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

7,733,830 Views | 49408 Replies | Last: 3 hrs ago by Ag with kids
whatthehey78
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
11:23a, 9/6/22
AG
Disgusted that apparently there are no (not one) TRUE, patriots with sufficient principal and moral ethics to do what is right!
Reply Quote
6
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 whatthehey78 • 11:37a, 9/6/22
AG
whatthehey78 said:
Disgusted that apparently there are no (not one) TRUE, patriots with sufficient principal and moral ethics to do what is right!
Our federal government is worse than the Mafia protection rackets. Step out of line, get whacked in one form or another.
Reply Quote
11
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 • 1:34p, 9/6/22
I've never researched Durham extensively, but to my knowledge, he's always kept his standards (see Boston FBI case) and I had no reason to doubt him. When the Sussman trial took place, there were two direct statements stating Hillary was culpable for the entire Russia episode.

This is VERY depressing.
Reply Quote
8
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 fasthorse05 • 1:44p, 9/6/22
AG
fasthorse05 said:
I've never researched Durham extensively, but to my knowledge, he's always kept his standards (see Boston FBI case) and I had no reason to doubt him. When the Sussman trial took place, there were two direct statements stating Hillary was culpable for the entire Russia episode.

This is VERY depressing.
Same here. Durham was supposed to be one of the white hats. But he has known that the FBI knew the Russiagate stuff was a hoax since the moment Barr directed him to investigate the predicate for Crossfire Hurricane. Yet, he never brought any charges, nor even wrote a scathing report about their conspiratorial activities.
Reply Quote
10
fasthorse05
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
11:25a, 9/9/22
"Implausible"! Judge rips Trump
Quote:
A federal judge threw out a sprawling racketeering lawsuit brought by former President Donald Trump against his 2016 opponent Hillary Clinton, members of her campaign, and an array of figures tied to Trump-Russia collusion claims.
Judge Donald Middlebrooks harshly critiqued Trump's legal filings in a ruling explaining why the case was being tossed out.
"Many of the Amended Complaint's characterizations of events are implausible because they lack any specific allegations which might provide factual support for the conclusions reached," the judge said in a 65-page ruling.
[url=https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/justice/judge-throws-out-trump-lawsuit-clinton-russiagate?utm_source=browser_push&utm_medium=onesignal&utm_campaign=push_notifications][/url]I can handle that one, mainly because I have no idea if the case was a good case. BUT, this one is hard for me to believe. I'll be VERY interested in y'alls interpretation of this. Page continues to be bent over. Trump appointed the judge, and I bet no Dems have an issue with this.

Carter Page Lawsuit Tossed

Quote:
A federal judge dismissed Carter Page's lawsuit against fired FBI Director James Comey, the FBI, and others involved in the improper Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act snooping that had relied on British ex-spy Christopher Steele's dossier.
Judge Dabney Friedrich relied on her interpretation of the criminal statutes that Page alleged the FBI officials had violated when she ruled against the onetime Trump campaign associate who was surveilled under FISA. Friedrich was appointed to the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia by then-President Donald Trump in 2017.
"Page alleges that the individual defendants violated 1809(a) and 1810 both by unlawfully engaging in electronic surveillance and using or disclosing the fruits of that surveillance. ... Each defendant claims that Page fails to sufficiently allege that he or she violated the statute," the judge said Thursday. "The Court finds that the claims are not time-barred but that Page does not state a claim against any of the individual defendants."
The judge added: "This plain-text understanding that Congress allowed suit against only those who conduct unauthorized surveillance, and not those who at the application stage mislead the [Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court] to approve that surveillance may seem odd. But it is not so 'absurd when considered in the particular statutory context,' as the Court must."
Reply Quote
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 fasthorse05 • 11:34a, 9/9/22
AG
fasthorse05 said:
Quote:
A federal judge dismissed Carter Page's lawsuit against fired FBI Director James Comey, the FBI, and others involved in the improper Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act snooping that had relied on British ex-spy Christopher Steele's dossier.
Judge Dabney Friedrich relied on her interpretation of the criminal statutes that Page alleged the FBI officials had violated when she ruled against the onetime Trump campaign associate who was surveilled under FISA. Friedrich was appointed to the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia by then-President Donald Trump in 2017.
"Page alleges that the individual defendants violated 1809(a) and 1810 both by unlawfully engaging in electronic surveillance and using or disclosing the fruits of that surveillance. ... Each defendant claims that Page fails to sufficiently allege that he or she violated the statute," the judge said Thursday. "The Court finds that the claims are not time-barred but that Page does not state a claim against any of the individual defendants."
The judge added: "This plain-text understanding that Congress allowed suit against only those who conduct unauthorized surveillance, and not those who at the application stage mislead the [Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court] to approve that surveillance may seem odd. But it is not so 'absurd when considered in the particular statutory context,' as the Court must."
Let's see if I have this right:

Use fraud to get your surveillance authorized and you aren't conducting unauthorized surveillance.

Reply Quote
17
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 fasthorse05 • 11:44a, 9/9/22
AG
Quote:
The judge added: "This plain-text understanding that Congress allowed suit against only those who conduct unauthorized surveillance, and not those who at the application stage mislead the [Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court] to approve that surveillance may seem odd. But it is not so 'absurd when considered in the particular statutory context,' as the Court must."
So when a FISA judge is lied to in order to get the most intrusive FISA warrant issued, there's not a crime committed?

Not following that logic at all.
Reply Quote
15
1 edit
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 • 11:53a, 9/9/22
Thank you very much!

My initial reaction was anger, then I decided I'd wait for a couple of legal reviews. I DO NOT understand, and just assumed the the lawyers sucked and it was written poorly.
Reply Quote
2
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 VegasAg86 • 11:58a, 9/9/22
AG
Quote:
Let's see if I have this right:

Use fraud to get your surveillance authorized and you aren't conducting unauthorized surveillance.
Pretty damned convoluted thinking for a statutory construction of a criminal statute. You had mens rea, intent to conduct illegal surveillance, lying to the FISC is circumstantial evidence os said intent. The fact that it was successful in duping a FISA judge does not remove that.
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 VegasAg86 • 12:10p, 9/9/22
Quote:
Let's see if I have this right:

Use fraud to get your surveillance authorized and you aren't conducting unauthorized surveillance.
that is not accurate. according to the ruling, government conceded the searches were improper.

the issue was not whether anyone was conducting unauthorized surveillance, but rather who could be sued under the statute

Quote:
to state a claim under 1810, Page must allege that the individual defendants personally engaged in unauthorized surveillance, not simply that they aided those who did
Reply Quote
will25u
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
3:42p, 9/12/22
Reply Quote
5
txags92
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 • 5:41p, 9/12/22
AG
will25u said:
So what are the chances that Durham's real target is the FBI guys and gals who pulled all of this? He seems to be getting a lot of people testifying under oath that the FBI knew and were told very early on that the Steele Dossier was BS. And yet the FBI pressed on and used it to underpin their effort to spy on the Trump campaign so they could trap Flynn and spent the entirety of Trumps time in office pushing their "investigation" of what they knew from the beginning to be a complete and total fabrication. Sounds vaguely like a conspiracy to pursue a fraudulent investigation to harass Trump.
Reply Quote
2
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 txags92 • 5:51p, 9/12/22
AG
Slim to none. Statute of Limitations has passed.
Reply Quote
7
Ellis Wyatt
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to txags92 • 6:18p, 9/12/22
txags92 said:
will25u said:
So what are the chances that Durham's real target is the FBI guys and gals who pulled all of this?
None at all.
Reply Quote
2
oh no
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
7:16p, 9/12/22
AG
The world needs to know this though. Sound it from the rooftops. …and if the feds convince Meta or Alphabet to censor or silence it, keep it going.
Reply Quote
4
Manhattan
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, 9/12/22
aggiehawg said:
Quote:
The judge added: "This plain-text understanding that Congress allowed suit against only those who conduct unauthorized surveillance, and not those who at the application stage mislead the [Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court] to approve that surveillance may seem odd. But it is not so 'absurd when considered in the particular statutory context,' as the Court must."
So when a FISA judge is lied to in order to get the most intrusive FISA warrant issued, there's not a crime committed?

Not following that logic at all.



Quote:
Federal District Court Judge James Boasberg said that while Clinesmith's actions were serious, the warrant application probably would have been approved anyway without his misstatement.
Reply Quote
fasthorse05
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
7:52p, 9/12/22
I'm not gonna start a new thread on this, but this does have a little bit to do with our topic. I'll allow one of our esteemed posters to post it since I've got to get out of here for some family business immediately.

However, Tucker's A block was very interesting. About 25 Trump officials and officers have been subpoenaed and are being interviewed by the DOJ/ FBI. Which, of course, will cost, each person probably $500,000.00 a piece.

Very, very, scary. I'm pretty sure I know why, which is to scare the crap out of anyone who chooses to run on anything but Democrat, but I'll let y'all decide.

See y'all manana!
Reply Quote
3
TRADUCTOR
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 • 8:07p, 9/12/22
aggiehawg said:
Slim to none. Statute of Limitations has passed.
The Statute of Limitation on Treason should not have run out. Really not a leap for me.

They perp walking Bannon for stupid ass crap...while they gut the soul of the nation with zero repercussion.
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 TRADUCTOR • 9:32p, 9/12/22
AG
TRADUCTOR said:
aggiehawg said:
Slim to none. Statute of Limitations has passed.
The Statute of Limitation on Treason should not have run out. Really not a leap for me.

They perp walking Bannon for stupid ass crap...while they gut the soul of the nation with zero repercussion.
There will never be a Dem nor Comey type Republican who will ever be charge with treason. Even when they give nuclear secrets to the Soviets and the Chinese, just like Clinton did. And Obama and Biden.
Reply Quote
10
will25u
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
1:09p, 9/13/22
Thread.

Reply Quote
1
2 edits
will25u
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
1:56p, 9/13/22
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
2:00p, 9/13/22
AG
Did Durham charge Danchenko to be able to bring this out and then drop the charges?
Reply Quote
3
will25u
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
2:48p, 9/13/22
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
2:53p, 9/13/22
FBI is irredeemable. EVERYONE who reads this thread needs to read the following thread. It is WAY beyond the pale.






Reply Quote
2
will25u
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
3:29p, 9/13/22
She's still going.





Reply Quote
3
2 edits
akm91
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
4:10p, 9/13/22
AG
Guess I'll wait for Prof. Cleveland's article on thefederalist.com. I'm not good at following twitter threads.
Reply Quote
6
CyclingAg82
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
4:25p, 9/13/22
AG
I guess Durham is not the impartial and fact based prosecutor we all thought he was when he was appointed.

I believe Durham is purposefully running out the clock.

I agree with the sentiment that FBI and DOJ are irredeemably corrupt. Clinton should be in the middle of the investigation but with Government as corrupt as it is and the media's "useful idiots" covering for them - there will be no justice.

It is truly ruling class vs. country class.
Reply Quote
8
whatthehey78
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to CyclingAg82 • 5:05p, 9/13/22
AG
CyclingAg82 said:
I guess Durham is not the impartial and fact based prosecutor we all thought he was when he was appointed.

I believe Durham is purposefully running out the clock.

I agree with the sentiment that FBI and DOJ are irredeemably corrupt. Clinton should be in the middle of the investigation but with Government as corrupt as it is and the media's "useful idiots" covering for them - there will be no justice.

It is truly ruling class vs. country class.
Correction:
Assumed/self imposed "Elitist" vs. everyone else.
Alexander, Caesar, Charlemagne, and myself founded empires; but upon what foundation did we rest the creations of our genius? Upon force! But Jesus Christ founded His upon love; and at this hour millions of men would die for Him. - Napoleon Bonaparte
Reply Quote
4
Adverse Event
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
6:43p, 9/13/22
Reply Quote
1
1 edit
Whitetail
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
6:53p, 9/13/22
AG
What is the statute of limitations on treason?
Reply Quote
3
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 Whitetail • 7:49p, 9/13/22
AG
Whitetail said:
What is the statute of limitations on treason?
There is no SOL.

But treason in very dificult to prove as it is not well defined.
Reply Quote
richardag
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
9:09p, 9/13/22
What are the current odds that the FBI and DOJ send a tactical team of 40 or more agents to raid Margot Cleveland's home and office?
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
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 richardag • 9:14p, 9/13/22
AG
richardag said:
What are the current odds that the FBI and DOJ send a tactical team of 40 or more agents to raid Margot Cleveland's home and office?
Oh, they are coming.
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
9:16p, 9/13/22
Thread.

Reply Quote
3
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 akm91 • 8:07a, 9/14/22
akm91 said:
Guess I'll wait for Prof. Cleveland's article on thefederalist.com. I'm not good at following twitter threads.
Here ya go!

Reply Quote
1
First Page Last Page
Page 1392 of 1412 ▼
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.