DOJ to unseal Mar-A-Lago warrant

[DBP66]

5 minutes ago, FreeBird said:

That you LIbbYS are the biggest threat to national security, that You lefties are turning this great country in a 3rd world country 

 

 

just my 2 pesos 

and once again you're 100% wrong...it's right wing nut jobs like you that are the biggest threat and right now they're mad because Trump told them they need to be mad....over another lie...scary shit!!

[SeaShells21]

I’m surprised one of you haven’t started a thread, or are at least mentioning the Six Flags shooting in Chicago this morning.

What’s supposed to be a fun and happy place to create lasting memories turned into an all out shootout 😳

It is so unexpected.

[FreeBird]

1 minute ago, SeaShells21 said:

I’m surprised one of you haven’t started a thread, or are at least mentioning the Six Flags shooting in Chicago this morning.

What’s supposed to be a fun and happy place to create lasting memories turned into an all out shootout 😳

It is so unexpected.

It’s Illinois, it’s a war zone I’m not shocked there was a shooting there, already got shootings at pop Warner games

[DBP66]

6 minutes ago, Warrior said:

Sheep

figured...I guess you're waiting for the next lie/explanation to be told??.....😪

[Warrior]

20 minutes ago, DBP66 said:

figured...I guess you're waiting for the next lie/explanation to be told??.....😪

I’m not waiting for anything. You’ve been for over 6 years…lol and still are. 

[DBP66]

1 minute ago, Warrior said:

I’m not waiting for anything. You’ve been for over 6 years…lol and still are. 

....🤡

[Wildcat Will]

9 hours ago, OldTerrapin said:

 

Pictures are worth 1000 words. Why type out 3 paragraphs of words of which no one is going to read when you can just post a pic and say it all and everyone will get your point easily and within seconds..  Which way is more efficient, effective and less idiotic? 

Thats their problem, the don't read. A what point do they grow up and do what adults do, use their words?  

You should re-examine your thought process here. A learned man would consider you a fool.

Hello fool.

[GoBigBlack]

On 8/13/2022 at 5:20 PM, concha said:

 

It's great that all that's required to determine intent is to ask GBB his esteemed opinion. "How do we know it was willful, your honor? Well, we're glad you asked.  None other than GBB from the high school football board thinks so. What? Was he there when the docs were packed? Well, no.  Does he personally know Trump? Uh, no. Does he have video of Trump ordering the surreptitious removal of the documents? Let's see... nope again."

 

Another Trump Mystery: Why Did He Resist Returning the Government's Documents?

“My generals,” he repeatedly said of the active-duty and retired military leaders who filled his government. “My money,” he often called the cash he raised through his campaign or for the Republican National Committee. “My Kevin,” he said of Rep. Kevin McCarthy, the Republican leader.

And White House documents?

“They’re mine,” three of Trump’s advisers said that he stated repeatedly when he was urged to return boxes of documents, some of them highly classified, that the National Archives sought after Trump took them with him to Mar-a-Lago, his private club in Palm Beach, Florida, in January 2021. A nearly 18-month back-and-forth between the government and Trump ended in an extraordinary FBI search for the documents at Mar-a-Lago last week.

 

will·ful

/ˈwilfəl/

adjective

1. (of an immoral or illegal act or omission) intentional; deliberate.

   "willful acts of damage"

    
   • having or showing a stubborn and determined intention to do as one wants, regardless of the consequences or effects.

     "the pettish, willful side of him"

      

     con·cha

     /kənt/

     noun

     1. dumb fuck

         
         

      

 

[concha]

1 hour ago, GoBigBlack said:

Another Trump Mystery: Why Did He Resist Returning the Government's Documents?

“My generals,” he repeatedly said of the active-duty and retired military leaders who filled his government. “My money,” he often called the cash he raised through his campaign or for the Republican National Committee. “My Kevin,” he said of Rep. Kevin McCarthy, the Republican leader.

And White House documents?

“They’re mine,” three of Trump’s advisers said that he stated repeatedly when he was urged to return boxes of documents, some of them highly classified, that the National Archives sought after Trump took them with him to Mar-a-Lago, his private club in Palm Beach, Florida, in January 2021. A nearly 18-month back-and-forth between the government and Trump ended in an extraordinary FBI search for the documents at Mar-a-Lago last week.

 

will·ful

/ˈwilfəl/

adjective

1. (of an immoral or illegal act or omission) intentional; deliberate.

   "willful acts of damage"

    
   • having or showing a stubborn and determined intention to do as one wants, regardless of the consequences or effects.

     "the pettish, willful side of him"

      

     con·cha

     /kənt/

     noun

     1. dumb fuck

         
         

      

 

 

It took you 5 days praying for a NYT drive-by to come up with this?

🤣

 

You buy into the latest storyline from the DoJ about nuclear secrets?  Something purportedly so real and dangerous that the FBI literally waited 18 months and then days after getting a warrant before bothering to grab them?

 

gullible

 adjective

 

gull·ible | \ ˈgə-lə-bəl  \

variants: or less commonly gullable

Definition of gullible

: easily duped or cheated

 

 

 

[concha]

 

https://tippinsights.com/9-troubling-things-about-dojs-raid-on-trump/

 

9 Troubling Things About DOJ’s Raid On Trump

The recent FBI raid on Mar-a-Lago, 92 days before the November midterms, brought to light troubling aspects regarding the functioning of the DOJ and the investigative agencies. Here’s a close look at the key issues.

TIPPINSIGHTS EDITORIAL BOARD

August 20, 2022 . 7:33 AM

 

Many lawyers believe that Attorney General Merrick Garland will indict former President Trump. Such an action would be unprecedented and likely deeply divide the country. Aside from the fact that the recent FBI raid took place just 92 days before the November midterm elections, there are numerous troubling aspects to this unparalleled action.

Here are a few key aspects that demand closer scrutiny.

1) Was Garland Pressured?

It is no secret that President Biden has been pressuring Attorney General Merrick Garland. We’ll never know if it was done face-to-face, but that is not the point.

The New York Times reported in an April 2 article: “The attorney general’s deliberative approach has come to frustrate Democratic allies of the White House and, at times, President Biden himself. As recently as late last year, Mr. Biden confided to his inner circle that he believed former President Donald J. Trump was a threat to democracy and should be prosecuted, according to two people familiar with his comments. And while the president has never communicated his frustrations directly to Mr. Garland, he has said privately that he wanted Mr. Garland to act less like a ponderous judge and more like a prosecutor willing to take decisive action over the events of Jan. 6.”

Garland might have succumbed to intense White House pressure. The President made sure that Garland got the message by criticizing him as a “ponderous judge” and setting public expectations that he should take the decisive actions of a prosecutor.

2) Conflicts of Interest

Numerous conflicts of interest appear in the extraordinary raid of the former president’s home.

First, in 2016, Attorney General Garland was denied a seat on the Supreme Court by Republicans, a move the then-candidate Trump backed. Judge Laurence Silberman, a friend and colleague of Garland, has said Garland has “always regarded the role of a judge as a culmination of his profession.” Garland may still be nursing a wound, and his actions may be driven by long-standing disappointment.

Second, Garland reports to President Biden. President Biden and President Trump are leaders of their parties and are likely to run against each other again.

Third, the FBI team closely tied to the raid has its own conflicts of interest, which we will discuss later in this article.

Fourth, the magistrate, Judge Bruce Reinhart, who signed off on the raid, also warrants a closer look.

3) The Magistrate

Federal magistrate Judge Bruce Reinhart approved the warrant authorizing the raid on President Trump's estate.

President Trump has sued Hillary Clinton and other prominent Democrats over Russia collusion allegations.  On June 22, Judge Reinhart recused himself from that lawsuit, and six weeks after that, he signed off the FBI warrant. Judge Reinhart's earlier recusal raises an interesting question: why did he recuse in the Trump vs. Clinton case, but not the raid?

During an appearance on Jesse Watters' show last Friday, Trump's attorney Alina Habba said, 'They needed a little drama, so they throw this out there. They go to the judge that had recused himself in my Hillary case a month ago.' She added, 'I would like to know why he recused himself in that case, but then he was able to sign this warrant. I want to know that.'

We can only speculate. The Judge may have a relationship with Clinton, the Democrats, or other matters that might have presented a conflict of interest leading to the recusal. Shouldn’t the reason that caused the recusal ipso facto prohibit the signing of the Trump search warrant?

One wonders whether the underlying reason for his recusal motivated his participation in the Trump search warrant.

4) Timing Of The Raid

Attorney General Merrick Garland warned prosecutors about cases involving political figures in a memo dated May 25. He asked them to get extra approvals in the weeks and proceed carefully leading up to an election.

Also, according to news reports, Garland mulled over the decision to approve the Trump search warrant for weeks before he decided to go with it. He appears to have changed his mind between May 25 and August 1.

Further, Trump attorneys say things were copacetic with a DOJ visit to Mar-a-Lago in June. Then Trump lawyers handed over documents and surveillance footage. According to the Wall Street Journal, Trump greeted the agents at the start of the meeting, saying, "I appreciate the job you're doing" and adding, "Anything you need, let us know." Trump staff complied with an additional lock to the basement storage as per subsequent advice.

There was no national security emergency pressing Garland. Had there been any imminent danger, it would not have afforded Garland the luxury of time for deliberation. Further, the magistrate approved the raid on August 1, stipulating that it must occur before August 19. The FBI took seven days after the approval to conduct the raid.

The FBI raided Mar-a-Lago on August 8, 92 days before the 2022 upcoming midterm elections on November 8. That goes against Garland's memo, cited above, about no sensitive action close to an election.

In summary, Garland changed his mind, deliberated, and changed course. There was also no national security situation. Then what pressured him to go ahead with the raid 92 days before the midterms?

5) Duration Of The Raid

Thirty FBI agents raided Mar-a-Lago for nine hours, that is 270 person-hours, an awful amount of time.

If all they wanted was some government material stored in the basement, it should not take much time to take possession and leave the premises. The sheer amount of time indicates that their objectives were not well-defined and much more expansive, a possible witch hunt. They even searched the former first lady's closets and the President's office and broke a safe.

The FBI agents were given carte blanche authority to seize "any government and presidential records created between January 20, 2017, and January 20, 2021," Trump's entire term in office. In short, they could take anything related to the Trump administration.

The irony was that they scooped up President Trump's passports, unaware that they needed a special warrant to seize passports.

Former FBI assistant director Chris Swecker opined that the guidelines governing the FBI's raid of former President Trump's home were "pushed aside.”  Swecker said: “What you're supposed to do when you possess these types of powers that the FBI does and Justice Department does is use the least intrusive investigative technique to get to what you need to get to, [whether] it's information, evidence, what have you. You're supposed to take into consideration the seriousness of the offense, and the impact on the public confidence in the FBI and law enforcement in general. These are codified in the domestic investigative operation guidelines and the attorney general guidelines. What jumps out at me is how that was completely … just shifted aside, just pushed aside. And this dramatic raid takes place over a fairly de minimis offense. Police lights flashing, dawn raid, kitted out ninja warriors outside, 30 agents inside.”

6) Tainted Investigators

The people who carried out the nine-hour drama bring baggage to the question of the fairness and credibility of the Mar-a-Lago raid. It is clear from the Russiagate investigation, which came to naught for lack of evidence, that there are agents within the bureau willing to go to great lengths to discredit the former President.

Paul Sperry, the investigative journalist, recently reported that Federal agents, who have actively promoted the Russiagate investigation and hold a deep bias against Trump, are now members of the raid searching for classified documents that allegedly "compromised" national security.

Members of the FBI’s counterintelligence division, who ran the Russia "collusion" investigation against President Trump during 2016-2017, codenamed "Crossfire Hurricane," are being probed by Special Counsel John Durham and the bureau’s internal disciplinary arm, the Office of Professional Responsibility for "alleged abuses of power and political bias."

Besides, Supervisory Intelligence Analyst Brian Auten, whose alleged labeling of evidence against Hunter Biden as "disinformation" brought the investigation to a close, is considered a top expert on Russia and nuclear warfare. Republicans fear, and justifiably so, that Auten, a man so biased against Trump, may be allowed to participate in analyzing and determining if the documents seized from Mar-a-Lago have compromised national security. Senator Chuck Grassley, the ranking Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee, has written to FBI Director Christopher Wray to express his concerns.

Other noted members of the raid include Jay Bratt (DNC donor and top counterintelligence official in Justice's national security division) and Alan Kohler (FBI's counterintelligence division head). Bratt had visited Mar-a-Lago in June to inspect the storage facility personally and had taken documents then.

7) Barrage Of Leaks

Even as Attorney General Merrick Garland did his best to defend the professionalism and integrity of the nation’s top investigative agency and its judicial system, the litany of leaked information told a completely different story.

He must have been dismayed to read the Washington Post’s assertion that Federal agents had raided the former President’s resort residence in search of “nuclear secrets” that could compromise the nation’s security.

But this isn’t the first time the former President or his family has been the target of such reports in the media based on “confidential” or “anonymous” sources.

We could go on to catalog the barrage of leaks, but Garland should know he presides over an organization with a recent checkered history. The first half of Trump’s presidency was mired in the Mueller probe, an exercise that wasted taxpayer money and amounted to nothing. Throughout the investigation, the liberal media were fed snippets that made an entire nation question its President.

James Comey, the former FBI Director, violated agency policies by keeping and leaking a set of memos he took documenting meetings with President Donald Trump early in 2017, according to a report by the Justice Department's inspector general.

Recall DOJ Inspector General Michael Horowitz detailed in his report in 2018 multiple instances in which Andrew McCabe, the former FBI Deputy Director, “lacked candor” about his authorization to leak sensitive information to the Wall Street Journal that revealed the existence of an FBI investigation into the Clinton Foundation. The apparent aim of McCabe’s leak was to combat the perception that he had a conflict of interest managing two Clinton investigations while Clinton allies donated to his wife’s campaign.

The FBI’s partisan views and actions are becoming clearer by the day. AG Garland will find it difficult to naysay New York Times reporter Matthew Rosenberg’s words: “There were a ton of FBI informants among the people who attacked the Capitol.”

😎 The White House’s Lack of Knowledge

The White House said it learned about the raid from news reports 'just like the American people.'

If it is true, it is shocking. We want to believe the White House prima facia but also note a pattern when denying things.

Remember, one year ago, in an interview with George Stephanopoulos, President Biden denied at least three times that no one advised him to keep 2,500 troops in Afghanistan. Though they would not divulge private deliberations, General Miley and General McKenzie said they recommended maintaining a presence of U.S. troops in Afghanistan.

The Biden veracity index is low. Those familiar with President Biden's first half of his political career know his tendency to glorify his education accomplishments and other issues. More recently, he denied knowledge of his son’s foreign business dealings on the debate stage.

"Biden knew all about this, just like he knew all about Hunter’s 'deals,'" President Trump wrote in a Truth Social post.

President Biden also has a history with arcane laws. Going after General Flynn using the 'Logan Act' was his brainchild. Flynn's legal team said "it appears" he "personally raised the idea" during a White House meeting. Using the Espionage Act in the search warrant against a former president is like using the Logan Act to go after General Flynn.

9) Hillary Clinton Standard

Hillary Clinton, former Secretary of State under then Vice President Biden, had a personal email server at her home in Chappaqua, New York. She used the email address for all official and private emails during her four years as Secretary of State. She never had a state.gov email account hosted on secure servers owned and managed by the government. She claimed that she used her server out of "convenience."

Clinton returned a partial tranche of 30,000 emails to the State Department. According to FBI director James Comey, 110 e-mails in that group had classified information. Further, seven e-mail chains concerned matters that had the Top Secret/Special Access Program level.

Comey concluded that while "there is evidence of potential violations" of criminal statutes covering the mishandling of classified information," our judgment is that no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case.”

So, what changed now?

The FBI did not raid Hillary Clinton's Chappaqua home. If no reasonable prosecutor would bring a case against Clinton, what is it about Trump that is different?

President Trump recently said at CPAC that a friend had said he was the most persecuted person in modern history.

The Justice Department and FBI subjected the country to a multi-year Russia collusion hoax. The key players have either found plum jobs in the media or are still trying to get President Trump in trouble.

Where does the political persecution of Trump stop?

DOJ's pettifoggery must end immediately, and the agency must tirelessly work to win back Americans’ trust. Otherwise, it is the beginning of the end for America that we love as the shining city on a hill.

 

 

[DBP66]

1 hour ago, concha said:

 

https://tippinsights.com/9-troubling-things-about-dojs-raid-on-trump/

 

9 Troubling Things About DOJ’s Raid On Trump

The recent FBI raid on Mar-a-Lago, 92 days before the November midterms, brought to light troubling aspects regarding the functioning of the DOJ and the investigative agencies. Here’s a close look at the key issues.

TIPPINSIGHTS EDITORIAL BOARD

August 20, 2022 . 7:33 AM

 

Many lawyers believe that Attorney General Merrick Garland will indict former President Trump. Such an action would be unprecedented and likely deeply divide the country. Aside from the fact that the recent FBI raid took place just 92 days before the November midterm elections, there are numerous troubling aspects to this unparalleled action.

Here are a few key aspects that demand closer scrutiny.

1) Was Garland Pressured?

It is no secret that President Biden has been pressuring Attorney General Merrick Garland. We’ll never know if it was done face-to-face, but that is not the point.

The New York Times reported in an April 2 article: “The attorney general’s deliberative approach has come to frustrate Democratic allies of the White House and, at times, President Biden himself. As recently as late last year, Mr. Biden confided to his inner circle that he believed former President Donald J. Trump was a threat to democracy and should be prosecuted, according to two people familiar with his comments. And while the president has never communicated his frustrations directly to Mr. Garland, he has said privately that he wanted Mr. Garland to act less like a ponderous judge and more like a prosecutor willing to take decisive action over the events of Jan. 6.”

Garland might have succumbed to intense White House pressure. The President made sure that Garland got the message by criticizing him as a “ponderous judge” and setting public expectations that he should take the decisive actions of a prosecutor.

2) Conflicts of Interest

Numerous conflicts of interest appear in the extraordinary raid of the former president’s home.

First, in 2016, Attorney General Garland was denied a seat on the Supreme Court by Republicans, a move the then-candidate Trump backed. Judge Laurence Silberman, a friend and colleague of Garland, has said Garland has “always regarded the role of a judge as a culmination of his profession.” Garland may still be nursing a wound, and his actions may be driven by long-standing disappointment.

Second, Garland reports to President Biden. President Biden and President Trump are leaders of their parties and are likely to run against each other again.

Third, the FBI team closely tied to the raid has its own conflicts of interest, which we will discuss later in this article.

Fourth, the magistrate, Judge Bruce Reinhart, who signed off on the raid, also warrants a closer look.

3) The Magistrate

Federal magistrate Judge Bruce Reinhart approved the warrant authorizing the raid on President Trump's estate.

President Trump has sued Hillary Clinton and other prominent Democrats over Russia collusion allegations.  On June 22, Judge Reinhart recused himself from that lawsuit, and six weeks after that, he signed off the FBI warrant. Judge Reinhart's earlier recusal raises an interesting question: why did he recuse in the Trump vs. Clinton case, but not the raid?

During an appearance on Jesse Watters' show last Friday, Trump's attorney Alina Habba said, 'They needed a little drama, so they throw this out there. They go to the judge that had recused himself in my Hillary case a month ago.' She added, 'I would like to know why he recused himself in that case, but then he was able to sign this warrant. I want to know that.'

We can only speculate. The Judge may have a relationship with Clinton, the Democrats, or other matters that might have presented a conflict of interest leading to the recusal. Shouldn’t the reason that caused the recusal ipso facto prohibit the signing of the Trump search warrant?

One wonders whether the underlying reason for his recusal motivated his participation in the Trump search warrant.

4) Timing Of The Raid

Attorney General Merrick Garland warned prosecutors about cases involving political figures in a memo dated May 25. He asked them to get extra approvals in the weeks and proceed carefully leading up to an election.

Also, according to news reports, Garland mulled over the decision to approve the Trump search warrant for weeks before he decided to go with it. He appears to have changed his mind between May 25 and August 1.

Further, Trump attorneys say things were copacetic with a DOJ visit to Mar-a-Lago in June. Then Trump lawyers handed over documents and surveillance footage. According to the Wall Street Journal, Trump greeted the agents at the start of the meeting, saying, "I appreciate the job you're doing" and adding, "Anything you need, let us know." Trump staff complied with an additional lock to the basement storage as per subsequent advice.

There was no national security emergency pressing Garland. Had there been any imminent danger, it would not have afforded Garland the luxury of time for deliberation. Further, the magistrate approved the raid on August 1, stipulating that it must occur before August 19. The FBI took seven days after the approval to conduct the raid.

The FBI raided Mar-a-Lago on August 8, 92 days before the 2022 upcoming midterm elections on November 8. That goes against Garland's memo, cited above, about no sensitive action close to an election.

In summary, Garland changed his mind, deliberated, and changed course. There was also no national security situation. Then what pressured him to go ahead with the raid 92 days before the midterms?

5) Duration Of The Raid

Thirty FBI agents raided Mar-a-Lago for nine hours, that is 270 person-hours, an awful amount of time.

If all they wanted was some government material stored in the basement, it should not take much time to take possession and leave the premises. The sheer amount of time indicates that their objectives were not well-defined and much more expansive, a possible witch hunt. They even searched the former first lady's closets and the President's office and broke a safe.

The FBI agents were given carte blanche authority to seize "any government and presidential records created between January 20, 2017, and January 20, 2021," Trump's entire term in office. In short, they could take anything related to the Trump administration.

The irony was that they scooped up President Trump's passports, unaware that they needed a special warrant to seize passports.

Former FBI assistant director Chris Swecker opined that the guidelines governing the FBI's raid of former President Trump's home were "pushed aside.”  Swecker said: “What you're supposed to do when you possess these types of powers that the FBI does and Justice Department does is use the least intrusive investigative technique to get to what you need to get to, [whether] it's information, evidence, what have you. You're supposed to take into consideration the seriousness of the offense, and the impact on the public confidence in the FBI and law enforcement in general. These are codified in the domestic investigative operation guidelines and the attorney general guidelines. What jumps out at me is how that was completely … just shifted aside, just pushed aside. And this dramatic raid takes place over a fairly de minimis offense. Police lights flashing, dawn raid, kitted out ninja warriors outside, 30 agents inside.”

6) Tainted Investigators

The people who carried out the nine-hour drama bring baggage to the question of the fairness and credibility of the Mar-a-Lago raid. It is clear from the Russiagate investigation, which came to naught for lack of evidence, that there are agents within the bureau willing to go to great lengths to discredit the former President.

Paul Sperry, the investigative journalist, recently reported that Federal agents, who have actively promoted the Russiagate investigation and hold a deep bias against Trump, are now members of the raid searching for classified documents that allegedly "compromised" national security.

Members of the FBI’s counterintelligence division, who ran the Russia "collusion" investigation against President Trump during 2016-2017, codenamed "Crossfire Hurricane," are being probed by Special Counsel John Durham and the bureau’s internal disciplinary arm, the Office of Professional Responsibility for "alleged abuses of power and political bias."

Besides, Supervisory Intelligence Analyst Brian Auten, whose alleged labeling of evidence against Hunter Biden as "disinformation" brought the investigation to a close, is considered a top expert on Russia and nuclear warfare. Republicans fear, and justifiably so, that Auten, a man so biased against Trump, may be allowed to participate in analyzing and determining if the documents seized from Mar-a-Lago have compromised national security. Senator Chuck Grassley, the ranking Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee, has written to FBI Director Christopher Wray to express his concerns.

Other noted members of the raid include Jay Bratt (DNC donor and top counterintelligence official in Justice's national security division) and Alan Kohler (FBI's counterintelligence division head). Bratt had visited Mar-a-Lago in June to inspect the storage facility personally and had taken documents then.

7) Barrage Of Leaks

Even as Attorney General Merrick Garland did his best to defend the professionalism and integrity of the nation’s top investigative agency and its judicial system, the litany of leaked information told a completely different story.

He must have been dismayed to read the Washington Post’s assertion that Federal agents had raided the former President’s resort residence in search of “nuclear secrets” that could compromise the nation’s security.

But this isn’t the first time the former President or his family has been the target of such reports in the media based on “confidential” or “anonymous” sources.

We could go on to catalog the barrage of leaks, but Garland should know he presides over an organization with a recent checkered history. The first half of Trump’s presidency was mired in the Mueller probe, an exercise that wasted taxpayer money and amounted to nothing. Throughout the investigation, the liberal media were fed snippets that made an entire nation question its President.

James Comey, the former FBI Director, violated agency policies by keeping and leaking a set of memos he took documenting meetings with President Donald Trump early in 2017, according to a report by the Justice Department's inspector general.

Recall DOJ Inspector General Michael Horowitz detailed in his report in 2018 multiple instances in which Andrew McCabe, the former FBI Deputy Director, “lacked candor” about his authorization to leak sensitive information to the Wall Street Journal that revealed the existence of an FBI investigation into the Clinton Foundation. The apparent aim of McCabe’s leak was to combat the perception that he had a conflict of interest managing two Clinton investigations while Clinton allies donated to his wife’s campaign.

The FBI’s partisan views and actions are becoming clearer by the day. AG Garland will find it difficult to naysay New York Times reporter Matthew Rosenberg’s words: “There were a ton of FBI informants among the people who attacked the Capitol.”

😎 The White House’s Lack of Knowledge

The White House said it learned about the raid from news reports 'just like the American people.'

If it is true, it is shocking. We want to believe the White House prima facia but also note a pattern when denying things.

Remember, one year ago, in an interview with George Stephanopoulos, President Biden denied at least three times that no one advised him to keep 2,500 troops in Afghanistan. Though they would not divulge private deliberations, General Miley and General McKenzie said they recommended maintaining a presence of U.S. troops in Afghanistan.

The Biden veracity index is low. Those familiar with President Biden's first half of his political career know his tendency to glorify his education accomplishments and other issues. More recently, he denied knowledge of his son’s foreign business dealings on the debate stage.

"Biden knew all about this, just like he knew all about Hunter’s 'deals,'" President Trump wrote in a Truth Social post.

President Biden also has a history with arcane laws. Going after General Flynn using the 'Logan Act' was his brainchild. Flynn's legal team said "it appears" he "personally raised the idea" during a White House meeting. Using the Espionage Act in the search warrant against a former president is like using the Logan Act to go after General Flynn.

9) Hillary Clinton Standard

Hillary Clinton, former Secretary of State under then Vice President Biden, had a personal email server at her home in Chappaqua, New York. She used the email address for all official and private emails during her four years as Secretary of State. She never had a state.gov email account hosted on secure servers owned and managed by the government. She claimed that she used her server out of "convenience."

Clinton returned a partial tranche of 30,000 emails to the State Department. According to FBI director James Comey, 110 e-mails in that group had classified information. Further, seven e-mail chains concerned matters that had the Top Secret/Special Access Program level.

Comey concluded that while "there is evidence of potential violations" of criminal statutes covering the mishandling of classified information," our judgment is that no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case.”

So, what changed now?

The FBI did not raid Hillary Clinton's Chappaqua home. If no reasonable prosecutor would bring a case against Clinton, what is it about Trump that is different?

President Trump recently said at CPAC that a friend had said he was the most persecuted person in modern history.

The Justice Department and FBI subjected the country to a multi-year Russia collusion hoax. The key players have either found plum jobs in the media or are still trying to get President Trump in trouble.

Where does the political persecution of Trump stop?

DOJ's pettifoggery must end immediately, and the agency must tirelessly work to win back Americans’ trust. Otherwise, it is the beginning of the end for America that we love as the shining city on a hill.

 

 

you and your kind have lost your minds...he took top secret info. he shouldn't have had and when asked (given a  subpoena) to return the files he refuses?!?!....wtf!...and you clowns defend the indefensible??..If Hillary did that you clowns would be marching to her home with torches in your hands like in Va....and you blame the FBI for doing their job?!?...you clowns aren't Americans...you're Trump's stooges...part of a clan that worships a guy who plays you for $ and lies more than tells the truth...f*in sad group of clowns his has under his thumb..😪  

[Slotback Right]

[GoBigBlack]

On 8/18/2022 at 4:40 PM, concha said:

You buy into the latest storyline from the DoJ about nuclear secrets?  Something purportedly so real and dangerous that the FBI literally waited 18 months and then days after getting a warrant before bothering to grab them?

Highly classified documents held at Mar-a-Lago contained foreign nuclear secrets that only a Cabinet level official or higher could authorize others to know, report says: Some documents were so secret that just a few DOZEN people knew of their existence

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11187407/Highly-classified-documents-held-Mar-Lago-contained-foreign-nuclear-secrets.html

 

On 8/18/2022 at 4:40 PM, concha said:

gullible

 adjective

 

gull·ible | \ ˈgə-lə-bəl  \

variants: or less commonly gullable

Definition of gullible

: easily duped or cheated

ironic

 adjective

 

iron·ic | \ ˌī-ˈrä-nik  also i-ˈrä- \

variants: or less commonly ironical \ ˌī-ˈrä-ni-kəl  also  i-ˈrä- \

Definition of ironic

1: relating to, containing, or constituting irony

an ironic remark

an ironic coincidence

 

On 8/18/2022 at 4:40 PM, concha said:

It took you 5 days praying for a NYT drive-by to come up with this?

I don't follow these things closely. Like pretty much everything else, all one needs to do is sit back and wait while every conspiracy and lie falls apart or produces absolutely nothing whatsoever.

Since you didn't believe the "storyline," I guess that makes you the gullible one.

[FreeBird]

2 minutes ago, GoBigBlack said:

Highly classified documents held at Mar-a-Lago contained foreign nuclear secrets that only a Cabinet level official or higher could authorize others to know, report says: Some documents were so secret that just a few DOZEN people knew of their existence

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11187407/Highly-classified-documents-held-Mar-Lago-contained-foreign-nuclear-secrets.html

 

ironic

 adjective

 

iron·ic | \ ˌī-ˈrä-nik  also i-ˈrä- \

variants: or less commonly ironical \ ˌī-ˈrä-ni-kəl  also  i-ˈrä- \

Definition of ironic

1: relating to, containing, or constituting irony

an ironic remark

an ironic coincidence

 

I don't follow these things closely. Like pretty much everything else, all one needs to do is sit back and wait while every conspiracy and lie falls apart or produces absolutely nothing whatsoever.

Since you didn't believe the "storyline," I guess that makes you the gullible one.

Seriously Bro you got ‘em this time

[concha]

46 minutes ago, GoBigBlack said:

Highly classified documents held at Mar-a-Lago contained foreign nuclear secrets that only a Cabinet level official or higher could authorize others to know, report says: Some documents were so secret that just a few DOZEN people knew of their existence

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11187407/Highly-classified-documents-held-Mar-Lago-contained-foreign-nuclear-secrets.html

 

ironic

 adjective

 

iron·ic | \ ˌī-ˈrä-nik  also i-ˈrä- \

variants: or less commonly ironical \ ˌī-ˈrä-ni-kəl  also  i-ˈrä- \

Definition of ironic

1: relating to, containing, or constituting irony

an ironic remark

an ironic coincidence

 

I don't follow these things closely. Like pretty much everything else, all one needs to do is sit back and wait while every conspiracy and lie falls apart or produces absolutely nothing whatsoever.

Since you didn't believe the "storyline," I guess that makes you the gullible one.

 

It makes me someone who learned from things like the fake Russia Dossier and not immediately buying into anything and everything the MSM puts out.

If this is true, perhaps it should be questioned why the FBI and DoJ waited for so long.  Perhaps they realized the Secret Service secures M-a-L?

Let's see if you've got him this time.

 

 

 

[I AM IRONMAN]

1 hour ago, concha said:

 

It makes me someone who learned from things like the fake Russia Dossier and not immediately buying into anything and everything the MSM puts out.

If this is true, perhaps it should be questioned why the FBI and DoJ waited for so long.  Perhaps they realized the Secret Service secures M-a-L?

Let's see if you've got him this time.

 

 

 

THIS TIME!

[GoBigBlack]

13 hours ago, concha said:

 

It makes me someone who learned from things like the fake Russia Dossier and not immediately buying into anything and everything the MSM puts out.

If this is true, perhaps it should be questioned why the FBI and DoJ waited for so long.  Perhaps they realized the Secret Service secures M-a-L?

You couldn’t tell us the first thing about the “fake” dossier. The truth literally stares you guys in the face and you perform the most twisted and illogical mental gymnastics to avoid the slightest chance of having to look back at it. You open up wide for Daddy Donny and deepthroat those lies like it’s your job.

You’re claiming the FBI and DOJ didn’t act sooner because the United States Secret Service was protecting the documents? Lol. Is that the latest defense after the first 37 fell apart?

Was it willful? Yup. Were there nuclear secrets? Yup. You said both were BS. You were wrong about this just like Ashli Babbit and I’m sure most other things. You don’t need to chime in on everything, especially when you know next to nothing. 
 

[concha]

16 minutes ago, GoBigBlack said:

You couldn’t tell us the first thing about the “fake” dossier. The truth literally stares you guys in the face and you perform the most twisted and illogical mental gymnastics to avoid the slightest chance of having to look back at it. You open up wide for Daddy Donny and deepthroat those lies like it’s your job.

You’re claiming the FBI and DOJ didn’t act sooner because the United States Secret Service was protecting the documents? Lol. Is that the latest defense after the first 37 fell apart?

Was it willful? Yup. Were there nuclear secrets? Yup. You said both were BS. You were wrong about this just like Ashli Babbit and I’m sure most other things. You don’t need to chime in on everything, especially when you know next to nothing. 
 

 

Question marks are important when reading. They distinguish between "statements" and "questions".

And I wasn't wrong about Babbit. <<<<< That's what's called a "period". 

 

[Troll]

5 hours ago, GoBigBlack said:

You I couldn’t tell us the first thing about the “fake” dossier or "nuclear" secrets. The truth literally stares you guys me in the face and you I perform the most twisted and illogical mental gymnastics to avoid the slightest chance of having to look back at it. You I open up wide for Daddy Donny 3rd party hearsay of the anonymous headlines and deepthroat those anonymous lies like it’s your my job.

 

FIFY 

 

5 hours ago, GoBigBlack said:

Were there nuclear secrets? Yup. .....when you I know next to nothing. 
 

Your link merely re-headlines and further obscures your reality...

your link: "according to a new bombshell report from The Washington Post. "

The actual headline: "Material on foreign nation’s nuclear capabilities seized at Trump’s Mar-a-Lago "

The actual source: "according to people familiar with the search, who spoke on the condition of anonymity "

 

PS: So (even IF anonymously true)  just what EXACTLY do you expect that to mean ?....

...your source describes "A document describing a foreign government’s military defenses, including its nuclear capabilities"....so essentially an assessment of another countries nuke capability? That's some real risk for YOU there....

 

BTW: Hanging yer hopes on anonymous headlines does absolutely nothing to make it "true"...

...or even rellevent.  When you got him this time...LOL

[GoBigBlack]

32 minutes ago, concha said:

 

Question marks are important when reading. They distinguish between "statements" and "questions".

And I wasn't wrong about Babbit. <<<<< That's what's called a "period". 

 

So if you end something with a question mark that clears you to write any ridiculously retarded words in front of it without any ridicule…? Lol. Yeah, the famous Tucker line — “I’m just asking questions!” Yeah, fucking stupid ones.

 

You are wrong about Babbit. Period, exclamation point, colon, semicolon, ellipses… anything but a question mark.

 

[concha]

1 hour ago, GoBigBlack said:

So if you end something with a question mark that clears you to write any ridiculously retarded words in front of it without any ridicule…? Lol. Yeah, the famous Tucker line — “I’m just asking questions!” Yeah, fucking stupid ones.

 

You are wrong about Babbit. Period, exclamation point, colon, semicolon, ellipses… anything but a question mark.

 

 

Do you understand what a question mark means now?

 

[DBP66]

1 hour ago, Troll said:

FIFY 

 

Your link merely re-headlines and further obscures your reality...

your link: "according to a new bombshell report from The Washington Post. "

The actual headline: "Material on foreign nation’s nuclear capabilities seized at Trump’s Mar-a-Lago "

The actual source: "according to people familiar with the search, who spoke on the condition of anonymity "

 

PS: So (even IF anonymously true)  just what EXACTLY do you expect that to mean ?....

...your source describes "A document describing a foreign government’s military defenses, including its nuclear capabilities"....so essentially an assessment of another countries nuke capability? That's some real risk for YOU there....

 

BTW: Hanging yer hopes on anonymous bullshit does absolutely nothing to make it "true"...

...or even rellevent.  When you got him this time...LOL

maybe it's a risk to the people who live in the country who's files he stole??...🙄..stop being so naïve....he stole files he shouldn't have after repeated efforts from the Gov't to retrieve them...why did he steal them??...why do you always try to make sense of lies??...it doesn't work....🤡

[I AM IRONMAN]

Round and round they go. Nothing but a waste of (work) time

[OldTerrapin]

16 minutes ago, I AM IRONMAN said:

Round and round they go. Nothing but a waste of (work) time

propaganda wars... how fun..

 

 

[I AM IRONMAN]

Seriously….66 is king of we got him and cut and paste from the Onion…or what he was spoon fed from PBS….PBS😂 then Troll corrects him and around they go….going where? Nowhere!