DOJ Report Drops

WuWei · 2019-12-11T01:24:30.535Z

BlueTex:

pensieve_seeker:

Horowitz is saying that the ‘facts’ they used were sufficient, IF those facts were true.
But as he doesn’t have the power to look outside the FBI/DOJ, he can’t conclude if the predicate was true or not.

Durham will now show that the factual predicate was a LIE.

Where do you think Durham is looking?

Australia with any luck.

AmusedObserver · 2019-12-11T01:49:29.352Z

TommyLucchese:

Nemesis:

Lmao yes he truly is a man of the people and has so much in common with the ordinary joe. Its hilarious Trump supporters say they hate the elite but then revere a man who is the epitome of the elite.

Epitome is pushing it. Caricature of the elite perhaps.

I don’t know who to credit for this but (paraphrasing) Trump is a weak man’s idea of a strong man, a poor man’s idea of a rich man, a stupid man’s idea of a smart man.

JayJay · 2019-12-11T02:01:14.935Z

WuWei:

BlueTex:

pensieve_seeker:

Horowitz is saying that the ‘facts’ they used were sufficient, IF those facts were true.
But as he doesn’t have the power to look outside the FBI/DOJ, he can’t conclude if the predicate was true or not.

Durham will now show that the factual predicate was a LIE.

Where do you think Durham is looking?

Australia with any luck.

Second time you’ve made me laugh tonight.

First time was invoking ACH.

WuWei · 2019-12-11T02:10:01.752Z

JayJay:

WuWei:

BlueTex:

pensieve_seeker:

Horowitz is saying that the ‘facts’ they used were sufficient, IF those facts were true.
But as he doesn’t have the power to look outside the FBI/DOJ, he can’t conclude if the predicate was true or not.

Durham will now show that the factual predicate was a LIE.

Where do you think Durham is looking?

Australia with any luck.

Second time you’ve made me laugh tonight.

First time was invoking ACH.

Bless your little heart.

pensieve_seeker · 2019-12-11T05:08:30.024Z

Durham more than likely looked at those who were not in the FBI/DOJ.

JayJay · 2019-12-11T11:44:28.359Z

WuWei:

JayJay:

WuWei:

BlueTex:

pensieve_seeker:

Horowitz is saying that the ‘facts’ they used were sufficient, IF those facts were true.
But as he doesn’t have the power to look outside the FBI/DOJ, he can’t conclude if the predicate was true or not.

Durham will now show that the factual predicate was a LIE.

Where do you think Durham is looking?

Australia with any luck.

Second time you’ve made me laugh tonight.

First time was invoking ACH.

Bless your little heart.

I like you…I really do.

These boards wouldn’t be the same…

18576 · 2019-12-11T11:54:52.391Z

I do deplore abuse of power…just one of the reasons I deplore Donald Trump as President.

WuWei · 2019-12-11T12:42:38.472Z

18576:

I do deplore abuse of power…just one of the reasons I deplore Donald Trump as President.

All abuses of power?

party-free · 2019-12-11T14:19:00.915Z

Melania doesn’t care. Do you?

WuWei · 2019-12-11T15:47:33.702Z

party-free:

Melania doesn’t care. Do you?

Yes.
…

NebraskaFootball · 2019-12-11T15:51:36.749Z

ImRightYoureWrong:

NebraskaFootball:

Thank you for admitting you were wrong. It happens to the best of us on occasion.

Not me

I was wrong once. I was wrong about being wrong, but turned out I was actually right. I can admit it.

NebraskaFootball · 2019-12-11T15:52:49.328Z

WuWei:

NebraskaFootball:

WildRose:

Stump your toe again or bang your head on the door?

His fabricated dossier proved otherwise.

It was not a “fabricated dossier.” Read the report.

Of course it is.

Of course it is not. I thought you knew about intelligence collecting. Could have sworn you mentioned that a time or two in the past. I must be mistaken. Sorry.

Camp · 2019-12-11T17:28:41.947Z

From today…

Graham says when they first applied for a FISA warrant, internal lawyers said they didn’t have enough evidence and McCabe suggested that they look at the Steele Dossier to get them “over the hump.” Graham says they then introduced the Dossier into the warrant application process and “it worked.” “Without this dossier, they go nowhere. With it, they are off to the races,” Graham says.

Well.

That is completely not what the media and many others have been insisting was true.

Brennan…

Ultimately, the ICA included a short summary and assessment of the dossier, which was incorporated in an appendix. “In the appendix, the intelligence agencies explained that there was ‘only limited corroboration of the source’s reporting’ and that Steele’s election reports were not used ‘to reach analytic conclusions of the CIA/FBI/NSA assessment,'” the IG report states.

A few months later, on May 23, 2017, when testifying before the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, Brennan categorically denied that the CIA relied on the Steele dossier for the ICA report. Here is the full exchange with former Rep. Trey Gowdy:

Mr. Gowdy: Do you know if the Bureau ever relied on the Steele dossier as any — as part of any court filings, applications, petitions, pleadings?

Mr. Brennan: I have no awareness.

Mr. Gowdy: Did the CIA rely on it?

Mr. Brennan: No.

Mr. Gowdy: Why not?

Mr. Brennan: Because we — we didn’t. It wasn’t part of the corpus of intelligence information that we had. It was not in any way used as a basis for the Intelligence Community assessment that was done. It was — it was not.

Brennan claimed the unverified dossier was not “part of the corpus of intelligence information we had.” On page 179 of the IG report, IG investigators asked former FBI Director James Comey if he remembered discussions with Brennan on presenting the dossier to Obama. Comey said Brennan and other officials argued it was “important” enough to include in the ICA — clearly part of the “corpus of intelligence information” they had.

The Federalist – 9 Dec 19

Brennan Lied About Not Including Steele Dossier In IC Assessment On 2016...

New DOJ IG report shows top intelligence officials deliberated about the inclusion of the unverified Steele dossier. Brennan lied to Congress about it.

Est. reading time: 2 minutes

DougBH · 2019-12-11T19:16:12.174Z

Horowitz testifying before the Senate:

“We also noted the lack of satisfactory explanations and leave open the possibility that for the reason you indicated its unclear what the motivations were, on the one hand gross incompetence, negligence – on the other hand intentionality and where in between, we weren’t in a position with the evidence we had to make that conclusion.”
"I’m not ruling it out," he says on the question of bias."

When we say that the report did not find that the motivation for the misfeasance by the FBI, lets make it clear that the report did not find that there was no bias. It did not express an opinion on what the motivation was for these actions.
It made no statement on way or the other…very much like the obstruction part of the Mueller report.

If there was no bias involved, if this is just the way the FBI operates, then God help any innocent person whom they get in their sights.

Paul_Thomson · 2019-12-12T01:08:49.273Z

Jezcoe:

This is the same dude who has been flying around the world trying to dig up evidence counter to this report.

This is the same dude who has been flying around the world trying to dig up more evidence that relates to this case, some of which seems to counter to this report.

Why is it wrong for an AG to look for more evidence in a case where another investigator has not received adequate explanations for the prima facie illegal actions taken by the FBI, and has not been given access to relevant records documenting meetings held by FBI staff in relation to the surveillance of the Trump campaign?

Paul_Thomson · 2019-12-12T01:12:08.652Z

Give perjurors in the FBI and DOJ and CIA the severity they gave Flynn, and Stone.

TheDoctorIsIn · 2019-12-12T01:13:51.101Z

Paul_Thomson:

…for the prima facie illegal actions taken by the FBI…

You sure you understand what that term means?

WuWei · 2019-12-12T01:19:21.289Z

NebraskaFootball:

WuWei:

NebraskaFootball:

WildRose:

Stump your toe again or bang your head on the door?

His fabricated dossier proved otherwise.

It was not a “fabricated dossier.” Read the report.

Of course it is.

Of course it is not. I thought you knew about intelligence collecting. Could have sworn you mentioned that a time or two in the past. I must be mistaken. Sorry.

I do know about it. I even know about it in the private sector. I’ve even seen how Brits do it in the private sector.

You ever do business with brits? They have a very identifiable business model.

WuWei · 2019-12-12T01:20:22.333Z

Camp:

over the hump.

And there it is.

Jezcoe · 2019-12-12T02:58:49.452Z

Paul_Thomson:

Jezcoe:

This is the same dude who has been flying around the world trying to dig up evidence counter to this report.

This is the same dude who has been flying around the world trying to dig up more evidence that relates to this case, some of which seems to counter to this report.

Why is it wrong for an AG to look for more evidence in a case where another investigator has not received adequate explanations for the prima facie illegal actions taken by the FBI, and has not been given access to relevant records documenting meetings held by FBI staff in relation to the surveillance of the Trump campaign?

There is no evidence.

The whole thing is made up.