Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

Evidence is leading to the conclusion officials inside Federal government agencies facilitated violent events on 1/6 and purposely let it all happen.

  • Like (+1) 1
  • 1 month later...
Posted

 

 

Seeing in Bloomberg law that Acting US Attorney for DC

Ed Martin has "demoted" supervisors who oversaw the

Jan6 prosecutions.

 

First -- that's the right thing to do based on a long-record

of their decision-making on how to handle those cases.

 

Second -- IT IS COMMON IN EACH CHANGE OF CONTROL

OF THE WHITE HOUSE to change the supervisors in US

Attorneys Offices.

 

Why should Ed Martin rely on the supervisors put in place

by Joe Biden's US Attorney. Happened in both Calif and

Hawaii when I was an AUSA from Bush to Clinton, then

Clinton to Bush, then Bush to Obama.

 

Every supervisor in the office was demoted back to line prosecutors

- some resigned -- and other line prosecutors was promoted

into supervisor spots.

 

SO -- AGAIN -- don't let the media gaslight you into thinking this anything other than normal.

 

 

 

 

  • Like (+1) 1
  • 1 month later...
  • 1 month later...
  • 2 weeks later...
Posted (edited)
9 hours ago, BillsFanNC said:

 

We'll see.  this is not new

from Mediaite

Notably, Department of Justice Inspector General Michael Horowitz released a reportlast month in which he stated that his team “found no evidence in the materials we reviewed or the testimony we received showing or suggesting that the FBI had undercover employees in the various protest crowds, or at the Capitol, on January 6.”

Horowitz found that 26 Confidential Human Sources — or defendants who engage “in the prohibited activity of associating with persons engaged in criminal activity for the purpose of furnishing information to or acting as an agent for a law enforcement or intelligence agency” — were present in D.C. on January 6, but that none “were authorized to enter the Capitol or a restricted area, or to otherwise break the law on January 6.”

 

in other news, patel is 6'2' 220lbs

https://www.hindustantimes.com/world-news/us-news/kash-patel-height-memes-viral-after-fox-interview-netizens-ask-how-tall-is-fbi-chief-101748471449434.html

Edited by Joe Ferguson forever
Posted
7 minutes ago, Joe Ferguson forever said:

We'll see.  this is not new

from Mediaite

Notably, Department of Justice Inspector General Michael Horowitz released a reportlast month in which he stated that his team “found no evidence in the materials we reviewed or the testimony we received showing or suggesting that the FBI had undercover employees in the various protest crowds, or at the Capitol, on January 6.”

Horowitz found that 26 Confidential Human Sources — or defendants who engage “in the prohibited activity of associating with persons engaged in criminal activity for the purpose of furnishing information to or acting as an agent for a law enforcement or intelligence agency” — were present in D.C. on January 6, but that none “were authorized to enter the Capitol or a restricted area, or to otherwise break the law on January 6.”

 

in other news, patel is 6'2' 220lbs

https://www.hindustantimes.com/world-news/us-news/kash-patel-height-memes-viral-after-fox-interview-netizens-ask-how-tall-is-fbi-chief-101748471449434.html

The newsworthy part is the FBI director/assistant director stating the facts will “surprise and shock everyone”.  
 

With regard to the confidential human sources, the only question I would have is if they violated laws, what charges were pursued?  I don’t know that “prohibited activities” equates to illegal activity, but it certainly sounds like it’s possible.  
 

I’m sure you would agree is all good news if the report is truly forthcoming.   Transparency is a good thing. 

Posted
27 minutes ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said:

The newsworthy part is the FBI director/assistant director stating the facts will “surprise and shock everyone”.  
 

With regard to the confidential human sources, the only question I would have is if they violated laws, what charges were pursued?  I don’t know that “prohibited activities” equates to illegal activity, but it certainly sounds like it’s possible.  
 

I’m sure you would agree is all good news if the report is truly forthcoming.   Transparency is a good thing. 

yes, I think it's good to release unededitorialized info.  If militant maga's really wanted to find the traitors to their perverse cause, they should look at which attendees were already facing jail time before Jan 6.  They've gone viral on Ray Epps.  Was ha facing jail time.  What else would motivate these scumbags to turn on their friends?

Posted
1 hour ago, Joe Ferguson forever said:

yes, I think it's good to release unededitorialized info.  If militant maga's really wanted to find the traitors to their perverse cause, they should look at which attendees were already facing jail time before Jan 6.  They've gone viral on Ray Epps.  Was ha facing jail time.  What else would motivate these scumbags to turn on their friends?

Huh. 

 

What? 

1 hour ago, Joe Ferguson forever said:

So why not just release it?  

I agree, and as you pointed out earlier--If little toy soldiers want to do the nutcracker dance at James Comey's place at the beach, they may go viral on Ray Epps!  Was ha facing jail time, assumed of course. 

  • Thank you (+1) 1
Posted
3 hours ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said:

Huh. 

 

What? 

I agree, and as you pointed out earlier--If little toy soldiers want to do the nutcracker dance at James Comey's place at the beach, they may go viral on Ray Epps!  Was ha facing jail time, assumed of course. 

You’d think these crackshot maga investigative journalists would have told y’all which insurrectionists were facing jail before Jan 6. At least for Ray Epps. But out of that huge short bus crowd there were probably at least the 26 who apparently acted as moles. But that might not make for a good conspiracy story. 

Posted
4 minutes ago, Joe Ferguson forever said:

You’d think these crackshot maga investigative journalists would have told y’all which insurrectionists were facing jail before Jan 6. At least for Ray Epps. But out of that huge short bus crowd there were probably at least the 26 who apparently acted as moles. But that might not make for a good conspiracy story. 

It's 2025 and we only recently received all the data associated with an assassination that took place in 1963.  It was several years before concrete evidence was produced to show that the Obama admin and CIA were fully briefed that the Clinton campaign was up to no good with Christopher Steele, a fact Obama could have shared at the very beginning of the hubub about Russia meddling in the elections.  Joe Biden had classified documents in his possession for what seems like decades, and was sharing intel with an individual without clearance and we only found out after Trump's house was raided. 

 

I have no idea who did what, who got arrested or who didn't.  You don't either.  I am absolutely willing to see how it all plays out with transparency. You should want the same thing. 

  • Thank you (+1) 1
Posted
4 minutes ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said:

It's 2025 and we only recently received all the data associated with an assassination that took place in 1963.  It was several years before concrete evidence was produced to show that the Obama admin and CIA were fully briefed that the Clinton campaign was up to no good with Christopher Steele, a fact Obama could have shared at the very beginning of the hubub about Russia meddling in the elections.  Joe Biden had classified documents in his possession for what seems like decades, and was sharing intel with an individual without clearance and we only found out after Trump's house was raided. 

 

I have no idea who did what, who got arrested or who didn't.  You don't either.  I am absolutely willing to see how it all plays out with transparency. You should want the same thing. 

 

To the bolded, winner winner chicken dinner.  Regardless of who one supports or doesn't, we should ALL want that.

  • Like (+1) 1
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said:

have no idea who did what, who got arrested or who didn't.  You don't either.  I am absolutely willing to see how it all plays out with transparency. You should want the same thing. 

I don't but if it were a case the Atlantic or the NYT were interested in, they'd find out.  public record, right?  most of these magabot reporters just print what they're told to.  And ptrofit handsomely.

Edited by Joe Ferguson forever
Posted
21 minutes ago, Joe Ferguson forever said:

I don't but if it were a case the Atlantic or the NYT were interested in, they'd find out.  public record, right?  most of these magabot reporters just print what they're told to.  And ptrofit handsomely.

 

FTFY.

 

Truly don't see how you can honestly say, as Jake Tapper and his buddy are making their mia culpa tour for the ENTIRE "mainstream" press corps, that the vast majority of ALL reporters on the national stage DON'T simply print or say what they're told to do.

 

Get to the primary source whether the conduit happens to be progressive, conservative, "mainstream," "alternative," or what have you.  And if you can't, well take it all with a grain of salt but true your own observations when you are provided enough primary source info to be able to make them.

×
×
  • Create New...