3rdnlng Posted December 11, 2019 Share Posted December 11, 2019 2 minutes ago, keepthefaith said: True but I also think it's a safe bet that Brennan and others have lots of off the grid communication especially if they're involved in a conspiracy. That will make this harder. IMO it's going to take a well founded indictment for a very serious crime for an individual or two before any will turn on the rest. The stupidity or I don't recall or I didn't know defense has been effective so far. This will be hard with so many people involved each having their own little piece of the resistance puzzle. Horowitz was fairly well neutered in this investigation but it appears that he got out what was needed. Durham will have the juice to get people to flip. Don't "short" popcorn stocks. Corner the market, Mortimer. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Foxx Posted December 11, 2019 Share Posted December 11, 2019 https://twitter.com/ByronYork/status/1204815012142964737 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Foxx Posted December 11, 2019 Share Posted December 11, 2019 https://twitter.com/MZHemingway/status/1204869760170770432 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buffalo_Gal Posted December 11, 2019 Share Posted December 11, 2019 31 minutes ago, keepthefaith said: IMO it's going to take a well founded indictment for a very serious crime for an individual or two before any will turn on the rest. Probably why this is taking so long. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dubs Posted December 12, 2019 Share Posted December 12, 2019 Sort of been detached from the OIG stuff. Caught wind of huge wins and vindications for the Dems the other day, but what I saw of the Horowitz testimony today seems actually pretty damning to them. Am I missing something? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted December 12, 2019 Share Posted December 12, 2019 Cruz to Horowitz: Did an FBI attorney defraud the FISA court? Horowitz: Yup https://hotair.com/archives/ed-morrissey/2019/12/11/cruz-horowitz-fbi-attorney-defraud-fisa-court-horowitz-yup/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted December 12, 2019 Share Posted December 12, 2019 2 hours ago, Foxx said: i'm taking his testimony that he didn't. Then he didn't properly do his job, and/or the FBI was singularly uncooperative. Everyone in the federal government takes annual training on this: such communication is federal records that have to be archived precisely for the purpose of supporting investigations like this. If the IG didn't have access to the records, either they were consciously and improperly withheld, or were recorded on systems outside of government control - say, for example, on an email server in someone's bathroom. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted December 12, 2019 Author Share Posted December 12, 2019 31 minutes ago, dubs said: Sort of been detached from the OIG stuff. Caught wind of huge wins and vindications for the Dems the other day, but what I saw of the Horowitz testimony today seems actually pretty damning to them. Am I missing something? Nope. It was spin and an attempt to preemptively frame the narrative because they knew how bad it really was. The report proved that by January of 2017, before Trump was even sworn in, the FBI knew there was nothing to Trump/Russia collusion -- but pushed through with the investigation (and in fact accelerated it) anyway. Resulting in the appointment of the SCO -- who knew from day one the "crime" he was tasked to investigate did not happen. Which makes the ensuing 1.5 years of his investigation nothing more than an obstruction/perjury trap designed to hobble the administration in bureaucratic and partisan warfare. In other words: a coup. 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dubs Posted December 12, 2019 Share Posted December 12, 2019 1 minute ago, Deranged Rhino said: Nope. It was spin and an attempt to preemptively frame the narrative because they knew how bad it really was. The report proved that by January of 2017, before Trump was even sworn in, the FBI knew there was nothing to Trump/Russia collusion -- but pushed through with the investigation (and in fact accelerated it) anyway. Resulting in the appointment of the SCO -- who knew from day one the "crime" he was tasked to investigate did not happen. Which makes the ensuing 1.5 years of his investigation nothing more than an obstruction/perjury trap designed to hobble the administration in bureaucratic and partisan warfare. In other words: a coup. so essentially what you and others have been saying for a long time and what many others suspected. Explains why I haven’t seen a lot of posts from the NPCs also. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted December 12, 2019 Author Share Posted December 12, 2019 6 minutes ago, dubs said: so essentially what you and others have been saying for a long time and what many others suspected. Explains why I haven’t seen a lot of posts from the NPCs also. Correct. There's still more to come. The OIG was just the DOJ/FBI slice of the pie, and he had limited tools in terms of who and what he could dig into. He was restricted to active FBI/DOJ personnel only, and could not compel anyone else to consent to an interview. Glenn Simpson and Jonathan Winer both declined -- two key people. Comey, as an example of how slippery/slimy these people are, refused to have his security clearances reinstated when he was interviewed, so the OIG could not ask him about anything still classified... which is pretty much the entire pretext of the investigation and the meat of what we still need to know. There is still some spin going around -- like how his report found no bias. That's not very convincing, considering as OIG he has to take testimony as fact. Meaning, if he asks someone if they have bias and they testify they don't, he has to accept that as a fact (because he's an OIG not a prosecutor). And, despite the dems on the committee today trying to get him to say that there was no bias at all, he would not do so because as the report says they did not get ANY satisfactory explanations for the 17 "errors" made with regard to the FISAs, or for the purposeful falsification of evidence used to get the FISA. The other spin is that Horowitz didn't find any evidence of "spying" -- which is nonsense and semantics. Or that he didn't find the FBI sent any spies into the campaign... when he DID find they sent spies to talk with members of the campaign STAFF. More semantics. And that's all they have left to offer. Semantics. *The dossier was exposed to be a complete fraud, and known to be a fraud by the FBI as early as January 2017. *It was proven an FBI lawyer falsified evidence about Carter Page (he edited an email from the CIA which said he was an OPERATIONAL SOURCE -- aka a good guy, and made it say Page was NOT a source). *The entire chain of command in the FBI was referred to the AG for potential criminal prosecution. Every single one of them. 3 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted December 12, 2019 Author Share Posted December 12, 2019 Gowdy comments: 5 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
njbuff Posted December 12, 2019 Share Posted December 12, 2019 You don’t need to be a political partisan hack to see what went on here. Those of us should be outraged if Republicans did this to a Democratic nominee (and then President) as well. For this to be IGNORED by the MSM is every bit as bad as the crimes committed themselves. Sean Hannity has been on this from day one and to the outrage of the people who hate Hannity........... he was been 1,000 percent correct on this all along. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted December 12, 2019 Author Share Posted December 12, 2019 Just now, njbuff said: Sean Hannity has been on this from day one and to the outrage of the people who hate Hannity........... he was been 1,000 percent correct on this all along. no argument -- other than to point out Hannity was 6 months behind PPP 2 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
njbuff Posted December 12, 2019 Share Posted December 12, 2019 2 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said: no argument -- other than to point out Hannity was 6 months behind PPP I’m not disparaging you guys. ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted December 12, 2019 Author Share Posted December 12, 2019 2 minutes ago, njbuff said: I’m not disparaging you guys. ? No, I know. I was just being an ass for laughs. It's a good day after three years of eating ***** (not here, but in terms of running some of this stuff down on my own), so I'm feeling salty. Gotta keep that in check. 3 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted December 12, 2019 Share Posted December 12, 2019 3 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said: no argument -- other than to point out Hannity was 6 months behind PPP The hearing today was actually rather boring. I had to ask myself why and I came to the conclusion that it was because I already knew the answers. It must have given you a real feeling of accomplishment to have nailed things so well. 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
njbuff Posted December 12, 2019 Share Posted December 12, 2019 Just now, Deranged Rhino said: No, I know. I was just being an ass for laughs. It's a good day after three years of eating ***** (not here, but in terms of running some of this stuff down on my own), so I'm feeling salty. Gotta keep that in check. There have been others that have been on this too. I would say Tucker was on this too, but he is skeptical everyone, including Lindsay Graham. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob's House Posted December 12, 2019 Share Posted December 12, 2019 29 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said: Correct. There's still more to come. The OIG was just the DOJ/FBI slice of the pie, and he had limited tools in terms of who and what he could dig into. He was restricted to active FBI/DOJ personnel only, and could not compel anyone else to consent to an interview. Glenn Simpson and Jonathan Winer both declined -- two key people. Comey, as an example of how slippery/slimy these people are, refused to have his security clearances reinstated when he was interviewed, so the OIG could not ask him about anything still classified... which is pretty much the entire pretext of the investigation and the meat of what we still need to know. There is still some spin going around -- like how his report found no bias. That's not very convincing, considering as OIG he has to take testimony as fact. Meaning, if he asks someone if they have bias and they testify they don't, he has to accept that as a fact (because he's an OIG not a prosecutor). And, despite the dems on the committee today trying to get him to say that there was no bias at all, he would not do so because as the report says they did not get ANY satisfactory explanations for the 17 "errors" made with regard to the FISAs, or for the purposeful falsification of evidence used to get the FISA. The other spin is that Horowitz didn't find any evidence of "spying" -- which is nonsense and semantics. Or that he didn't find the FBI sent any spies into the campaign... when he DID find they sent spies to talk with members of the campaign STAFF. More semantics. And that's all they have left to offer. Semantics. *The dossier was exposed to be a complete fraud, and known to be a fraud by the FBI as early as January 2017. *It was proven an FBI lawyer falsified evidence about Carter Page (he edited an email from the CIA which said he was an OPERATIONAL SOURCE -- aka a good guy, and made it say Page was NOT a source). *The entire chain of command in the FBI was referred to the AG for potential criminal prosecution. Every single one of them. Are you still down here spinning your wild conspiracy theories? Give it up, pal. Nobody's buying what you're selling, except maybe the rubes who believe Fox News. There was no bias. That's it. End of story. Case closed. Your revolution is over. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
njbuff Posted December 12, 2019 Share Posted December 12, 2019 Because the MSM failed so miserably in ignoring this story......... What will be the cover up for their intentional ignorance? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted December 12, 2019 Author Share Posted December 12, 2019 2 minutes ago, njbuff said: There have been others that have been on this too. I would say Tucker was on this too, but he is skeptical everyone, including Lindsay Graham. Oh, there were more than a few without a doubt. A lot was accomplished through independent media types getting real good sources to help guide them towards the actual fire under all the smoke. It's actually pretty amazing, or will be with some distance and people look back, at how badly the corporate media failed to maintain control of the narrative thanks to the work of a bunch of (largely) anonymous citizens who were pissed off. 4 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts