Horowitz reportedly finds FBI lawyer falsified FISA doc; WaPo stealth-deletes Strzok connection

  
Via:  badfish-hd-h-u  •  3 weeks ago  •  112 comments

Horowitz reportedly finds FBI lawyer falsified FISA doc; WaPo stealth-deletes Strzok connection

S E E D E D   C O N T E N T


Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz has found evidence that an FBI lawyer manipulated a key investigative document related to the FBI's   secretive surveillance   of a former Trump campaign adviser -- enough to change the substantive meaning of the document, according to multiple reports.

The show-stopping development comes as Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., told Fox News that Horowitz's comprehensive report on allegations of Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) warrant abuse against former Trump campaign aide Carter Page will be released on Dec. 9. "That's locked," Graham said.

The new evidence concerning the altered document, which pertained to the FBI's FISA court warrant application to surveil Page, is expected to be outlined in Horowitz's upcoming report. CNN   first reported   the news, which was   largely confirmed   by The Washington Post.

The Post, hours after publishing its story, conspicuously  removed the portion of its reporting   that the FBI employee involved was underneath Peter Strzok, the FBI's since-fired head of counterintelligence. The Post did not offer an explanation for the change, which occurred shortly after midnight. Earlier this week, the DOJ   highlighted a slew of anti-Trump text messages   sent by Strzok when he was leading the Hillary Clinton email investigation and the probe into the Trump campaign.

Horowitz reportedly found that the FBI employee who modified the FISA document falsely stated that he had "documentation to back up a claim he had made in discussions with the Justice Department about the factual basis" for the FISA warrant application, the Post reported. Then, the FBI employee allegedly "altered an email" to substantiate his inaccurate version of events. The employee has since been forced out of the bureau.

In its initial 2016 FISA warrant application, the FBI flatly called Page "an agent of a foreign power."

FBI AGENTS MANIPULATED FLYNN FILE, AS CLAPPER ORDERED 'KILL SHOT,' FILING SAYS

Sources told Fox News last month that U.S. Attorney John Durham's separate, ongoing probe into potential FBI and  Justice Department  misconduct in the run-up to the 2016 election through the spring of 2017 has transitioned into a full-fledged criminal investigation -- and that Horowitz's report will shed light on why Durham's probe has become a criminal inquiry.

Durham has reportedly taken up Horowitz's findings concerning the falsified FISA document, meaning the ex-FBI lawyer who made the changes is now under criminal investigation. The Post indicated, however, that the document was not central to the legality of the FISA warrant obtained against Page.


rtx2up14.jpg?ve=1&tl=1


One-time advisor of U.S. president-elect Donald Trump Carter Page was called "an agent of a foreign power" by the FBI in its 2016 FISA surveillance warrant application. He has not been charged with any wrongdoing despite more than a year of surveillance, and several holes have emerged in the FBI's FISA case. (AP)



Republicans have long argued that the FBI's alleged FISA abuses, which came as the bureau aggressively pursued ultimately unsubstantiated claims of criminal links between the Trump team and Russia during the 2016 presidential campaign, were politically motivated. In recent months, a series of unearthed documents has strengthened those claims.

Just nine days before the FBI applied for its first FISA warrant to surveil Page, bureau officials were battling with a senior Justice Department official who had "continued concerns" about the "possible bias" of a source pivotal to the application, according to internal text messages   previously obtained by Fox News.

The 2016 messages, sent between  Lisa Page  and then-FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, also revealed that bureau brass circulated at least two anti-Trump blog articles, including a  Lawfare blog post  sent shortly after Election Day that called Trump possibly "among the major threats to the security of the country."

DOJ OUTLINES STRZOK 'SECURITY VIOLATIONS'; FINDS 'PARANOID' CASE AGENT NOTICED STRZOK WAS SITTING ON WEINER LAPTOP

Fox News is told the texts were connected to the ultimately successful Page application, which relied in part on information from British ex-spy Christopher Steele – whose anti-Trump views are now well-documented – and cited Page’s suspected Russia ties. In its warrant application, the FBI   inaccurately   assured the FISA court on numerous occasions  that media sources independently corroborated Steele's claims, and did not clearly state that Steele worked for a firm hired by Hillary Clinton's campaign and the Democratic National Committee (DNC).

Much of the   Steele dossier   has been proved   discredited or unsubstantiated , including the dossier's claims that the Trump campaign was paying hackers in the United States   out of a non-existent   Russian consulate in Miami, or that ex-Trump lawyer Michael Cohen traveled to Prague to conspire with Russians. Special Counsel Robert Mueller also was unable to substantiate the dossier's claims that Carter Page had received a large payment relating to the sale of a share of Rosneft, a Russian oil giant, or that a lurid blackmail tape involving the president existed.

Despite being accused by the FBI of being a Russian agent in the FISA application, and being secretly surveilled for more than a year, Page has not been charged with any wrongdoing. He has since  sued numerous actors  -- including the DNC -- for defamation related to claims that he worked with Russia.


ContentBroker_contentid-049ac04f55764983


Former Trump national security adviser Michael Flynn, seen here in 2018, is alleging that the FBI also doctored documents in his case. (AP)



DISPUTE ERUPTS AS BRENNAN, COMEY APPEAR TO DISPUTE WHO PUSHED THE STEELE DOSSIER

"OI [Office of Intelligence] now has a robust explanation re any possible bias of the chs [confidential human source] in the package," Lisa Page wrote to McCabe on Oct. 12, 2016. "Don't know what the holdup is now, other than Stu's continued concerns."

It's unclear whether the confidential source in question was Steele or another individual. "Stu" was an apparent reference to Stuart Evans, then the DOJ's National Security Division deputy assistant attorney general. In one  previously unearthed and since-unredacted text message , Strzok texted Page that he was "Currently fighting with Stu for this FISA" in late 2016.

Page is not the only Trump official to allege misconduct by the FBI. Last month, an explosive court filing from  Michael Flynn’s  legal team   alleged that FBI agents manipulated official records   of the former national security adviser’s 2017 interview that led to him being charged with lying to investigators. Flynn's attorneys   demanded the FBI search   its internal "Sentinel" system to find more evidence of allegedly doctored files.

Newly released text messages involving text messages between Strzok and former FBI lawyer Lisa Page revealed that Page -- who was not present for the Flynn interview -- had apparently made "edits" to the so-called "302" witness report in the case, which was key to Flynn's prosecution on a false statements charge. Page told Strzok on February 10, 2017 that she “gave my edits to Bill to put on your desk.”

Horowitz told congressional lawmakers  in an October letter that his investigation and ensuing report were nearing their conclusion.

FBI BLAMES SYSTEM-WIDE SOFTWARE FAILURE FOR MISSING STRZOK TEXTS -- PHONE FROM MUELLER DAYS TOTALLY WIPED

The "lengthy" draft report "concerns sensitive national security and law enforcement matters," Horowitz wrote in the letter, adding that he anticipated "the final report will be released publicly with few redactions."

Horowitz noted that he did not anticipate a need to prepare or issue "separate classified and public versions of the report."

"After we receive the final classification markings from the Department and the FBI, we will then proceed with our usual process for preparing a final report, including ensuring that appropriate reviews occur for accuracy and comment purposes," Horowitz wrote in the letter. "Once begun, we do not anticipate the time for that review to be lengthy."


Tags

jrDiscussion - desc
smarty_function_ntUser_is_admin: user_id parameter required
Find text within the comments Find 
 
†hε pε⊕pレε'š ƒïšh
1  seeder  †hε pε⊕pレε'š ƒïšh    3 weeks ago

Corruption regarding the Russia Hoax? Who would have thought? Shocking!

 
 
 
WallyW
1.1  WallyW  replied to  †hε pε⊕pレε'š ƒïšh @1    3 weeks ago

More  truth coming soon. Stay tuned

 
 
 
Transyferous Rex
1.2  Transyferous Rex  replied to  †hε pε⊕pレε'š ƒïšh @1    3 weeks ago

I know I'm shocked. 

 
 
 
Ronin2
2  Ronin2    3 weeks ago

The left will call these people "patriots". The only thing they are loyal to is themselves, and their corrupted version of what they think government should be.

 
 
 
†hε pε⊕pレε'š ƒïšh
3  seeder  †hε pε⊕pレε'š ƒïšh    3 weeks ago

What is it like to live in 2019 and still believe the Russia Hoax and hope it removes the donald from office? Clinical delusions should be treated by psychiatric health professionals. Best of luck to those suffering from Russia delusions.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
3.1  JohnRussell  replied to  †hε pε⊕pレε'š ƒïšh @3    3 weeks ago

What's it like to be an anarchist who spreads fake news every day?  Exciting I presume. 

While this particular story is not fake news, the reaction from the right wing and the libertarians and anarchists to the story probably will be. 

There is a reason this story is barely being covered in mainstream media. 

The Justice Department inspector general has uncovered evidence that an FBI lawyer might have altered a document related to a court’s approval of a request to surveil a Trump campaign adviser in 2016, the   Washington Post reported. 

However,  DOJ Inspector General Michael Horowitz concluded that t he alteration did not have an impact on the validity of the surveillance application , U.S. officials familiar with the matter told the Post.

The finding is included in a draft of Horowitz’s report on his review of the FBI’s Russia investigation. The report will be made public Dec. 9, and the Senate Judiciary Committee plans to hold a hearing on the report Dec. 11.   CNN   was first to report on this finding.

The FBI employee was a low-level lawyer in the Office of General Counsel. He reportedly told the Justice Department that he had documents to bolster a claim he made in the application to surveil former Trump campaign adviser Carter Page. Horowitz found that the lawyer actually did not have the documentation he needed and then altered an email to cover it up, the Post reported.

The employee was forced out of the FBI after the mistake and coverup was identified, according to the Post.

In his report Horowitz will say that the alteration did not affect the validity of the application and the document had a “proper legal and factual basis , ” in the Post’s words.

It’s a detail that’s inconvenient to Trump allies. And while the Post initially reported that the FBI employee being investigated worked for former Deputy Assistant Director Peter Strzok, a hated figure in Trump world, the Post later corrected its report to state that the lawyer in question was “a low-level lawyer in the Office of General Counsel and did not report to the deputy assistant director.”

https://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/doj-inspector-general-finds-carter-page-surveillance-document-altered
 
 
 
Texan1211
3.1.1  Texan1211  replied to  JohnRussell @3.1    3 weeks ago
What's it like to be an anarchist who spreads fake news every day?  Exciting I presume. 

LOL! No need for you to presume!

Use your own experience!

 
 
 
JohnRussell
3.1.2  JohnRussell  replied to  Texan1211 @3.1.1    3 weeks ago

You are confused. There is an anarchist involved here, but it is not me.

 
 
 
Texan1211
3.1.3  Texan1211  replied to  JohnRussell @3.1.2    3 weeks ago
You are confused.

Not in the least.

There is an anarchist involved here, but it is not me.

WTF are you going on about now? I didn't mention a word about anarchists.

Holy deflection, JR!

Use your own experience pasting articles bashing the President--some of them false-- and let others do the same!

 
 
 
JohnRussell
3.1.4  JohnRussell  replied to  Texan1211 @3.1.3    3 weeks ago
WTF are you going on about now? I didn't mention a word about anarchists.

Are you ok? The word anarchist appears in your post, and you directly reference it. 

 
 
 
Texan1211
3.1.5  Texan1211  replied to  JohnRussell @3.1.4    3 weeks ago

Learn when someone quotes one of YOUR posts, JR. 

I referred to you posting fake news, JR.

Can you seriously not see that,or are you deliberately misconstruing my words in some vain effort to pretend you don't understand?

 
 
 
†hε pε⊕pレε'š ƒïšh
3.1.6  seeder  †hε pε⊕pレε'š ƒïšh  replied to  Texan1211 @3.1.5    3 weeks ago

You think it's bad now, wait until the day after the election. Recount demands, Russian collusion 3.0 allegations. It's going to be terrifically weird.

 
 
 
†hε pε⊕pレε'š ƒïšh
3.1.7  seeder  †hε pε⊕pレε'š ƒïšh  replied to  JohnRussell @3.1.2    3 weeks ago

Anarchist? is that bad? Russia.....must be Russia? LOL people are so tired of the childish little conspiracy labels. Why not just get your party to have an actual platform that Americans like then you won't need the fake news, the hoaxes and the false narratives.

 
 
 
Ozzwald
3.1.8  Ozzwald  replied to  JohnRussell @3.1.4    3 weeks ago
The word anarchist appears in your post, and you directly reference it.

Notice that he is deflecting from addressing your quote debunking everyone's claim of malfeasance?  They can't address it, so deflection.

Fox-Squirrel-by-Red-Faux-300x300.jpg

 
 
 
bugsy
3.1.9  bugsy  replied to  Texan1211 @3.1.3    3 weeks ago
some of them false

No....all of them

 
 
 
Ed-NavDoc
3.1.10  Ed-NavDoc  replied to  JohnRussell @3.1    3 weeks ago

Is it your impression that use of extra large red and black bold print is going to impress or change anyone's point of view or opinion? It certainly does not work with me.

 
 
 
Texan1211
3.1.11  Texan1211  replied to  Ed-NavDoc @3.1.10    3 weeks ago

But isn't it rather impressive that he figured out how to do it?

 
 
 
JohnRussell
3.1.12  JohnRussell  replied to  Ed-NavDoc @3.1.10    3 weeks ago

I use different size fonts and colors to emphasize various phrases and sentences.  I think it works quite well actually. 

Also and just as important it breaks up the monotony of looking at the exact same size and font all the time. Its bad enough reading dozens of inane comments , having them all look exactly alike is even worse. 

 
 
 
MUVA
3.1.13  MUVA  replied to  JohnRussell @3.1.12    3 weeks ago

BS is BS no Matter how it is framed.

 
 
 
WallyW
3.1.14  WallyW  replied to  JohnRussell @3.1.12    3 weeks ago

You're just channeling Mac, and doing a piss poor job of it

 
 
 
 
KDMichigan
3.1.16  KDMichigan  replied to  WallyW @3.1.14    3 weeks ago

Coming from the guy who told me my Gif's could make someone have a seizure. 

256

 
 
 
†hε pε⊕pレε'š ƒïšh
3.1.17  seeder  †hε pε⊕pレε'š ƒïšh  replied to  KDMichigan @3.1.16    3 weeks ago

There is a reasonable explanation for the Former Secretary of State's seizure. She couldn't get the vibrator out because of her fat little T-Rex hands

384

 
 
 
JohnRussell
3.1.18  JohnRussell  replied to  KDMichigan @3.1.16    3 weeks ago

Fake news. 

 
 
 
JohnRussell
3.1.19  JohnRussell  replied to  WallyW @3.1.14    3 weeks ago

I think Mac copied me, but I am sure it was inadvertent. 

Do you have anything of interest to say Wally?   Hope springs eternal. 

 
 
 
†hε pε⊕pレε'š ƒïšh
3.1.20  seeder  †hε pε⊕pレε'š ƒïšh  replied to  JohnRussell @3.1.19    3 weeks ago

No one has ever copied you. 

 
 
 
bugsy
3.1.21  bugsy  replied to  †hε pε⊕pレε'š ƒïšh @3.1.20    3 weeks ago
No one has ever copied you. 

Mocked..yes

Copied?...Never

 
 
 
Dismayed Patriot
3.2  Dismayed Patriot  replied to  †hε pε⊕pレε'š ƒïšh @3    3 weeks ago
What is it like to live in 2019 and still believe the Russia Hoax

What's truly delusional is to imagine Russia wasn't behind the election interference or that they didn't do all they could to get Donald Trump elected. You seriously have to be living with your head in the sand if you keep calling proven facts a "hoax". Perhaps it is a side effect from spending so many years continuing to believe Obama was born in Kenya even after all the evidence to the contrary and basic common sense.

 
 
 
MUVA
3.2.1  MUVA  replied to  Dismayed Patriot @3.2    3 weeks ago

Hoax you can not prove they tried to help Trump they meddled in the election to disrupt our democracy not to help Trump they do every 4 years.

 
 
 
Greg Jones
3.2.2  Greg Jones  replied to  Dismayed Patriot @3.2    3 weeks ago

They might have tried to "influence" the election, they never interfered  in the election. No votes were changed.

Even Obama himself claimed he was born in Kenya, in a bio booklet he had drawn up in 1991.

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/promotional-booklet/   His most likely real father is the commie Frank Marshall Davis.

bookbio.jpg

 
 
 
JohnRussell
3.2.3  JohnRussell  replied to  Greg Jones @3.2.2    3 weeks ago

I wanted to see who the birthers are on this seed, so I clicked to see who "liked" this nonsense.  Heartland, Telo, and Bugsy.  Sounds about right. 

 
 
 
WallyW
3.2.4  WallyW  replied to  JohnRussell @3.2.3    3 weeks ago

The truth is right there, in blue and black.

 
 
 
It Is ME
4  It Is ME    3 weeks ago

According to Certain "Media Outlet/s" (ref. comment #3.1) jrSmiley_18_smiley_image.gif , Nothing to really see here. jrSmiley_97_smiley_image.gif

Falsifying…..is only an Offense if it actually "Does" something. 

Reminds me of the "Impeachment Hearings"....the "Opposite Effect" ! jrSmiley_10_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
JohnRussell
4.1  JohnRussell  replied to  It Is ME @4    3 weeks ago

[deleted]

 
 
 
It Is ME
4.1.1  It Is ME  replied to  JohnRussell @4.1    3 weeks ago
If you are ever going to, this might be the time to try and make sense. 

Think about it ….. won't you ? jrSmiley_87_smiley_image.gif

If you're adamant about this being a non-issue in "Falsifying" information for a FISA warrant (A Very Important "Legal" piece of paper by the way), because a "Media Outlet" says so, you must think the same way about this Impeachment Fallacy, which is based on a non-legally binding phone call, and didn't have anything "Happen", no matter what Schiffty Schiff is telling you otherwise. 

Hope I didn't.....CONFUSE YOU !

 
 
 
Tessylo
4.1.2  Tessylo  replied to  JohnRussell @4.1    3 weeks ago
'If you are ever going to, this might be the time to try and make sense.'

jrSmiley_40_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
It Is ME
4.1.3  It Is ME  replied to  Tessylo @4.1.2    3 weeks ago

And what do you really " Feel " ( can't use "Think" here jrSmiley_10_smiley_image.gif ), about this issue ?

 
 
 
Tessylo
4.1.4  Tessylo  replied to  It Is ME @4.1.3    3 weeks ago
'can't use "Think" here'

No, you never can.  

 
 
 
It Is ME
4.1.5  It Is ME  replied to  Tessylo @4.1.4    3 weeks ago
No, you never can.

I knew it !

You have no "Grasp" of the "Subject" as explained in the article/Seed ! jrSmiley_10_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
JohnRussell
4.1.6  JohnRussell  replied to  It Is ME @4.1.1    3 weeks ago

I dont think what the low level FBI lawyer did is "ok", but it is not the bombshell in this story. The bombshell is that after a long investigation the IG determined that the FISA application was valid and had a "proper legal and factual basis". 

Did Fox News report that little tidbit I wonder. 

 
 
 
It Is ME
4.1.7  It Is ME  replied to  JohnRussell @4.1.6    3 weeks ago
The bombshell is that after a long investigation the IG determined that the FISA application was valid and had a "proper legal and factual basis". 

The Bomb shell   is that a respected? "Intelligence Agent" jrSmiley_18_smiley_image.gif , Actually Fudged Info.. Doesn't it make you wonder what this "Wonderful" agency of ours, "Fudged" elsewhere ? jrSmiley_97_smiley_image.gif

Maybe poor "American Citizen" Martha Stewart" shouldn't really have been put in jail ? jrSmiley_89_smiley_image.gif

What about all the other "American Folks" that have been put to the test by "Our Intelligence ? Agencies". Were they really ALL Okay in the "Evidence" AGAINST them ? jrSmiley_68_smiley_image.png

 
 
 
Heartland American
4.1.8  Heartland American  replied to  It Is ME @4.1.1    3 weeks ago

I’m thinking that Flynn’s new legal team is right on in what they told the judge in that case. 

 
 
 
JohnRussell
5  JohnRussell    3 weeks ago

If this is the biggest bombshell to come out of the IG report and the Barr / Durham investigation  (and the first leaks usually are the biggest bombshells)  this long dreamed of take down of the deep state will more resemble a feather landing on an elephant's ass. 

 
 
 
†hε pε⊕pレε'š ƒïšh
5.1  seeder  †hε pε⊕pレε'š ƒïšh  replied to  JohnRussell @5    3 weeks ago

Win the election and then you don't need hold over hack bureaucrats to break the law and try to unseat an elected president.

I would highly suggest campaigning in swing states but you might need a viable candidate that isn't a fruit ball moonbat circus freak.

 
 
 
Tessylo
5.1.1  Tessylo  replied to  †hε pε⊕pレε'š ƒïšh @5.1    3 weeks ago
'Win the election'

We/She did.  

 
 
 
Texan1211
5.1.2  Texan1211  replied to  Tessylo @5.1.1    3 weeks ago
We/She did.  

So then Trump as Presdent must be a gigantic figment of your imagination, and you should really stop talking about him so much.

 
 
 
Ed-NavDoc
5.1.3  Ed-NavDoc  replied to  Tessylo @5.1.1    3 weeks ago

Is "she" sitting in the big chair in the Oval Office? Enough said....

 
 
 
Dulay
5.1.4  Dulay  replied to  †hε pε⊕pレε'š ƒïšh @5.1    3 weeks ago
Win the election and then you don't need hold over hack bureaucrats to break the law and try to unseat an elected president.

Why the plural BF. Your own seed cites ONE low level FBI agent. ONE. SINGULAR. 

From your seed:

The show-stopping development

Show-stopping? Really?

This IG report has been held up by the conservatives on this site, including you, as an anticipated BOMBSHELL.

OOOO you liberals just wait, the IG report is just around the corner and the whole Obama cabal  that was mean to Trump, including Obama will be indicted!

Instead, I suppose in an attempt to save face, a finding that sights a low level FBI agent altered a document used in a subsequent FISA application somehow becomes 'show-stopping'. 

PATHETIC!

 
 
 
JohnRussell
6  JohnRussell    3 weeks ago
In his report Horowitz will say that ....the document had a “proper legal and factual basis,” 

Oops , there goes thousands of hours of right wing fever dreams that the FISA application represented a deep state conspiracy against Donald Trump that people would go to prison for. 

 
 
 
Tessylo
6.1  Tessylo  replied to  JohnRussell @6    3 weeks ago

I'm still waiting for all those indictments to the President Obama administration.

 
 
 
Dean Moriarty
6.2  Dean Moriarty  replied to  JohnRussell @6    3 weeks ago

And the left will claim the Deep State are good people as we've seen in a recent Krugman tweet. 

512

 
 
 
Tessylo
6.2.1  Tessylo  replied to  Dean Moriarty @6.2    3 weeks ago

THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS THE DEEP STATE.  

 
 
 
Dean Moriarty
6.2.2  Dean Moriarty  replied to  Tessylo @6.2.1    3 weeks ago

You might want to write Krugman and let him know. jrSmiley_10_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
†hε pε⊕pレε'š ƒïšh
6.2.3  seeder  †hε pε⊕pレε'š ƒïšh  replied to  Dean Moriarty @6.2    3 weeks ago

That is the same Moron who claimed the deep state was not real. LOL

 
 
 
Texan1211
6.2.4  Texan1211  replied to  Dean Moriarty @6.2.2    3 weeks ago

Krugman, for some very strange reason, is a favorite among many on the left. Probably because he erroneously predicted doom and gloom for the economy under Trump. 

And some are still hoping he will be right one day, as long as Trump is still in office.

 
 
 
†hε pε⊕pレε'š ƒïšh
6.2.5  seeder  †hε pε⊕pレε'š ƒïšh  replied to  Texan1211 @6.2.4    3 weeks ago

Krugman is such a debunked hack. He demanded a housing bubble until we had one. He wanted to shore up trade deficits with tariffs until we did. He supported the current economic path before he didn't.

He will support anything and everything as long as the president is a democrat and he has a 20 history of print to prove he is a shill.

 
 
 
Dismayed Patriot
6.2.6  Dismayed Patriot  replied to  Dean Moriarty @6.2.2    3 weeks ago
You might want to write Krugman and let him know

I get that you don't do sarcasm, but that was obviously a tongue in cheek comment by Krugman. I heard the same from a few other news pundits, and it was by no means an affirmation that the "deep state" as the tin foil hat conspiracy theorists fantasize about, but that there are deeply courageous, deeply honorable, deeply principled State department employees who are non-partisans who work every day for the benefit of the American people, which is exactly the opposite of what Trump has been doing which is why he hates them so much.

Again, Krugman was not in ANY way affirming the existence of a shadowy cabal of government officials corruptly subverting the will of the people. There are dedicated civil servants who work tirelessly on our behalf and we just watched many of them testify before congress and they were credible, believable and honest which no doubt pissed off the lying clown in the oval office.

 
 
 
MUVA
6.2.7  MUVA  replied to  Tessylo @6.2.1    3 weeks ago

Wrong

 
 
 
Tessylo
6.2.8  Tessylo  replied to  MUVA @6.2.7    3 weeks ago

I am correct.

Referring to the deep state that tRump and those in his administration and all of the whackjobs have been referring to.

Doesn't exist.   

 
 
 
bbl-1
6.2.9  bbl-1  replied to  Tessylo @6.2.8    3 weeks ago

Actually the 'deep state' does exist.  It is international and desires to rule/control with wealth and not democracy.  Examine Putin's government to understand how this works.

The right wing puts forth the concept that the 'deep state' is the EPA, Social Security, Medicare, anything that benefits the people, the nation and those that want rule by democracy.

Has Russian oligarch money 'bought' the GOP in the same manner it bought the NRA?

 
 
 
Dean Moriarty
6.2.10  Dean Moriarty  replied to  Dismayed Patriot @6.2.6    3 weeks ago

The cat is out of the bag even Rand Paul acknowledges the Deep State. 

“There is an establishment in foreign policy and also in the intelligence community,” Paul noted. “The intelligence community truly is the Deep State.”

https://www.thedailybeast.com/rand-paul-there-are-gop-senators-more-loyal-to-deep-state-than-trump

 
 
 
MUVA
6.2.11  MUVA  replied to  bbl-1 @6.2.9    3 weeks ago

The deep state is the bureaucracy the state department employees that think they make foreign Policy to the appointed special prosecutor to the corrupt Appointed FBI director.

 
 
 
MUVA
6.2.12  MUVA  replied to  Tessylo @6.2.8    3 weeks ago

The deep state is the bureaucracy it isn’t debatable.

 
 
 
Dismayed Patriot
6.2.13  Dismayed Patriot  replied to  MUVA @6.2.12    3 weeks ago
The deep state is the bureaucracy it isn’t debatable

So you and the Republicans want to get rid of the "bureaucracy"? You want everything to go to just whatever anyone feels at the time, no written laws, no procedures, no civil servants dutifully doing their jobs making government function? Shall we go back to just eating raw meat off the carcass too?

The supposed "deep state" that doesn't exist is some fantasy cabal of government officials pulling strings behind the scenes to enact their own agenda. The deep state as described does not exist. If now you're moving the bar to "Well anyone who pushes paper at the State Department or works in civil service and is part of the bureaucracy is the 'deep state' ", then you might as well go buy an island and try starting your own government because we aren't starting over here in America just because a bunch of half wits rage about not being heard and wanting their safe spaces where they can discriminate against gays, liberals and progressives.

 
 
 
Tessylo
6.2.14  Tessylo  replied to  MUVA @6.2.12    3 weeks ago

You're good at parroting other people since obviously you didn't know what you were talking about in the first place 

 
 
 
bbl-1
6.2.15  bbl-1  replied to  MUVA @6.2.11    3 weeks ago

False.  The 'deep state' is the wealth that buys the politicians to serve the deep state.  Kindly stop propagating Putin's anti-democratic anti-American democracy.

 
 
 
Greg Jones
6.3  Greg Jones  replied to  JohnRussell @6    3 weeks ago

The "Steele Dossier" was never verified as being true. If you think so, show us the links and sources.

 
 
 
bbl-1
6.3.1  bbl-1  replied to  Greg Jones @6.3    3 weeks ago

Wrong. The Steel Dossier was never fully vetted to prove whether it was true or false.

 
 
 
bbl-1
7  bbl-1    3 weeks ago

"The Strzok connection?"  Meaning the agent knew and understood that Trump was a liar, cheat, fraud and perhaps was to easily influenced by foreigners with money?

 
 
 
JBB
8  JBB    3 weeks ago

NEWSFLASH - Horowitz CLEARS FBI of Bias in Russia Probe!

 
 
 
JohnRussell
8.1  JohnRussell  replied to  JBB @8    3 weeks ago
Horowitz CLEARS FBI of Bias in Russia Probe!
original
Justice Dept. watchdog finds political bias did not taint top officials running …
Washington Post  · 55m
original
DOJ Watchdog Report to Clear Comey, McCabe of Bias: NYT
The Daily Beast  · 22m
IG Reportedly Expected to Clear James Comey, Andrew McCabe of Claims of Bias Against Trump

An Inspector General report long hyped by allies of President Donald Trump is reportedly expected to …

Mediaite  · 41m
 
 
 
JohnRussell
8.1.1  JohnRussell  replied to  JohnRussell @8.1    3 weeks ago

That didnt exactly reproduce the way I wanted, but you are correct. 

The famed IG investigation has blown up in the right's face. 

 
 
 
JohnRussell
8.1.2  JohnRussell  replied to  JohnRussell @8.1    3 weeks ago

Now we will hear that Horowitz is part of the "deep state" too.  It's inevitable. 

 
 
 
JBB
8.1.3  JBB  replied to  JohnRussell @8.1.1    3 weeks ago

Kinda like that McCabe indictment that never came...

 
 
 
JohnRussell
8.1.4  JohnRussell  replied to  JBB @8.1.3    3 weeks ago

I think Vic needs to recalibrate his timeline, although in fairness the thing McCabe is accused of doing wrong wasnt related to Trump. 

 
 
 
JohnRussell
8.1.5  JohnRussell  replied to  JBB @8.1.3    3 weeks ago

I wonder how many Trumpsters understand that this finding wipes out about 95% of their bitching about the "Russia hoax".  I'm guessing not many. 

 
 
 
Tessylo
8.1.6  Tessylo  replied to  JBB @8.1.3    3 weeks ago

Magic eight ball said he's predicted that the Obama administration would be in deep shit soon due to these investigations and that's what he's been saying all along and now I guess it will be just some other whackjob conspiracy theory 

 
 
 
Greg Jones
8.1.7  Greg Jones  replied to  JohnRussell @8.1.1    3 weeks ago

Wait until it's released. Remember also, that Barr and Durham are just getting started.

 
 
 
bugsy
8.1.8  bugsy  replied to  JohnRussell @8.1    3 weeks ago
Horowitz CLEARS FBI of Bias in Russia Probe!

As I stated in another of your posts where you copied and pasted a portion of the NYT article, it clearly stated that the NTY had not seen to DRAFT and was not sure if there was anything damning in it.

Your whole premise, once again, is based on unnamed sources, where you have never been correct.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
8.1.9  JohnRussell  replied to  bugsy @8.1.8    3 weeks ago

Bugsy newspapers use unnamed sources every day 24/7. 

If you want to wait until the report is released Dec 9th, knock yourself out. 

I seriously doubt the result will be any different. 

 
 
 
bugsy
8.1.10  bugsy  replied to  JohnRussell @8.1.9    3 weeks ago
If you want to wait until the report is released Dec 9th, knock yourself out. 

I already stated earlier I was doing that. No credible sources are reporting this. Only far left wing, and they are all citing the NYT, no independent reporting.

I really hope you are not disappointed on the 9th, John. It may very well send you over the edge.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
8.2  JohnRussell  replied to  JBB @8    3 weeks ago

Where is Vic? I want to buy him a drink. 

 
 
 
 
bugsy
9  bugsy    3 weeks ago

One of the intriguing contradictions between this story and the one that claims the main FBI players in the Russian hoax will be cleared is this...

The media is claiming this lawyer that altered the FISA document is a low level lawyer, but other reports have debunked that claim. It has also been reported that he was fired from the Mueller probe for writing a handful of anti Trump and Pence texts.

Now, contrast this with the MMM claim that the IG report will be a ho hum and all of the main players will be cleared. Not really sure how a "low level" lawyer can be fired over a few texts but Sztrok will be in the clear and shown not biased after many more biased texts, with some claiming a insurance policy if Trump is elected.

Like most controversial subjects, I will sit back and watch what happens, and if the IG deems to harm, no foul, then I will accept it, although I may not agree with it.

Contrast that with liberals screaming at the sky, donning their vagina hats and protesting, or the militant arm of democrats, ANTIFA, and go out in the streets to assault those that don't think like them.

 
 
 
 
bugsy
9.1.1  bugsy  replied to  JBB @9.1    3 weeks ago

OK, fine, the WaPo. Not really surprising as they are just as biased, if not more so than the other outlets I listed. They and the NYT usually parrot each other

What about some down the middle outlets. Any of them report on it?

 
 
 
bugsy
9.1.2  bugsy  replied to  bugsy @9.1.1    3 weeks ago

I see a couple of other outlets have reported on it, like USA Today and the WSJ. What is striking is they all cite the NYT for the report. None are independently confirmed. That is lazy reporting.

Even a link from the NYT says the NYT has never seen the draft, and are relying on "anonymous sources".

 
 
 
The Magic Eight Ball
9.1.3  The Magic Eight Ball  replied to  bugsy @9.1.2    3 weeks ago
Even a link from the NYT says the NYT has never seen the draft, and are relying on "anonymous sources".

just like the term anonymous whistleblower, "anonymous sources" mean it is complete bs.

take it all with a grain of salt until the report is released on the 9th.

the leftwing circular reporting of anonymous bs has not been right yet. 

 
 
 
Greg Jones
9.1.4  Greg Jones  replied to  The Magic Eight Ball @9.1.3    3 weeks ago

If a couple dozen people were in on the call, not sure why they need the whistleblower.

Not one solid punch was landed on Trump in spite of the Dem flailing and lying.

 
 
 
bugsy
9.1.5  bugsy  replied to  Greg Jones @9.1.4    3 weeks ago
If a couple dozen people were in on the call, not sure why they need the whistleblower.

Exactly. Why is it that only 2 people out of better than a dozen that were on the call had a problem with it.

Coincidence that the "whistleblower" and Vindman used the same language to describe what they felt about it? Of course, by Vindman's actions at his hearings, he is the one that fed the info to the "whistleblower/leaker". He said that person had the "right to know". I wonder how much of that is true, considering he knew Schifty Schiff would step in and make sure he did not answer questions concerning who he fed the info to.

 
 
 
Dulay
9.1.6  Dulay  replied to  bugsy @9.1.5    3 weeks ago
Exactly. Why is it that only 2 people out of better than a dozen that were on the call had a problem with it.

Actually, only three testified under oath and ALL THREE had a problem with it, albeit for different reasons. 

He said that person had the "right to know".

That is FALSE. Vindman said that the IC officer that he spoke to had the right to know. 

I wonder how much of that is true, considering he knew Schifty Schiff would step in and make sure he did not answer questions concerning who he fed the info to.

His lawyer spoke up. WATCH the hearing!

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
9.1.7  Vic Eldred  replied to  Dulay @9.1.6    3 weeks ago
Vindman said that the IC officer that he spoke to had the right to know. 

Vindman doesn't get to make that decision. The only person he should have informed was the one he didn't - his superior!  Vindman is insubordinate as well as a leaker. Not what we expect from a military man.

 
 
 
Dulay
9.1.8  Dulay  replied to  Vic Eldred @9.1.7    3 weeks ago
Vindman doesn't get to make that decision.

Actually Vic, he does. His authority requires him to know others designations. 

The only person he should have informed was the one he didn't - his superior! 

His superior was in the room on the call. DO try to keep up. 

Vindman is insubordinate as well as a leaker.

Insubordinate to whom? PROVE IT. 

What did he leak? Link? 

Not what we expect from a military man.

Everything Vindman did is EXACTLY what I expect from a military man. Vindman's oath is to the Constitution, NOT to Trump. 

 
 
 
pat wilson
9.1.9  pat wilson  replied to  Vic Eldred @9.1.7    3 weeks ago
"Not what we expect from a military man."

No ? What about :

Vindman completed the Infantry Officer Basic Course (IOBC) at Fort Benning in 1999 and was sent the next year to South Korea , where he commanded both infantry and an anti-armor platoons . [3] In addition to overseas deployments to South Korea and Germany, Vindman is a combat veteran of the Iraq War , and he served in Iraq from September 2004 to September 2005. [2] In October 2004, [2] he sustained an injury from a roadside bomb in Iraq, for which he received a Purple Heart . [3] He was promoted to the rank of major in 2008, [7] and to lieutenant colonel in September 2015. [8]

During his Army career, Vindman earned the Ranger Tab , Combat Infantryman Badge , Expert Infantryman Badge , and Parachutist Badge , as well as four Army Commendation Medals and two Defense Meritorious Service Medals . [2]

Beginning in 2008, Vindman became a Foreign Area Officer specializing in Eurasia. In this capacity he served in the U.S. embassies in Kiev , Ukraine , and Moscow , Russia . Returning to Washington, D.C. he was then a politico-military affairs officer focused on Russia for the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff . Vindman served on the Joint Staff at the Pentagon from September 2015 to July 2018. [2]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexander_Vindman

What exactly do you expect from a military man ?

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
9.1.10  Vic Eldred  replied to  Dulay @9.1.8    3 weeks ago

 Ratcliffe: Who do you report to? What is your chain of command?

Vindman's lawyer erupted: "I object to that characterization. It's pretty obvious what you're trying to do, sir."

Ratcliffe:                 "Let me ask the question."

Vindman's lawyer:   "I'm representing my witness here, and this is my client. For you, I mean this insinuation, if you guys want to go down this road, God be with you."


Vindman went around the man he should have reported to. That is insubordination and malfeasance, and would normally be punishable under several sections of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ). It won't be in his case.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
9.1.11  Vic Eldred  replied to  pat wilson @9.1.9    3 weeks ago

You seem to think his military record gives him carte blanche to do whatever he wants? Michael Flynn had a distinguished military career and was a Lieutenant General. I didn't see anyone touting his military record when he was accused of lying.

I expect a military man to live up to the tenents of the military as do those who serve:

https://newspunch.com/fellow-soldiers-slam-col-vindman-pushing-coup/

 
 
 
bugsy
9.1.12  bugsy  replied to  Dulay @9.1.6    3 weeks ago
Actually, only three testified under oath and ALL THREE had a problem with it, albeit for different reasons. 

I said ONLY TWO had a problem, and you think you have a gotcha with only three. Reaching?

Vindman does not have the right to grant "right to know". What did he do? Go around and ask the person if he had the right to know? Of course, they guy said "yea", huh?

"His lawyer spoke up. WATCH the hearing"!

They both did. The lawyer could have made his case and Schiff could have stated his decision, but he jumped in AT THE SAME TIME as the lawyer.

You act as if Vindman is free from any type of questioning because of his military background. I can assure you, that with 20 years under my belt, if I was accused of wrongdoing, or just maybe has s

ome info about something, I certainly would be questioned about it, and I would not have someone whine about me being asked about something simply because I was in the military.,

Let me ask you this and see if you can answer honestly. Schiff says he does not know who the whistleblower is. Vindman states the same. If Schiff does not know who that person is, why did he have an issue with Vindman simply give the name of the person he talked to? Why didn't Vindman tell his lawyer that he does not know either way who the whistleblower is, so he is simply giving the name of the person he talked to.

Two points....They both know who the whistleblower is. Vindman and the whistleblower both used the same language, that NOBODY else used, when describing their feelings of the July 25 call. They both used the word "demanded", where no one else did.

Very strong evidence that I am right, as listed above. If true, I hope Vindman is court martialed and booted from the Army with a BCD.

 
 
 
pat wilson
9.1.13  pat wilson  replied to  Vic Eldred @9.1.11    3 weeks ago
You seem to think his military record gives him carte blanche

Where did I say ANYTHING like that ?

His military record is clear evidence of his high level of integrity. That you don't like what he has to say is meaningless.

You can't compare him to Michael Flynn, a convicted felon based on his guilty plea.

 
 
 
Dulay
9.1.14  Dulay  replied to  Vic Eldred @9.1.10    3 weeks ago
Ratcliffe: Who do you report to? What is your chain of command? 

Where are you quoting from Vic?

That wasn't said in either the hearing or the deposition.

Are you making up testimony now Vic? 

Vindman went around the man he should have reported to. That is insubordination and malfeasance, and would normally be punishable under several sections of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ). It won't be in his case.

That is an utter load of bullshit.

Morrison was Vindman's direct report and Morrison was IN THE ROOM. Secondly, Vindman had moral and ethical issues with the call and went to NSC legal.

BTFW, Morrison did EXACTLY the same thing. Morrison didn't go to his direct report, he went directly to NSC legal. Where is your outrage for his actions? 

As an aside, after watching Fiona Hill and Tim Morrison testify, Morrison must have been a YUGE letdown for his subordinates. Talk about a downgrade. 

 
 
 
Dulay
9.1.15  Dulay  replied to  bugsy @9.1.12    3 weeks ago
I said ONLY TWO had a problem, and you think you have a gotcha with only three. Reaching?

Assume much? You cited more than a dozen and I pointed out that only 3 of them testified under oath and all of them had issues with the call. That isn't reaching, that's a fact. 

Vindman does not have the right to grant "right to know". What did he do? Go around and ask the person if he had the right to know? Of course, they guy said "yea", huh?

Vindman is the Director for European Affairs for the United States National Security Council. He KNOWS who has the 'need to know' within his chain of command. Just STOP. 

You act as if Vindman is free from any type of questioning because of his military background.

No I don't. 

I would not have someone whine about me being asked about something simply because I was in the military.

If you and your JAG lawyer had been instructed by the Chair of the inquiry NOT to reply to questions about IC employees, your JAG lawyer sure as hell BETTER jump in and stop you from doing so. 

Let me ask you this and see if you can answer honestly. 

I will answer with an analogy. 

Ever play hangman? You call out letters and take note of what letters match and which letters don't. It's a process of elimination and there are 26 letters to choose from. 

So Vindman doesn't know who the whistleblower is but he knows who in the IC community he spoke to. The same may be true for ALL of the witnesses.

Now the GOP has a list of the people that qualify to file a ICIG whistleblower complaint, who also may have participated in the meetings cited in the complaint. That list could be far shorter that 26 people long. 

All you need do is start throwing out names on that list and eliminating or confirming who talked to whom. Eventually, through process of elimination, you figure out the identity of the whistleblower. 

THAT is why the Chairman refuses to allow ANY questions about specific members of the IC community. 

Two points....They both know who the whistleblower is. 

I believe Schiff AND Vindman. 

Vindman and the whistleblower both used the same language, that NOBODY else used, when describing their feelings of the July 25 call. They both used the word "demanded", where no one else did.

So what? 

Very strong evidence that I am right, as listed above. If true, I hope Vindman is court martialed and booted from the Army with a BCD.

Because Vindman used the word demand and so did the WB?

So you're actually claiming THAT is 'very strong evidence' for a court martial but everything that's been brought to light by the Impeachment inquiry isn't enough to remove Trump?

Wow, if that doesn't illustrate bias I don't know what does. 

 
 
 
bugsy
9.1.16  bugsy  replied to  Dulay @9.1.15    3 weeks ago

Look. I get it. You are thrashing because you know the outcome you are hoping and "praying" for is not going to happen. The only thing that makes you happy is that your little liberal buddies in Congress made it clear during the 2018 mid terms that they were running to impeach the President, and they probably will keep that promise in the House. What pisses you off is you know the Senate sees through Schiff charade and will not remove this President. Even Independents are seeing the farce for what it is.

I'm not going to respond to you point by point, because it will be a waste of time and you will continue to spin. However, what I said was true. You just don't want to admit it.

Joe and Hunter Biden are now being looked at thoroughly and that could be the true bribery you are so hoping is going to remove the president. You also know Vindman and Schiff both know who the whistleblower is or else neither would have objections to naming the person Vindman spoke to. Vindman is in a world of crap when it comes out he is the informant for the whistleblower. You know the whistleblower did not have the need to know because he was not on the call and if you knew anything about how the military or the government works, you would know that if you were not a part of something, you did not have the need to know about it.

Trump will be your President for 5 more years, no matter how many libs cry, scream at the sky, assault people, or insult supporters of the President. As a matter of fact, the more they do it, the more of a landslide the President and, we the supports, will have next year.

You just have to accept it.

 
 
 
The Magic Eight Ball
9.1.17  The Magic Eight Ball  replied to  Dulay @9.1.15    3 weeks ago
everything that's been brought to light by the Impeachment inquiry isn't enough to remove Trump?

that, is a fact.

 
 
 
WallyW
9.1.18  WallyW  replied to  The Magic Eight Ball @9.1.17    3 weeks ago
Anything other than  impeachment AND removal will be devastating to the Democrats
afb112219dAPR20191122054509.jpg
 
 
 
WallyW
9.1.19  WallyW  replied to  WallyW @9.1.18    3 weeks ago

jrSmiley_100_smiley_image.jpg

 
 
 
Dulay
9.1.20  Dulay  replied to  bugsy @9.1.16    3 weeks ago
Look. I get it.

You're supercilious comments haver proven over and over again that you don't. 

 
 
 
Dulay
9.1.21  Dulay  replied to  Vic Eldred @9.1.11    3 weeks ago
You seem to think his military record gives him carte blanche to do whatever he wants? 

You seem to think you have carte blanche to gaslight members of NT. 

Michael Flynn had a distinguished military career and was a Lieutenant General. I didn't see anyone touting his military record when he was accused of lying.

Trump stated that Flynn of lied:

“I had to fire General Flynn because he lied to the Vice President and the FBI. He has pled guilty to those lies,” Trump said on Twitter while he was in New York for a fundraising trip. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-russia-flynn-idUSKBN1DW0HK
 
 
 
bugsy
9.1.22  bugsy  replied to  Dulay @9.1.20    3 weeks ago
You're supercilious comments haver proven over and over again that you don't. 

Your opinion...and it's usually wrong.

 
 
 
Dulay
9.1.23  Dulay  replied to  The Magic Eight Ball @9.1.17    3 weeks ago

The fact that you need to truncate my comment makes your reply intellectually dishonest. 

 
 
 
Dulay
9.1.24  Dulay  replied to  Vic Eldred @9.1.10    2 weeks ago
Ratcliffe: Who do you report to? What is your chain of command? 

I take from your silence that you have no intention of admitting that you fabricated that 'quote'. 

IMHO, it's pretty fucking sad to have to make up shit out of whole cloth when you can't make a real argument. You've made multiple allegations against Vindman and the only 'evidence' you offer is fabricated. 

You're credibility meter is bottoming out. 

Disgusting. 

 
 
 
XDm9mm
9.1.25  XDm9mm  replied to  Dulay @9.1.24    2 weeks ago
Ratcliffe: Who do you report to? What is your chain of command? 
I take from your silence that you have no intention of admitting that you fabricated that 'quote'. 

I'll provide the answer for Vic, as someone is obviously too lazy to do his own search, not mentioning names of course.

Seek and ye shall find:

https://www.scribd.com/document/434064258/Vindman-pdf

 
 
 
XDm9mm
9.1.26  XDm9mm  replied to  bugsy @9.1.16    2 weeks ago
Look. I get it. You are thrashing because you know the outcome you are hoping and "praying" for is not going to happen.

I'm wondering if heads can literally explode as in the Kingsman movie.   They will be splattering ickky stuff all over the place in November 2020 when Trump wins re-election.

 
 
 
Dulay
9.1.27  Dulay  replied to  XDm9mm @9.1.25    2 weeks ago
I'll provide the answer for Vic, as someone is obviously too lazy to do his own search, not mentioning names of course.

Really XD? Tell you what, cite the page # from that pdf where Radcliff asked those two questions. 


Oh fuck it, I'm done giving you and your fellow travelers the opportunity to redeemed yourselves.  

Vic bailed and instead of doing YOUR due diligence, you chose to infer that I was too lazy to do the research. 

Yet here's the thing XD, before I replied to Vic, I searched BOTH Vindman's deposition AND the transcript of the open hearing testimony and it DOES NOT EXIST.

Vic just made that shit up and you swilled the pabulum he served up. You've been gaslighted and you know who you can thank for it. 

 
 
Loading...
Loading...

Who is online





29 visitors