Criminal Inquiry launched into the origins of the Trump-Russia investigation

notobtuse · 09-12-2019 3:41pm

Cody montana wrote: »

Any predictions??

Hopefully we'll know later today. But the Durham report is the big one. I speculate Horowitz will try to play the peacemaker in his report and will probably try to save the FBI’s reputation in their roll on spying of the Trump campaign... and merely report on serious lapses in judgment. He might also shift blame onto others… former political appointees. I don’t think Barr will have enough from the Horowitz report to issue indictments... as that will be left for when the Durham report comes out.

Cody montana · 09-12-2019 7:13pm

"Breaking #FoxNews Alert : Long-awaited IG report finds mistakes but no political bias in FBI’s bid to spy on Trump campaign staffer"

Next time, definitely next time.

notobtuse · 09-12-2019 7:27pm

Cody montana wrote: »

"Breaking #FoxNews Alert : Long-awaited IG report finds mistakes but no political bias in FBI’s bid to spy on Trump campaign staffer"

Next time, definitely next time.

Yeah, no political bias but all the FBI top officials were complete morons. Anybody believe this... I have a bridge in NYC to sell you.

You see the problem is not in identifying political bias, but proving it in a court of law.

Igotadose · 09-12-2019 7:32pm

notobtuse wrote: »

Yeah, no political bias but all the FBI top officials were complete morons. Anybody believe this... I have a bridge in NYC to sell you.

You see the problem is not in identifying political bias, but proving it in a court of law.

So, that's GOP speak for 'Yet another trumpeted investigation by the GOP finding nothing.' Benghazi: Nothing. Horowitz: Nothing.
Ukraine interference in the 2016 election: Nothing.

I could go on. But, popcorn at the ready for the Durham report, surely the GOP witch hunters have to finally turn up something, amiright?

After all that taxpayer money spent and all.

notobtuse · 09-12-2019 7:56pm

Igotadose wrote: »

So, that's GOP speak for 'Yet another trumpeted investigation by the GOP finding nothing.' Benghazi: Nothing. Horowitz: Nothing.
Ukraine interference in the 2016 election: Nothing.

I could go on. But, popcorn at the ready for the Durham report, surely the GOP witch hunters have to finally turn up something, amiright?

After all that taxpayer money spent and all.

Explain to me WHY Peter Strzok, Lisa Page and others were removed from the FBI and/or Mueller’s investigative team and then explain to me how anyone in their right mind can say no political bias. I admire Horowitz, but something tells me he had ‘for the good of the country’ in mind when he wrote the report.

Cody montana · 09-12-2019 8:20pm

notobtuse wrote: »

Yeah, no political bias but all the FBI top officials were complete morons. Anybody believe this... I have a bridge in NYC to sell you.

You see the problem is not in identifying political bias, but proving it in a court of law.

A bad day for conspiracies theories.
Definitely next time though.

Billy Mays · 09-12-2019 8:28pm

notobtuse · 09-12-2019 8:31pm

Cody montana wrote: »

A bad day for conspiracies theories.
Definitely next time though.

I haven’t read the report. Did they identify the FBI lawyer who manipulated a key investigative document that was critical to the FBI's secretive surveillance FISA application on the Trump campaign, and who this lawyer worked for?

Igotadose · 09-12-2019 8:36pm

notobtuse wrote: »

Explain to me WHY Peter Strzok, Lisa Page and others were removed from the FBI and/or Mueller’s investigative team and then explain to me how anyone in their right mind can say no political bias. I admire Horowitz, but something tells me he had ‘for the good of the country’ in mind when he wrote the report.

So, is Horowitz not in his right mind? Or is it just denial - another GOP investigation, another waste of taxpayer $$, and no results that match your expectations?

What Horowitz concluded is the investigation was legitimate, and the application for the FISA permits to monitor Carter Page was legitimate, too. The Carter Page surveillance didn't lead to conviction for Page - isn't US justice great that way. The investigation has borne tremendous fruit - lots of Trump's campaign and inner circle in jail, and latest is the Obstruction charges in the Mueller report will end up as one of the articles of impeachment.

notobtuse · 09-12-2019 8:50pm

Igotadose wrote: »

So, is Horowitz not in his right mind? Or is it just denial - another GOP investigation, another waste of taxpayer $$, and no results that match your expectations?

What Horowitz concluded is the investigation was legitimate, and the application for the FISA permits to monitor Carter Page was legitimate, too. The Carter Page surveillance didn't lead to conviction for Page - isn't US justice great that way. The investigation has borne tremendous fruit - lots of Trump's campaign and inner circle in jail, and latest is the Obstruction charges in the Mueller report will end up as one of the articles of impeachment.

I see from reports that Horowitz concluded the information passed to the FBI about George Papadopoulos met the low bar to launch Operation Crossfire Hurricane. LOW BAR to launch an operation into spying on the GOP presidential candidate. Low bar is no bar at this level. The only reason for launching a spying operation, based on known faulty data, into the man who would be president can only be political bias.

And Horowitz wondered why the DOJ didn’t think to develop more stringent standards when it comes to dealing with high-profile federal election campaigns. Anyone with half a brain can figure that out… Political Bias!

And Update...
https://twitter.com/ryanjreilly/status/1204105392646737921/photo/1

Seems Durham disagrees with Horowitz and will reach a completely different conclusion. And I believe Horowitz can't indict but Durham can, and Durham's report carries much more weight if there were to be indictments, than does Horowitz.

Horowitz now wants to audit ALL of the FISA warrant processes at the FBI. I guess the FBI better hope they find as many glaring problems in other FISA applications or it sure as hellfire would look to be political bias regarding Trump.

MadYaker · 10-12-2019 3:50am

Anyone without a biased viewpoint knew that this was the most likely outcome. Same for the Durham report. Durham even showing his own bias by releasing that statement.

notobtuse · 10-12-2019 4:20pm

MadYaker wrote: »

Anyone without a biased viewpoint knew that this was the most likely outcome. Same for the Durham report. Durham even showing his own bias by releasing that statement.

There is no such thing as an unbiased viewpoint regarding US politics, but there are things called common sense and reason.

Yes, this was the most likely outcome because Horowitz had no right to subpoena, and currently, most of the people who conducted the abuse have been fired and were out of the purview of the Inspector General. So why bother having an investigation if he can only take on face value the lies that were told him?

But the IG report did find that 'officials lied and omitted helpful information to Trump campaign officials who were being spied on but couldn’t determine if the malfeasance was politically motivated?' I guess Horowitz would have determined ducks don’t swim.

But Bill Barr was quick to bring us back into the real world with…

The Inspector General’s report now makes clear that the FBI launched an intrusive investigation of a U.S. presidential campaign on the thinnest of suspicions that, in my view, were insufficient to justify the steps taken. It is also clear that, from its inception, the evidence produced by the investigation was consistently exculpatory. Nevertheless, the investigation and surveillance was pushed forward for the duration of the campaign and deep into President Trump’s administration. In the rush to obtain and maintain FISA surveillance of Trump campaign associates, FBI officials misled the FISA court, omitted critical exculpatory facts from their filings, and suppressed or ignored information negating the reliability of their principal source. …[T]he malfeasance and misfeasance detailed in the Inspector General’s report reflects a clear abuse of the FISA process.

Durham, who is in charge of another and related investigation also quickly issued a statement…

Based on the evidence collected to date, and while our investigation is ongoing, last month we advised the Inspector General that we do not agree with some of the report’s conclusions as to predication and how the FBI case was opened.

My guess is the Durham investigation is the main reason why the Democrats are rushing the impeachment process in order to get ahead of the damning news of their lawbreaking actions in the 2016 election. They are even trying to change the Constitution in their impeachment process.

They’ve changed the standard of impeachment to fit their narrative. Committee Chairman Nadler wrote that grounds for impeachable offenses in the Nixon and Clinton eras “remain useful points of reference, but no longer reflect the best available learning on questioning relating to presidential impeachment.” Translation… We have no evidence for legitimate grounds of impeachment so we’re changing the rules! Also, they are impeaching Trump not actually based on wrongdoings (that they have no proof of), but because they need to “save the Nation” from Trump remaining in office and who would win the 2020 election if Democrats don’t save us ignorant bastards. This is not the standard for any legal proceeding in the US. Democrats have become the tyrants they pretend they are fighting against. This Democrat run impeachment kangaroo court is an attempt to overthrow the Constitution and rule of law.

The key players in this soft coup (Pelosi, Shiff, Nadler, Obama and his political appointees) should probably be brought up on charges of treason, or at a minimum crimes against our nation and a underhanded coup scheme to oust a duly elected president merely for political reasons.

notobtuse · 10-12-2019 6:49pm

Regardless, a big win for Nunes who first blew open the FISA abuses. So Nunes was telling the truth and Shiff was lying… as usual. Shiff should be removed from Congress… ASAP!

https://twitter.com/KimStrassel/status/1204200899133919232

James Brown · 10-12-2019 7:44pm

notobtuse wrote: »

Regardless, a big win for Nunes who first blew open the FISA abuses. So Nunes was telling the truth and Shiff was lying… as usual. Shiff should be removed from Congress… ASAP!

https://twitter.com/KimStrassel/status/1204200899133919232

Maybe we should have Trump removed for lying? I mean if that's the bar? Is it only some lies or certain kinds of lies?

notobtuse · 10-12-2019 10:06pm

Matt Barrett wrote: »

Maybe we should have Trump removed for lying? I mean if that's the bar? Is it only some lies or certain kinds of lies?

Most of the Trump so-called 'lies' are often his opinion and stretches of the truth... mostly campaign type things all politicians do. Shiff's lies are dangerous and meant to actually hurt people.

Cody montana · 10-12-2019 10:24pm

notobtuse wrote: »

Most of the Trump so-called 'lies' are often his opinion and stretches of the truth... mostly campaign type things all politicians do. Shiff's lies are dangerous and meant to actually hurt people.

So lies.

notobtuse · 11-12-2019 3:41pm

Cody montana wrote: »

So lies.

No. Stretches of the truth in politics is not considered lies.

As for Trumps lies, one example is our lovely biased leftist controlled ‘fact checker’ organizations labeled Trump’s claim of Ukrainian interference in the 2016 election as a lie.

The facts are Ukraine most certainly did interfere in the US 2016. Unfortunately their preferred candidate didn’t win.

So with this available information how can the biased fact checkers declare it a Trump lie? At most it is a matter of debatable opinion. But lie sounds so much better for those suffering from DTS, right?

https://thehill.com/opinion/campaign/435029-as-russia-collusion-fades-ukrainian-plot-to-help-clinton-emerges

Overheal · 11-12-2019 4:10pm

notobtuse wrote: »

No. Stretches of the truth in politics is not considered lies.

As for Trumps lies, one example is our lovely biased leftist controlled ‘fact checker’ organizations labeled Trump’s claim of Ukrainian interference in the 2016 election as a lie.

The facts are Ukraine most certainly did interfere in the US 2016. Unfortunately their preferred candidate didn’t win.

So with this available information how can the biased fact checkers declare it a Trump lie? At most it is a matter of debatable opinion. But lie sounds so much better for those suffering from DTS, right?

https://thehill.com/opinion/campaign/435029-as-russia-collusion-fades-ukrainian-plot-to-help-clinton-emerges

John Solomon Lol oh geez

Igotadose · 11-12-2019 5:28pm

notobtuse wrote: »

As for Trumps lies, one example is our lovely biased leftist controlled ‘fact checker’ organizations labeled Trump’s claim of Ukrainian interference in the 2016 election as a lie.

That'd be the NSC, right? Where Fiona Hill worked? Who recently said, under oath to Congress:
“This is a fictional narrative that has been perpetrated and propagated by the Russian security services themselves.”

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/nov/21/trump-impeachment-inquiry-fiona-hill-david-holmes-testimony

The facts are Ukraine most certainly did interfere in the US 2016.

If you believe that, I've a bridge between Manhattan and Brooklyn to sell you.

Overheal · 11-12-2019 7:42pm

Igotadose wrote: »

That'd be the NSC, right? Where Fiona Hill worked? Who recently said, under oath to Congress:
“This is a fictional narrative that has been perpetrated and propagated by the Russian security services themselves.”

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/nov/21/trump-impeachment-inquiry-fiona-hill-david-holmes-testimony

If you believe that, I've a bridge between Manhattan and Brooklyn to sell you.

He could also mean the likes of Politifact and WaPo - as if there is some Force preventing a 'conservative fact-checker' from emerging. I have yet, regrettably, to see a reputable one emerge.

mcmoustache · 11-12-2019 8:01pm

notobtuse wrote: »

The key players in this soft coup (Pelosi, Shiff, Nadler, Obama and his political appointees) should probably be brought up on charges of treason, or at a minimum crimes against our nation and a underhanded coup scheme to oust a duly elected president merely for political reasons.

There's a lot of nonsense in that post but the one that takes the biscuit is that you consider an action by the Dems that could end with a Republican president to be a coup. Seriously, what kind of coup puts the opposition in charge? It completely defeats the purpose of a coup. You should look up what a coup is to give yourself some idea of what it is that you're talking about.

mcmoustache · 11-12-2019 8:05pm

notobtuse wrote: »

Regardless, a big win for Nunes who first blew open the FISA abuses. So Nunes was telling the truth and Shiff was lying… as usual. Shiff should be removed from Congress… ASAP!

https://twitter.com/KimStrassel/status/1204200899133919232

Nunes sponsored the FISA reauthorisation of 2017. FISA has always had a low bar and civil libertarians have complained about if for a long time. The republicans could have done something about it but for some reason, chose not to.

notobtuse · 12-12-2019 5:43pm

mcmoustache wrote: »

There's a lot of nonsense in that post but the one that takes the biscuit is that you consider an action by the Dems that could end with a Republican president to be a coup. Seriously, what kind of coup puts the opposition in charge? It completely defeats the purpose of a coup. You should look up what a coup is to give yourself some idea of what it is that you're talking about.

The FBI both knowingly and fraudulently obtained warrants to spy on the Trump campaign. An FBI lawyer even doctored an email to trick the FISA court into authorizing spying on the Trump campaign. The FBI used the fraudulent Steele dossier as their “central and essential” justification in its wiretap operation of Trump campaign aide Carter Page and therefore communications with other campaign personnel. The FBI knew the dossier was written by a discredited former British spy and had been paid for by Hillary Clinton’s campaign, and also knew there were significant troubles with its reliability... yet never told the court any of this. IG Horowitz’s testimony confirms the Russia-collusion hoax amounted to an attempted coup against Trump and laid the groundwork for impeachment. This is the biggest crime our nation has ever seen.

12-12-2019 6:10pm

notobtuse wrote: »

Shiff was lying… as usual. Shiff should be removed from Congress… ASAP!

notobtuse wrote: »

Most of the Trump so-called 'lies' are often his opinion and stretches of the truth....

The mental gymnastics are actually staggering. I can understand poor, uneducated, disenfranchised middle Americans with little to no prospects voting for someone as odious as DJT and his promises. the fact he has a fanclub this side of the Atlantic is actually baffling to me.

notobtuse · 12-12-2019 6:44pm

Deleted User wrote: »

The mental gymnastics are actually staggering. I can understand poor, uneducated, disenfranchised middle Americans with little to no prospects voting for someone as odious as DJT and his promises. the fact he has a fanclub this side of the Atlantic is actually baffling to me.

Apparently Trump Derangement Syndrome has also spread to that side of the Atlantic.

Billy Mays · 12-12-2019 7:26pm

notobtuse wrote: »

The FBI both knowingly and fraudulently obtained warrants to spy on the Trump campaign. An FBI lawyer even doctored an email to trick the FISA court into authorizing spying on the Trump campaign. The FBI used the fraudulent Steele dossier as their “central and essential” justification in its wiretap operation of Trump campaign aide Carter Page and therefore communications with other campaign personnel. The FBI knew the dossier was written by a discredited former British spy and had been paid for by Hillary Clinton’s campaign, and also knew there were significant troubles with its reliability... yet never told the court any of this. IG Horowitz’s testimony confirms the Russia-collusion hoax amounted to an attempted coup against Trump and laid the groundwork for impeachment. This is the biggest crime our nation has ever seen.

I can think of at least two bigger ones

notobtuse · 12-12-2019 7:35pm

Billy Mays wrote: »

I can think of at least two bigger ones

Nope, it’s even bigger than the assassination of Abraham Lincoln and a second term for Barack Obama.

Igotadose · 12-12-2019 7:39pm

notobtuse wrote: »

Nope, it’s even bigger than the assassination of Abraham Lincoln and a second term for Barack Obama.

Derangement indeed.

I'd suggest you stop obsessing about the black guy. That might fly in the US but not so much here. He won both elections handily. You're unhappy with the results - well, too bad. Get over it. to quote the current acting CoS.

notobtuse · 12-12-2019 8:30pm

Igotadose wrote: »

Derangement indeed.

I'd suggest you stop obsessing about the black guy. That might fly in the US but not so much here. He won both elections handily. You're unhappy with the results - well, too bad. Get over it. to quote the current acting CoS.

I thought Obama was half white. Yes I'm unhappy with him being elected a second term after such a disastrous first term, but I accepted him as president and didn't want him impeached merely because he won... unlike Democrats of today.

notobtuse · 13-12-2019 3:18pm

So there we have it… The FBI, under the Obama administration, became a political weapon and falsified documents in order to get legal permission to launch an investigation and spy on a Republican presidential campaign. And the media abandoned their journalistic integrity and turned a blind eye to the truth in order to cheer every illegal and underhanded tactic of the Democrats.

And the Democrats are impeaching Trump to provide cover for their own illegal malfeasance? Nothing more really needs to be said.

Just imagine what will come out in the Durham report. I hope our jails are big enough to house all the criminals involved in this... As long as our justice system doesn’t decide to turn a blind eye to all the corruption and illegal actions for ‘the good on the nation,' that is.

13-12-2019 3:53pm

notobtuse wrote: »

So there we have it…the criminal inquiry launched into the origins of the Trump-Russia investigation found that the investigation was justified and there was no bias found.

Fixed that there for you.

notobtuse · 13-12-2019 4:15pm

Deleted User wrote: »

Fixed that there for you.

Barr and Durham would beg to differ.

13-12-2019 4:36pm

Of course Barr would, he's a sock puppet who basically whored himself and his relatives out for the post in the first place. Durham, of course, is his own appointee so it's no surprise he's backing him up.

Nevertheless, his own department found that the investigation into the POTUS was legitimate and not borne out of any political motivation. Let that sink in. The Department of Justice found that there was reasonable suspicion that the Trump campaign conspired with a hostile foreign power to help his side win an election.

notobtuse · 13-12-2019 4:46pm

Deleted User wrote: »

Of course Barr would, he's a sock puppet who basically whored himself and his relatives out for the post in the first place. Durham, of course, is his own appointee so it's no surprise he's backing him up.

Nevertheless, his own department found that the investigation into the POTUS was legitimate and not borne out of any political motivation. Let that sink in. The Department of Justice found that there was reasonable suspicion that the Trump campaign conspired with a hostile foreign power to help his side win an election.

Doubling down on dumbassery is not a good look.

13-12-2019 5:18pm

I agree..... For once.

But let's face facts here. If the IG report stated that the investigation was unwarranted, you'd be shouting from the rooftops that the DOJ was a competent authority and should be listened to. Instead, you get to just dismiss it because it didn't come up with the answer you wanted and call anyone who disagrees a dumbass. Farcical. It's intellectually dishonest and like trying to debate with a 5 year old.

If the Durham investigation says the same, will you admit defeat?

notobtuse · 13-12-2019 5:57pm

Deleted User wrote: »

I agree..... For once.

But let's face facts here. If the IG report stated that the investigation was unwarranted, you'd be shouting from the rooftops that the DOJ was a competent authority and should be listened to. Instead, you get to just dismiss it because it didn't come up with the answer you wanted and call anyone who disagrees a dumbass. Farcical. It's intellectually dishonest and like trying to debate with a 5 year old.

If the Durham investigation says the same, will you admit defeat?

Yes I will. I doubt you would do the same.

Use your brain, man... If once is happenstance, twice is coincidence, and three times is enemy action... Then seventeen times has got to be political bias or a non-military coup, take your pick.

Too much outside the purview of Horwwitz... not so with Barr and Durham. Horowitz could only take the word of those biased individuals he interviewed, which was not everyone involved... Upstanding men and women, I’m sure. :rolleyes:

Look at the messages from Peter Strzok and tell me how in the world anyone can determine there was no political bias. And by the way... he was fired for his anti-Trump texts. Call me crazy but anti-Trump texts kinda leads one to believe there was political bias.

MadYaker · 13-12-2019 6:40pm

You’ll just rubbish the Durham report as well when that says the same thing. I guess you must be young and have never watched any real coups happening (they don’t normally involve the use of laws set down in a constitution and due legal process)

notobtuse · 13-12-2019 7:23pm

MadYaker wrote: »

You’ll just rubbish the Durham report as well when that says the same thing. I guess you must be young and have never watched any real coups happening (they don’t normally involve the use of laws set down in a constitution and due legal process)

Not all coups are by military force. And the law and Constitution doesn’t allow for the FBI to alter documents in order to support a political agenda and obtain an illegal FISA warrant to spy on a political campaign and then an attempt to oust a duly elected president. Even my kids know this… so should you.

James Brown · 13-12-2019 7:38pm

notobtuse wrote: »

Not all coups are by military force. And the law and Constitution doesn’t allow for the FBI to alter documents in order to support a political agenda and obtain an illegal FISA warrant to spy on a political campaign and then an attempt to oust a duly elected president. Even my kids know this… so should you.

Japers I pop in now and then. This is Dr. Strangelove farcical.

Trump is the one who initiated and consistently calls into question the loyalty and ethics of national intelligence, the CIA and FBI while bragging he knows better than the generals and asking Russia and China for support against political allies, that's not even touching the Ukraine thing. He also accused the then President of lying and not being a US citizen. So please tell us about your coup? :rolleyes:

notobtuse · 13-12-2019 7:40pm

Matt Barrett wrote: »

Japers I pop in now and then. This is Dr. Strangelove farcical.

Trump is the one who initiated and consistently calls into question the loyalty and ethics of national intelligence, the CIA and FBI while bragging he knows better than the generals and asking Russia and China for support against political allies, that's not even touching the Ukraine thing. He also accussed the then President of lying and not being a US citizen. So please tell us about your coup?

You're wrong, but regardless, what has this got to do with my comment?

notobtuse · 13-12-2019 9:32pm

On a positive note (well positive for truth, justice and the American way, anyway) the Horowitz report did reveal a scandal of historic proportions. And it has nothing to do with the FBI’s lying to deceive the FISA court, its concealment of evidence, and their manipulation of documents in order to spy on a US citizen and campaign during a presidential election. It has to do with what the US mainstream media has claimed (under the guise of ‘reporting’) about all of the matters associated with Trump regarding Russia/Obstruction/Ukraine over the last three years… fed by Obama’s political operatives in the FBI, DOJ, CIA, DOD and State Department, of which have now been determined to be completely false. The media let Democrats do the reporting for them and merely served as lowly scribes. I wonder if the media will have the decency to give back all their Pulitzer Prizes over the last three years for stories written with information obtained via biased politicians, anonymous sources, and uncorroborated stories from Deep State operatives (aka Democrats)? Don’t hold your breath! Sadly, I fear credibility in US journalism will never be restored after this.

14-12-2019 1:14am

So the part that outlines the above is gospel, but the part that says the investigation was properly warranted is a load of bollocks?

Riiiiiiight.

Must be handy, going around cherrypicking the bits and pieces of info that support your view and dismissing the rest as fake conspiracy nonsense.

notobtuse · 16-12-2019 3:50pm

Deleted User wrote: »

So the part that outlines the above is gospel, but the part that says the investigation was properly warranted is a load of bollocks?

Riiiiiiight.

Must be handy, going around cherrypicking the bits and pieces of info that support your view and dismissing the rest as fake conspiracy nonsense.

You must have missed the point where Horowitz testified he could not rule out political bias as a possible motivation for the 17 errors the FBI made in applications for the Page surveillance. Unfortunately, much of the needed data to make an informed decision was outside Horowitz’s purview, but that is not the case in Durham’s investigation. That is why Durham quickly released a statement… “Based on the evidence collected to date, and while our investigation is ongoing, last month we advised the inspector general that we do not agree with some of the report’s conclusions as to predication and how the FBI case was opened,". That's not cherrypicking... those are the facts.

notobtuse · 17-12-2019 9:03pm

I wonder if any of this came from Barr’s recent overseas trips regarding his investigation? According to reporting by John Soloman:

As the U.S. presidential race began roaring to life in 2016, authorities in the former Soviet republic of Latvia flagged a series of “ suspicious” financial transactions to Hunter Biden and other colleagues at a Ukrainian natural gas company and sought Kiev’s help investigating, according to documents and interviews.

The Feb. 18, 2016 alert to Ukraine came from the Latvian prosecutorial agency responsible for investigating money laundering, and it specifically questioned whether Vice President Joe Biden’s younger son and three other officials at Burisma Holdings were the potential beneficiaries of suspect funds.

“The Office for Prevention of Laundering of Proceeds Derived from Criminal Activity … is currently investigating suspicious activity of Burisma Holdings Limited,” the Latvian agency also known as the FIU wrote Ukraine’s financial authorities.

The memo was released to me by the Ukrainian General Prosecutor’s Office and confirmed by the Latvian embassy to the United States.

Hmmm…. Seems Trump DID have reason to be concerned about what the Bidens had been doing regarding Ukraine. I know Democrats are trying to impeach Trump for the very things it appears Joe Biden actually did by threats. But in Trump’s case... it’s called “Doing his job.”

So I guess now Latvia is helping Trump smear his political rival. I hear Pelosi, Nadler and Shiff are investigating whether they can impeach Latvia.

18-12-2019 5:56pm

notobtuse wrote: »

You must have missed the point where Horowitz testified he could not rule out political bias as a possible motivation for the 17 errors the FBI made in applications for the Page surveillance. Unfortunately, much of the needed data to make an informed decision was outside Horowitz’s purview, but that is not the case in Durham’s investigation.

[snip]

That's not cherrypicking... those are the facts.

You are 100% cherry-picking the bits that you like while glossing over the other facts and findings. You're also being disingenuous with the truth here. The report "identified there were 17 significant inaccuracies or omissions in applications for a warrant from the Fisa court". That's a big difference to your statement that "Horowitz testified he could not rule out political bias as a motivation for 17 significant....."

You also neglect to mention that the report states:

The FBI had an "authorized purpose" to launch the Russia investigation.
The FBI did not use the so-called Steele dossier to start the probe as it was received by the feds after the probe was launched
There is no "documentary or testimonial evidence that political bias or improper motivation influenced the decisions to open the four individual investigations" into the Trump campaign aides George Papadopoulos and Carter Page, former national security adviser Michael Flynn, and former Trump campaign Chairman Paul Manafort.
There is no "documentary or testimonial evidence that political bias or improper motivation influenced the FBI's decision to seek FISA authority on Carter Page."
The report uncovered several pro-Trump text messages exchanged between two FBI employees on November 9, 2016, the day after Trump won the election - Hardly political bias against the great Orange one

Source: PDF of the report as issued

Overheal · 19-12-2019 1:45pm

notobtuse wrote: »

Nope, it’s even bigger than the assassination of Abraham Lincoln and a second term for Barack Obama.

BAHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHHAAAAA

notobtuse · 19-12-2019 5:35pm

Deleted User wrote: »

You are 100% cherry-picking the bits that you like while glossing over the other facts and findings. You're also being disingenuous with the truth here. The report "identified there were 17 significant inaccuracies or omissions in applications for a warrant from the Fisa court". That's a big difference to your statement that "Horowitz testified he could not rule out political bias as a motivation for 17 significant....."

You also neglect to mention that the report states:

Source: PDF of the report as issued

Bull$hit! Use your god given brain, man, and stop taking the word of our Trump hating media as gospel. Yeah, our biased media has fed us a false narrative that Horowitz’s report found no evidence of political bias, but it's lies. Lies because he actually did discover political bias, but he wasn't tasked with making a determination on intent. And even though he couldn’t make a determination on intent he did testify that evidence of political bias was found.

Senator Johnson (R-Wisc.), "But you definitely — in both these investigations, you found political bias?"

Horowitz replied, "We found through the text messages evidence of people’s political bias, correct."

He also said the FBI’s explanations for their errors were not credible:

Senator Hawley: "They were competent enough to deliberately mislead the FISA court, to change submissions to the FISA court, to alter emails. It doesn’t sound like they’re very stupid to me. What's the explanation? Why over time, why would all of these people. four times over the space of half a year, deliberately mislead a federal court?"

Horowitz: "So we ultimately make — we don’t make a conclusion as to the intent here. So I want to be clear about that... There are so many errors, we couldn’t reach a conclusion or make a determination on what motivated those failures other than we did not credit what we lay out here were the explanations we got.

Then, regarding the explanations given by the FBI for the deceptive applications for the FISA warrants:

Horowitz said, "we didn’t find any of the explanations particularly satisfactory." "I can’t tell you as I sit here whether it was gross incompetence, and I think with the volume of errors you could make an argument that that would be a hard sell... I can think of plenty of motivations that could have caused that to occur."

There was also the FBI attorney who doctored records in order to get the FISA warrant extended. Horowitz said he had an obvious anti-Trump bias.

Senator Rand Paul: “But could you then specifically say the opposite, that actually in this instance there actually was evidence of political bias and evidence of record-changing that looks like malfeasance?”

Horowitz: “There is evidence of both, I agree with you.”

Those are the facts, bub!

The Democrats have waged war with this and the impeachment nonsense. The Republicans in the House should use the Democrats playbook and impeach Joe Biden for doing what the Dems accuse Trump of doing. And they wouldn’t have to pay for some bogus dossier on him... just use his own words on tape. Impeachment wouldn’t remove Joe from any office but it would keep him from holding any future high office. The Democrats should reap what they sowed.

Outlaw Pete · 23-01-2020 11:46pm

Update: At least two of the FISA renewals were UNLAWFUL:

Spy Court Admits FISA Warrants Against Carter Page Were ‘Not Valid’

Judge James Boasberg, the current federal judge presiding over the FISA court, wrote in his order that at least two of the four FISA applications against Carter Page were unlawfully authorized. Additionally, according his order, the Department of Justice similarly concluded following the release of a sprawling investigate report on the matter by the agency’s inspector general that the government did not have probable cause that Page was acting as an agent of a foreign power. The FISA law states that American citizens cannot be secretly spied on by the U.S. government absent probable cause, based on valid evidence, that an American is unlawfully acting as a foreign agent.

“DOJ assesses that with respect to the applications in Docket Numbers 17-375 and 17-679, ‘if not earlier, there was insufficient predication to establish probable cause to believe that [Carter] Page was acting as an agent of a foreign power,'” Boasberg wrote, referring to the final two of the four FISA applications to spy on Page. “The Court understands the government to have concluded, in view of the material misstatements and omissions, that the Court’s authorizations in Docket Numbers 17-375 and 17-679 were not valid.”

Boasberg’s ruling noted that DOJ had not yet taken a position on the lawfulness of the first two applications against Page, but was currently collecting information to assess whether those two spy applications were also invalid. The invalid applications specified by Boasberg were dated April 7 and June 29 of 2017. The false and invalid April 7 application was personally signed by James Comey, while the false and invalid June 29 application was signed by Andrew McCabe. Both men were referred for criminal prosecution by the inspector general. Former deputy attorney general Rod Rosenstein, who is alleged to have offered to wear a wire against President Donald Trump, also signed off on the false June 29 FISA warrant against Page.

Still all just a conspiracy theory?

Outlaw Pete · 24-01-2020 3:57am

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1220536711031078913

Criminal Inquiry launched into the origins of the Trump-Russia investigation

Comments