maddogdrivethru.net

Open all night
It is currently Fri Dec 13, 2019 5:54 am

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 1907 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 184, 185, 186, 187, 188, 189, 190, 191  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: The Obama DOJ & FBI Conspiracy
PostPosted: Fri Oct 25, 2019 12:21 pm 
Offline
Sergeant Major

Joined: Fri Dec 05, 2008 3:19 pm
Posts: 32322
Reputation points: 20000
Not just context or correction of omissions but outright fabrications.

_________________
I haven't figured out how to the block thingy works but if anyone alters my posts I will become really, really angry and throw monkey poop out of my cage.


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Obama DOJ & FBI Conspiracy
PostPosted: Fri Oct 25, 2019 2:55 pm 
Offline
Sergeant Major

Joined: Sat Oct 04, 2008 4:43 pm
Posts: 20195
Reputation points: 682
chijohnaok wrote:
jack t ripper wrote:
"Modifying a 302"...surely that is a crime and not simply a violation of FBI policy.

Flynn should sue both Crapper and Page...and the FBI.


You could potentially make an argument in support of that IF those edits were limited to spelling or grammar AND that editing was stated in the 302 document.

But the changes went beyond that.

From the Twitchy piece:

Attachment:
302 change A.jpg


Attachment:
302 change B.jpg


Those are important and material changes to what was actually stated to the Agent in the interview



Attachment:
302 change C.jpg


She apparently lied so often she forgot when she lied and when she didn't.


All related to the "security organs" that Nero was worried about being purged (but never was purged by Trump)

TechnoFrog sounds like something from the Internet Research Agency. ;)

_________________
A stupid person is a person who causes losses to another person or to a group of persons while himself deriving no gain and even possibly incurring losses. -- Carlo M. Cipolla

Mit der Dummheit kämpfen selbst Götter vergebens. -- Friedrich Schiller


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Obama DOJ & FBI Conspiracy
PostPosted: Sat Oct 26, 2019 5:20 am 
Offline
Sergeant Major

Joined: Sat Oct 04, 2008 4:43 pm
Posts: 20195
Reputation points: 682
Oh well, what the hell.



Consigliere Barro in action for Don Donaldo and for the capo di tutti capi Vova Putino.

_________________
A stupid person is a person who causes losses to another person or to a group of persons while himself deriving no gain and even possibly incurring losses. -- Carlo M. Cipolla

Mit der Dummheit kämpfen selbst Götter vergebens. -- Friedrich Schiller


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Obama DOJ & FBI Conspiracy
PostPosted: Sat Oct 26, 2019 8:31 am 
Offline
Sergeant Major

Joined: Fri Dec 05, 2008 3:19 pm
Posts: 32322
Reputation points: 20000
Don't forget the career guy from SDNY who is actually DOING the investigation and the other career professionals working for him. They are most certainly crooks too. Not to mention the members of the public empaneled on the Grand Jury. They must be in on it too.

Absolutely childish argument. Clearly someone is getting nervous.

_________________
I haven't figured out how to the block thingy works but if anyone alters my posts I will become really, really angry and throw monkey poop out of my cage.


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Obama DOJ & FBI Conspiracy
PostPosted: Sat Oct 26, 2019 8:32 am 
Offline
Sergeant Major

Joined: Fri Dec 05, 2008 3:19 pm
Posts: 32322
Reputation points: 20000
I wonder if OJ could sell Crapper his old beard....and is the White Bronco still around?

_________________
I haven't figured out how to the block thingy works but if anyone alters my posts I will become really, really angry and throw monkey poop out of my cage.


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Obama DOJ & FBI Conspiracy
PostPosted: Sat Oct 26, 2019 10:28 am 
Offline
Sergeant Major
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2011 3:06 pm
Posts: 15755
Location: inside your worst nightmare
Reputation points: 18812
jack t ripper wrote:
Don't forget the career guy from SDNY who is actually DOING the investigation and the other career professionals working for him. They are most certainly crooks too. Not to mention the members of the public empaneled on the Grand Jury. They must be in on it too.

Absolutely childish argument. Clearly someone is getting nervous.


All Putin Patsies.

_________________
Anthro's NSFW Thread


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Obama DOJ & FBI Conspiracy
PostPosted: Wed Oct 30, 2019 7:34 am 
Offline
Sergeant Major
User avatar

Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2008 9:50 pm
Posts: 36868
Location: West coast of the east coast
Reputation points: 20000
Image

:lol:

_________________
The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public’s money.
- misattributed to Alexis De Tocqueville

No representations made as to the accuracy of info in posted news articles or links


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Obama DOJ & FBI Conspiracy
PostPosted: Sat Nov 02, 2019 9:30 am 
Offline
Sergeant Major

Joined: Fri Dec 05, 2008 3:19 pm
Posts: 32322
Reputation points: 20000
Indict Brennan? Sounds good to me.

https://spectator.org/the-case-for-indi ... n-brennan/

Quote:


Former CIA director John Brennan calls the Justice Department’s widening probe into Spygate’s origins “bizarre.” It has no “legal basis,” he bleats.

What’s bizarre is that the expanding inquiry didn’t happen earlier. Brennan’s responsibility for criminal leaks during the Obama administration’s investigation of Trump has been obvious for at least two years. Even Trump hater Peter Strzok, the FBI liaison to John Brennan, couldn’t believe the leaks coming out of his shop. Referring to Brennan’s agents as “sisters,” Strzok said to his mistress Lisa Page, “our sisters have begun leaking like mad. Scorned and worried and political, they’re kicking in to overdrive.”

The “leaking like mad” began in the thick of the 2016 campaign, as the feverishly partisan John Brennan sought to sabotage Donald Trump before Election Day. Has John Durham, the U.S. attorney assigned to the probe of the Obama administration’s spying on Trump, talked to Harry Reid about Brennan’s leaking? He should. Recall Brennan’s blatant disclosure of classified information about the investigation to the former Nevada senator in the late summer/early fall of 2016. Reid has told reporters that Brennan used him as the conduit for that leak against Trump during the campaign: “Why do you think he called me?”

In other words, Brennan knew damn well that he was criminally leaking to a fellow anti-Trump partisan. That’s enough to indict him right there. Reid, of course, was happy to broadcast the leak to the media, but even he found Brennan’s “ulterior motive” for a senatorial briefing a little odd, as he explained to David Corn and Michael Isikoff in their book Russian Roulette. Corn and Isikoff write that Reid “had concluded the CIA chief believed the public needed to know about the Russian operation, including the information about the possible links to the Trump campaign.”

Brennan has said that the widening probe “concerns” him. It should. He is guilty as hell. The news that his subordinates are lawyering up suggests that he is perhaps hoping that one of those saps takes the fall for him. But the fact remains that he conducted the briefing with Reid in the hopes of dirtying up Trump before election day.

Durham could also nail Brennan for perjury — his most obvious whopper being his denial before Congress of knowledge of the Hillary-financed Christopher Steele dossier. Reid had told Brennan about the Steele dossier in the summer of 2016. So, too, did Steele’s old colleagues in British intelligence, whose well-publicized role in feeding Brennan information about alleged Trump–Russia ties depended at least in part on Steele’s recycled yarns. Peter Strzok, to whom Brennan gave a special CIA award, would have also alerted him to Steele’s role in Crossfire Hurricane.

The same demented political animus driving Brennan now drove him before the election. Through leaks to the press, he made it clear to Hillary Clinton that he wanted to remain as CIA director under her. In the last months of the campaign, Brennan was in effect auditioning for her. He had hoped his October surprise with Harry Reid would win him her enduring affection.

The problem was that he didn’t have much to give Reid, apart from the existence of the investigation itself and the half-baked “intelligence” he had picked up from foreign counterparts in Britain, Estonia, and elsewhere. That’s why Brennan and Comey had to concoct the harebrained scheme of using a Cambridge intellectual on the make, Stefan Halper, to try and entrap George Papadopoulos. With Election Day bearing down on them in September 2016, they ran Halper in again to the Trump campaign, who came up empty. (Halper had also been trying to entrap Carter Page.)

Spygate is an immensely complicated tale. It would take a special counsel to unravel it all and indict all the bad guys. But Republicans don’t have the stomach for a special counsel. And so we are left with the hope that John Durham will at least hook a few big fish like Brennan.

That the media is freaking out over the news of Durham hiring more lawyers and receiving more resources from Bill Barr can be taken as a promising sign. The more noise they make, the closer Durham gets to the truth — a truth future historians will prize for its rich irony: that the government that tried the hardest to throw the election was our own.


_________________
I haven't figured out how to the block thingy works but if anyone alters my posts I will become really, really angry and throw monkey poop out of my cage.


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Obama DOJ & FBI Conspiracy
PostPosted: Tue Nov 05, 2019 9:52 am 
Offline
Sergeant Major
User avatar

Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2008 9:50 pm
Posts: 36868
Location: West coast of the east coast
Reputation points: 20000
https://www.amgreatness.com/2019/11/04/ ... ents-case/

Quote:
News

New Filing in Flynn Prosecution Casts Further Doubt on the Government’s Case

Adam Mill - November 4th, 2019

Michael Flynn’s attorney filed a response Monday to the federal government’s defense against several shocking claims of misconduct. Attorney Sidney Powell alleged in an earlier filing that federal prosecutors, led by former Special Counsel Robert Mueller alumnus Brandon Van Grack, hid or destroyed evidence and used an edited account of Flynn’s statement as a basis for charging the former national security advisor with lying to the FBI.

Powell inferred that an earlier version of Flynn’s statement, as recorded by the interviewing agents, was suppressed or destroyed. She writes,

It is no excuse that the original Flynn 302 is not ‘in the possession of’ Mr. Van Grack at this moment. It is in the FBI’s system, or can be retrieved, along with the audit trail, the A1 files, information about any attempt made to destroy it, and all the metadata for the changes which are more important now than ever in light of the absurdity of the government’s Surreply. Tellingly, Mr. Van Grack does not deny that such information is, in fact, available.

Powell also noted that FBI attorney Lisa Page and Bill Priestrap, who was the FBI’s assistant director of investigation and counterintelligence, edited Flynn’s statement after the interview, even though neither was present during the questioning.

Powell also cited the testimony of former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, who talked to the FBI agents immediately after they interviewed Flynn. McCabe testified to the House Intelligence Committee, “[T]he conundrum that we faced on their return from the interview is that although [the agents] didn’t detect deception in the statements that he made in the interview . . . the statements were inconsistent with our understanding of the conversation that he had actually had with the ambassador.”

McCabe proceeded to admit to the committee that “the two people who interviewed [Flynn] didn’t think he was lying, [which] was not [a] great beginning of a false statement case.”

Powell alleges that two of the “false” statements that appeared in the final draft of the agents’ account of Flynn’s statement do not appear in their original handwritten notes.

“Two allegations depend on Ambassador Kislyak’s response to purported questions about the U.N. vote and sanctions,” Powell writes in Monday’s brief. “Read the notes of both agents for hours, and you won’t find a question or an answer about Kislyak’s response on either the U.N. vote or the sanctions—yet those assertions underpin the factual basis for the plea. . . . By failing to join issue on these points, the government has effectively conceded that the notes do not support the purported false statements in the factual basis for the plea.”

Powell also rebutted the government’s contention that the edits to Flynn’s statement were superficial, writing,

We do know that the same evening, Strzok went into the office, picked up Page’s edits, and made changes that any reasonable person would deem material to the 302. He added a definitive statement: “FLYNN stated he did not.” This was in response to whether, on the issue of UN vote, Flynn had asked Kislyak to vote in a particular way. This is materially different from the notes which state Flynn did not recall speaking to Kislyak on the UN vote issue.

Finally, Powell on Monday challenged the entire basis for the FBI interview of Flynn, noting that the government previously claimed it was investigating links between the Russians and the 2016 Trump campaign for president.

“The agents already knew exactly what Mr. Flynn said in all his communications with the Russian Ambassador, so the FBI agents did not ask questions to discover the existence or substance of those communications,” she writes. “And, second, the agents did not ask Mr. Flynn a single question about anything even approaching ‘interference with the 2016 election.’”

Powell’s filing appears to conclude the briefing schedule and a previously scheduled hearing set for November 7 remains cancelled. It is therefore unclear what the next step in the nearly two-year-old case might be.

Adam Mill
Adam Mill is a pen name. He works in Kansas City, Missouri as an attorney specializing in labor and employment and public administration law. Adam...


_________________
The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public’s money.
- misattributed to Alexis De Tocqueville

No representations made as to the accuracy of info in posted news articles or links


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Obama DOJ & FBI Conspiracy
PostPosted: Wed Nov 06, 2019 3:57 pm 
Offline
Sergeant Major

Joined: Sat Oct 04, 2008 4:43 pm
Posts: 20195
Reputation points: 682
Joseph McCarthy had a point, there is indeed a blue deep state. Or was it red for for Joe? :roll:

HEATHER DIGBY PARTON wrote:
Image

Mike Pompeo and Bill Barr's attack on their own government is nothing new for Republicans

Going back to the Cold War, conservatives have mistrusted the State Department and CIA as plagued with traitors

    Image
    Mike Pompeo and Bill Barr

Transcripts of testimony in the impeachment inquiry have been coming fast and furious this week and they have been electrifying. EU ambassador Gordon Sondland even made a late addendum in which he admitted to presenting the Ukrainians with the quid-pro-quo deal that Donald Trump denies ever happened.

But after first demanding to see the transcripts and complaining they've been left out of the process, Republicans have now decided to hold their breath until they turn blue.

Lindsey Graham, the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, says he won't read any of the transcripts, and dismissed Sondland's reversal.

"I've written the whole process off ... I think this is a bunch of B.S."

Per @alanhe

One of the most important revelations in these depositions is the fact that Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and Attorney General Bill Barr are up to their necks in this mess. As the Washington Post's Greg Sargent notes, this story shows the remarkable "degree to which this whole scheme is corrupting multiple government agencies and effectively placing them at the disposal of Trump’s reelection effort."

The New York Times took a long look at Pompeo's involvement, making the important point that he had accepted the CIA's conclusion on Russian interference when he was the director of that agency, but since he became secretary of state he's acted as an accomplice to Trump and Giuliani's addled conspiracy theory and has thrown one career State Department employee after another under the bus. As Sargent puts it, Pompeo is "a secretary of state who is essentially perverting the State Department and subverting the national interest to carry out Trump’s sordid political project."

Meanwhile, we have Barr running all over the world also trying to prove Trump's daft Ukraine conspiracy theory and show that the FBI and intelligence agencies went rogue and infiltrated the Trump campaign without good reason. One would have thought the Mueller report had dispatched such concerns, but Barr is apparently determined to prove that investigation was tainted as well.

Many people are wringing their hands and scratching their heads, wondering how the once staunch defenders of law and order in the GOP have suddenly turned into bleeding-heart libertarians, railing against the Deep State, standing up for the rights of the poor lone individual, Donald J. Trump. What happened to the Republican Party?

Well, as with everything else in this strange political era, the truth is that none of this is exactly unprecedented. Much of what is happening is just a funhouse-mirror version of Republican politics over the past 50 years.

Take, for instance, Mike Pompeo's obvious disregard for the career diplomats and foreign service personnel at the State Department. I wrote the other day about Sen. Joseph McCarthy's attacks on Gen. George Marshall and his hearings about alleged Soviet infiltration of the U.S. military. But the opening salvo of his Red Scare was against the State Department. In his famous speech in Wheeling, West Virginia, McCarthy said that he had a list with the names of more than 200 members of the Department of State who were “known communists."

In fact, Cold War hawks were always suspicious of the State Department because they saw diplomacy as soft at best and traitorous at worst, and often took the opportunity to blame that department for foreign policy failures, periodically purging the department of people they suspected of not holding "Americanist" values. (Today they are accused of being "globalists.") As recently as the Bush administration there was a move to "reform" the State Department in the wake of 9/11, led by none other than Newt Gingrich. He gave speeches and wrote articles in 2003 attacking "The Rogue State Department" for having produced honest intelligence assessments in the run-up to the Iraq invasion.

That attitude also explains a strange dichotomy with respect to how the right and left view the CIA. A couple of weeks ago Salon's Andrew O'Hehir wrote a piece reminding people on the left about the CIA's history of undemocratic and underhanded activities over the years, so we don't lose perspective as we watch this Trump debacle unfold. He was right, of course. The left has traditionally been rightfully skeptical of CIA activities, particularly after the revelations of the 1970s showing that it had essentially operated as a shadow government, carrying out assassinations and interfering in domestic political matters. Along with the FBI, the CIA was shown to have operated illegally and unethically for decades, behavior that hawks in both parties endorsed as necessary to fight "the evil empire." The reforms of the Church Commission in the 1970s, among others, were enacted to rein in the agency. But our experience with Central America in the 1980s and the torture, black sites and rendition programs of the War on Terror made clear that those reforms were only as good as a government that believed in them.

But there was another side to that story. During the 1970s, the CIA was also producing analysis showing that the Soviet military was a much less formidable threat than was being portrayed. This information was rejected by Cold War hawks who persuaded Gerald Ford to bring in "outside experts," including people like two-time Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, who naturally found that the CIA's estimates were all wrong and the Soviets were on the verge of taking over the world. For years the hawks created a series of "alternate" analyses under the auspices of groups with names like "Team B" and Committee on the Present Danger. History has shown that the CIA analysis was much closer to the truth.

The right's unwillingness to accept the findings of actual intelligence continued all the way to the Iraq war, when Vice President Dick Cheney and CIA Director George Tenet refused to accept the conclusion that Saddam Hussein likely did not possess weapons of mass destruction, and almost certainly had no nuclear weapons. Instead, they "stovepiped" only the intelligence that would back up their desired goal to invade Iraq. We know how that worked out too.

All the way back to the 1970s, even as the left was rightly skeptical of CIA covert activity, it has accepted that the CIA's analysis of various threats was far more reliable, if imperfect, than anything that came out of the right-wing hawks' mouths. We find ourselves in a similar position today. The intelligence community's analysis of the 2016 election interference appears to be backed up by many foreign allies, press accounts and personal testimony, while the right's absurd counter-narrative is once again made up out of whole cloth.

So supposed pillars of the GOP establishment, like Mike Pompeo trashing his own State Department and Bill Barr running around the world trying to discredit intelligence analysis is not nearly as strange as people think. They are following a well-worn path. The only difference is that this time they're not doing it for any recognizable ideological or geopolitical purpose. They are doing what they always do, but putting it in service of Donald Trump's massive ego.

O tempora, o mores!

PS. Mac, yes it is the Salon. ;)

_________________
A stupid person is a person who causes losses to another person or to a group of persons while himself deriving no gain and even possibly incurring losses. -- Carlo M. Cipolla

Mit der Dummheit kämpfen selbst Götter vergebens. -- Friedrich Schiller


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 1907 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 184, 185, 186, 187, 188, 189, 190, 191  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 13 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group