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

7,770,870 Views | 49442 Replies | Last: 11 min ago by will25u
will25u
How long do you want to ignore this user?
More incestuous relationships...

SPF250
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
sicandtiredTXN said:

It's going to be hilarious when someone informs this idiot Louise Mensch crony that Durham didn't just watch the statute of limitation deadline pass because in all conspiracy cases, the statute of limitations doesn't start until the conspiracy ends, just as AggieHawg said just a few posts back and has said numerous times all over this 1300 plus pages of watching this entire mess.



The pigs. They are squealing.
benchmark
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
sicandtiredTXN said:

With these latest revelations how on earth does Jake Sullivan have a top level security clearance and hold the seat as NSA to the POTUS?
Sadly, bad behavior during an election is mostly ignored and often rewarded. Even if Jake Sullivan was the mastermind and puppet master behind the Russian conspiracy hoax - Durham still has to prove a crime was committed.. Conspiracy isn't a crime otherwise.
captkirk
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
benchmark said:

sicandtiredTXN said:

With these latest revelations how on earth does Jake Sullivan have a top level security clearance and hold the seat as NSA to the POTUS?
Sadly, bad behavior during an election is mostly ignored and often rewarded. Even if Jake Sullivan was the mastermind and puppet master behind the Russian conspiracy hoax - Durham still has to prove a crime was committed.. Conspiracy isn't a crime otherwise.
In some quarters, generating hoax evidence and presenting it to law enforcement is still a crime. Ask Juicy Smollier.

Durham has all the emails discussing the plan

Sussman was just the poor SOB that drew the short straw and was the conduit for all of it. Durham has him by the short curlys
MouthBQ98
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
All they had to do was materially mislead the FBI. Crime.
Jabin
How long do you want to ignore this user?
MouthBQ98 said:

All they had to do was materially mislead the FBI. Crime.
I wonder if it would be a defense to that charge that it would be impossible to mislead the FBI since the FBI was also part of the conspiracy?
Muy
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Remember when Libs claimed for decades that Watergate is the biggest political crime of all time?
benchmark
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
captkirk said:

In some quarters, generating hoax evidence and presenting it to law enforcement is still a crime. Ask Juicy Smollier.

Durham has all the emails discussing the plan
Absolutely ... provided the intel he gave the FBI was false and he knew it. That's clearly fraud. But what if Sussmann provided the FBI with untampered raw data along with his biased interpretation? Exactly what he gave the FBI seems critical.
MarkTwain
How long do you want to ignore this user?
benchmark said:

sicandtiredTXN said:

With these latest revelations how on earth does Jake Sullivan have a top level security clearance and hold the seat as NSA to the POTUS?
Sadly, bad behavior during an election is mostly ignored and often rewarded. Even if Jake Sullivan was the mastermind and puppet master behind the Russian conspiracy hoax - Durham still has to prove a crime was committed.. Conspiracy isn't a crime otherwise.
My point is they pull NATSEC clearances for even the suspicion of wrongdoing

You have to remember First Jake Sullivan was sharing Top Secret info on Hillary's serverwhen he was the Dep Chief of Staff to Hillary in the State Dept. He knew well it was illegal because he said so in some of the emails on that server. Made no bones about it that he was afraid if it ever got out they'd be in deep Sh**

Then he's in the email chain directing traffic in this Sussmann scandal involving literal spying on the sitting POTUS, that's not election shenanigans.

This clown is the NATSEC advisor of the POTUS

But then again we all remember Ben Rhodes was Barry's Assistant to the President and Deputy National Security Advisor for Strategic Communications and Speechwriting which was a Job he had to invent because Rhodes couldn't get a NATSEC Clearance. SO Barry did a workaround and Rhodes had full access to everything, including the PDB and all NATSEC Council paperwork.
People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because hard men stand ready to do violence on their behalf.
FTAG 2000
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Yep, they locked out Flynn for less than what we know about Sullivan.

But this administration doesn't give a **** about the law.
whatthehey78
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
benchmark said:

sicandtiredTXN said:

With these latest revelations how on earth does Jake Sullivan have a top level security clearance and hold the seat as NSA to the POTUS?
Sadly, bad behavior during an election is mostly ignored and often rewarded. Even if Jake Sullivan was the mastermind and puppet master behind the Russian conspiracy hoax - Durham still has to prove a crime was committed.. Conspiracy isn't a crime otherwise.
I would contend "hacking" the WH servers is a crime. If not, Congress needs to "get on it" like YESTERDAY!
TRM
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
whatthehey78 said:

benchmark said:

sicandtiredTXN said:

With these latest revelations how on earth does Jake Sullivan have a top level security clearance and hold the seat as NSA to the POTUS?
Sadly, bad behavior during an election is mostly ignored and often rewarded. Even if Jake Sullivan was the mastermind and puppet master behind the Russian conspiracy hoax - Durham still has to prove a crime was committed.. Conspiracy isn't a crime otherwise.
I would contend "hacking" the WH servers is a crime. If not, Congress needs to "get on it" like YESTERDAY!
That's why I said a couple days ago they should go after the researchers 1st. They'd be easy to flip and implicate Joffe. It'd be nice to get Elias, Sullivan, etc., but I don't want to get my hopes up.
aggiehawg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Call the waaambulance.

Quote:

Lawyers for Michael Sussman, an attorney facing a single charge of making a false statement to the FBI, responded late Monday night to Durham's surprise allegations last week that Sussman's clients had organized a conspiracy to spy on the Trump White House. In a court filing, Sussman's lawyers said the information Durham's office submitted to the court was misleading and unnecessary, and could only be intended to stir up media and jury bias against their client.

"Given the Special Counsel's pattern of including unnecessary prejudicial material in public filings, there can be no doubt that the superfluous 'Factual Background' in the Special Counsel's motion is intended to further politicize this case, inflame media coverage, and taint the jury pool," they wrote in their brief Monday night.

The defense lawyers asked a federal judge to strike the portion of Durham's Friday brief from the court record, a procedural move to rid the record of filings that are irrelevant or inappropriate.
Link

After all of the crap thrown into the filings by Team Mueller, this complaint rings pretty hollow to me.
MarkTwain
How long do you want to ignore this user?
will25u
How long do you want to ignore this user?



akm91
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
"And liberals, being liberals, will double down on failure." - dedgod
will25u
How long do you want to ignore this user?

fasthorse05
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG 2000' said:

Yep, they locked out Flynn for less than what we know about Sullivan.

But this administration doesn't Democrats and their judges don't give a **** about the law.
Apparently, the judge threw out the Palin lawsuit today, so there you go.
will25u
How long do you want to ignore this user?
captkirk
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
will25u said:



akm91
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
"And liberals, being liberals, will double down on failure." - dedgod
will25u
How long do you want to ignore this user?
NYT about Russia gate being too complicated for readers, so they shouldn't even cover it.

Hahahahahahahaha hahahahahahahaha hahahahahahahaha hahahahahahahaha hahahahahahahaha hahahahahaha


benchmark
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
will25u said:

NYT about Russia gate being too complicated for readers, so they shouldn't even cover it..
Somewhat true. However, if Biden's National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan is indicted it'll magically become less complicated.
aggiehawg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
benchmark said:

will25u said:

NYT about Russia gate being too complicated for readers, so they shouldn't even cover it..
Somewhat true. However, if Biden's National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan is indicted it'll magically become less complicated.
Not sure Durham gets to charges against Sullivan. Marc Elias might be the top name embroiled with criminal charges.

Obviously I would much prefer they (in the words of Hillary) "all hang" but there is no justice for those elites. Elias is out of Perkins now. He's still powerful but doesn't have near the size of a fortressed castle as he once did.
We fixed the keg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Funny, a number of people seem to do a fine job of explaining and showing the evidence on their twitter accounts. Whoever wrote and approved that should be fired. Might has well just said, "dear reader, you are too stupid to understand grown up things, so we won't write about them."
outofstateaggie
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
akm91 said:




Interesting coming from one of Klaus Schwab's "Young Global Leaders."
aggiehawg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Even Fox News is kind of downplaying the latest filing from Durham.

I will repeat myself: Durham filed a 26 page indictment to allege a single charge of a false statement against Sussman. Experienced prosecutors don't waste their time doing that unless they have bigger fish on the line. It is not like Durham's investigatory unit is paid by the word.
RiskManager93
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG

txags92
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
outofstateaggie said:

akm91 said:




Interesting coming from one of Klaus Schwab's "Young Global Leaders."
Tulsi has no reason at all to like Hillary and has always been pretty intellectually honest when it comes to criticizing what the bad actors on the left are doing. I disagree with her vehemently on quit a few of her policy positions, but she appears to be an honorable person, which is rare in the politicians on the left.
will25u
How long do you want to ignore this user?
will25u
How long do you want to ignore this user?

will25u
How long do you want to ignore this user?
fasthorse05
How long do you want to ignore this user?
As I do with most of your comments, it's likely dead on correct, but if Elias was employed by Perkins, Coie at the time, aren't they culpable?
aggiehawg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
fasthorse05 said:

As I do with most of your comments, it's likely dead on correct, but if Elias was employed by Perkins, Coie at the time, aren't they culpable?
Yes and no. Depends on what the separation agreement says, oddly enough.

When partners have to separate from a law firm under those types of circumstances, there is a payout upfront in exchange for a hold harmless clause. If or when it comes to that, Elias takes the fall and exonerates the firm.

He went rogue is the story.
fasthorse05
How long do you want to ignore this user?
You dang lawyers think of everything

BTW, for the first time in a while, Hannity is outstanding tonight
First Page Last Page
Page 1327 of 1413
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.