald Trump of . . . yes . . . colluding with Russians.

Danchenko, who in 2005 reportedly told a Russian intelligence officer that he hoped someday to work for the Russian government, became Steele's source on Trump. Even before October 2016, when the FBI and the Obama Justice Department first sought a surveillance warrant against Page based on the information Steele was compiling, it was obvious that the information was unreliable some of it laughably so.

But the story was just too good. Nobody bothered to check the information or press Steele about its sourcing.

For months, Steele had been logged on bureau records as an official FBI informant. Nevertheless, in the most significant investigation in its modern history, the FBI did not identify Steele's "primary sub-source," Danchenko, until December 2016 two months after the bureau, under oath, used the uncorroborated Steele/Danchenko information in what the FBI and Obama Justice Department labeled a "VERIFIED" application to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC).

Wait, there's more. The FBI could easily have figured out Danchenko was Steele's source months earlier. So why do it in December 2016? Because by then, they had no choice. It had become necessary a few weeks earlier to boot Steele out of the investigation at least ostensibly. That's because he had been outed publicly as a media source for information about his investigation of Trump.

The public outing of Steele (in a Mother Jones article by David Corn, shortly before the 2016 election) should have come as no surprise. It had been obvious since at least September, when information from Steele was published in a Yahoo News article by Michael Isikoff, that Steele had been leaking to the media in order to help the Clinton campaign. Yet, the bureau repeatedly represented under oath to the FISC four times between October 2016 through June 2017 that "the FBI does not believe that [Steele] directly provided this information [in the Isikoff article] to the press."

To the contrary, as the Justice Department Inspector General (IG) found, there was considerable FBI suspicion that Steele was Isikoff's source. Moreover, the FBI had continuous access to Steele. Note: I said (above) that Steele was ostensiblykicked out of the investigation. In reality, the bureau continued to get information from Steele through Justice Department official Bruce Ohr (though neither the FBI nor the Justice Department revealed that fact to the FISC). Still, as the IG concluded, no one at the FBI ever asked Steele if he was the source for the Isikoff article. Obviously, they didn't want to know the answer that way, they could just keep insisting to court that they didn't believe he was the source.
That doesn't even scratch the surface of deceit.

When FBI agents interviewed Danchenko for three days in January 2017, they learned, undeniably, that Steele's story about his source "network" the story the bureau and the Justice Department told the FISC again and again was a risible distortion. Steele did not have a network of sources; he had Danchenko.

In turn, Danchenko had a motley collection of drinking buddies, a grifter, a girlfriend, and an anonymous source Danchenko cannot identify. And, as Eric Felton recounts in infuriatingly hilarious detail, none of these sub-sources could actually vouch for anything they heard, or wildly speculated, about Trump and Russia.

The "Well-Developed Conspiracy of Cooperation" On this score, we can't let pass the opportunity to describe what Stele and, ultimately, the FBI portentously describe as a "close associate" of Trump's who asserted that the candidate-turned-president was in a "well-developed conspiracy of cooperation" with the regime of Vladimir Putin.

Danchenko told FBI agents that a man he labeled "Source 6" was "this guy" whom he thinks but is not sure he once talked to on the phone for "about 10 minutes." In a Thai restaurant, you see, Danchenko ran into a U.S. journalist he managed to chat up about Trump and Russia. The journalist told Danchenko he was "skeptical" because "nothing substantive had turned up" tying the two together. But the journalist referred Danchenko to a "colleague," who advised Danchenko to talk to "this guy" via email. Danchenko took the email address and tried to reach "this guy" but didn't get a reply.

Weeks later, though, Danchenko got a call from an anonymous Russian who never identified himself. Danchenko assumed it was "this guy" . . . but he can't say for sure. So, Danchenko simply labeled the presumed "this guy" as "Source 6," with whom he had a brief "general discussion about Trump and the Kremlin" supposedly having "an ongoing relationship."

It was left to Steele, the old intel pro, to turn this sow's ear into a silk purse. By the time the craftsman was done "summarizing" Danchenko's unverifiable, anonymously sourced gossip, "this guy" had evolved from Danchenko's "Source 6" to Steele's "Source E," depicted as "an ethnic Russian and close associate of . . . Donald TRUMP," who had "admitted" that "there was a well-developed conspiracy of cooperation" between the Trump campaign and Russian leadership (emphasis added). Indeed, according to Steele, "Source E" had even "acknowledged" that Russia was "behind the recent leak of embarrassing e-mail messages, emanating from the Democratic National Committee [DNC], to the WikiLeaks platform" a storyline that just happened to be all over the media at that point.

As the IG has found, Steele's allegation that Page was part of a "well-developed conspiracy" of cooperation between the Trump campaign and the Kremlin, as well as the claim that Russia released the DNC emails in an effort to swing the 2016 election to Trump, were central to the surveillance application by the FBI and Obama Justice Department, and to the FISC's issuance of surveillance warrants.

And now we know, the liberal inflation of unsubstantiated indeed, unattributable rumor into purported probable cause that the now-president of the United States was a Kremlin mole is not the half of it.

Why Are We Just Hearing This Now? Once the FBI identified Danchenko as Steele's source, agents soon realized he was the same man the FBI had investigated as a suspected Russian spy six years earlier. You can't even make this up, so I'm not it is in a letter and accompanying FBI report, transmitted on Thursday from Attorney General Bill Barr to Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Lindsey Graham (R., S.C.).

It is mind-boggling that this information has been withheld from the public for years, despite congressional efforts to pry it from the FBI and Justice Department since 2017 (when Republicans controlled the House).

---

Quote:

---

Now Aaron Zelinsky and the other three trial team prosecutors FOUR of them to handle a case lasting FOUR days and involving only FIVE witnesses will have their decision-making in coming up with their Sentencing Statement scrutinized.

---

Quote:

---

I'm so old I remember when Eric Holder bragged about being Obama's wingman, on things like Ferguson, gun running to Mexico, and political prosecutions in general of anything that could amp up racial divisions (or dropping prosecutions, like with the black panther voter intimidation case). Back then, no heroic USA's or AUSA's spoke up, to my recollection, about how troubled they were with a real politicization of the DoJ, nor did they when Hillary was running rampant at State with Comey covering her flank.

---