The Robert Mueller Investigation

[DDD Dad 14251]

 
 

[Jabberwocky 1666]

2 hours ago, Anastasis said:

The Justice Department’s internal watchdog, close to concluding its inquiry into steps the FBI took in its probe of Trump campaign associates and Russia beginning in 2016, is homing in on whether the agency continued surveillance of one associate despite questions about a key source’s credibility, according to people familiar with the matter.

Just more evidence that this president has continued to try to use the Justice Department as a political tool, as well as his own personal law firm. Secondly, what exactly has come from all this investigating, and Republican huffpuffery about the Steele dossier that they themselves initiated and partly funded? Carter Page was doing suspicious things with some suspicious foreign nationals, and found himself in the cross-hairs of surveillance. Trump did not like the consequences. That is the only bottom line.

[The People’s Elbow 707]

I seem to recall TTom from several sites ago and his recent posts in this thread read as a man lost and churning amongst his own demons, and are really more sad than anything else. 

Get help, TTom. You aren’t alone. 

[David Dennison 18655]

39 minutes ago, Enchubben said:

It’s going to be hilarious when trump gets investigated

its going to be hilarious when the results come out from the investigation

its going to be hilarious when the report is released

its going to be hilarious when Barr has to testify 

pretty much batting 0.00 at this point. It might be time to move on.

The credibility ship has come and gone. 

You think it’s the republicans who won’t stop “fucking that chicken?” Goodness 

You didn't read the Mueller report, did you?

It exposes the president of the United States as a felon.

[Enchubben 5509]

20 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

You didn't read the Mueller report, did you?

It exposes the president of the United States as a felon.

I’ve read as much or as little as half of Congress that swore Trump colluded with Russia to steal the election and that the report had significant evidence of it. Yet, here we are and Trump is still our president. 

Thanks to Brad I did make time to go and read the full constitution though so I suppose I should thank him for that.

Edited May 9, 2019 by Enchubben

[henrygandorf 29174]

19 minutes ago, Enchubben said:

I’ve read as much or as little as half of Congress that swore Trump colluded with Russia to steal the election and that the report had significant evidence of it. Yet, here we are and Trump is still our president. 

Thanks to Brad I did make time to go and read the full constitution though so I suppose I should thank him for that.

he will be our president until 2020.  the mueller report could've confirmed conspiracy and obstruction and he would still be our president until 2020.

absolutely zero people (who understand the process) have predicted his actual removal from office.

if your takeaway is "he's still the president so he must be innocent" then i think this conversation is probably pointless.

[SubliminalHorn 6674]

2 minutes ago, henrygandorf said:

 

if your takeaway is "he's still the president so he must be innocent" then i think this conversation is probably pointless.

That’s his takeaway and it really is pointless to converse with him regarding this. He hasn’t read the mueller report and doesn’t understand how impeachment works. In short, he’s a moron. 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23356]

The Mueller Report in two minutes 

 

[Jim Tom Pinch 120]

4 hours ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

It doesn’t feel like it now but this is one of the most historic periods in American Democracy.  

This shit makes Watergate look like a picnic. 

Yeah. Never before has a political party used the FBI in a coup to unseat a sitting President.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23356]

Yeah, the FBI, full of libtard democrats. 

[hobbes2702 12804]

2 minutes ago, Jim Tom Pinch said:

Yeah. Never before has a political party used the FBI in a coup to unseat a sitting President.

Still true

[DDD Dad 14251]

Yeah. Never before has a political party used the FBI in a coup to unseat a sitting President.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23356]

1 minute ago, hobbes2702 said:

Still true

[henrygandorf 29174]

6 minutes ago, Jim Tom Pinch said:

Yeah. Never before has a political party used the FBI in a coup to unseat a sitting President.

god i would love a coup right about now.

[woohorn 1131]

 

 

 

Everyone objecting to strike the last word of the previous member

 

Will someone please explain why they were doing this?

 

[softlynow 1783]

4 hours ago, henrygandorf said:

wonder what barr will be thinking in a couple years when he looks back at this whole chapter of his life.

"Damn, all that asshatery and I'm still $300,000 in debt!"

[henrygandorf 29174]

3 minutes ago, woohorn said:

Will someone please explain why they were doing this?

i wondered too, so i looked it up.

https://www.countable.us/articles/287-markup-marathon-does-strike-word-mean

[Anastasis 23394]

1 hour ago, Jim Tom Pinch said:

Yeah. Never before has a political party used the FBI in a coup to unseat a sitting President.

I don't think that the OIG report will lay it out in these terms obviously.  What I do think that it will report is that the FISA Page application took a non-standard path outside the typical FBI processes and procedures.  That there should have been greater transparency wrt the origins of Steele's material, and that there were irregularities around the entrance of the Steele materials into the FBI and his continuing engagement even after his formal relationship with the FBI was closed (e.g. perkins coie Baker interactions, Corn Baker back channel, Gaeta Steele conduit, and the Ohr back channel, etc.). Dahobbs is probably still looking up a definition of what back channel means, but all of this stuff is already in publicly released testimony. I think it will be critical of the Steele materials. Auditors gonna audit. This type of shit is a slam dunk unless it gets ruled out of scope or redacted for some reason. As with the Clinton investigation OIG report, I think that he will stop short of suggesting political bias influenced any of the decisions. Nor do I think that he will address other aspects alluded to by FBI agents in their "private" communications, such as the CIA leaking re: the Russia investigation. 

Edited May 9, 2019 by Anastasis

[Anastasis 23394]

1 hour ago, henrygandorf said:

god i would love a coup right about now.

There was a [serious] discussion of a military angle to that back on the scat site. 

[DDD Dad 14251]

I don't think that the OIG report will lay it out in these terms obviously.  What I do think that it will report is that the FISA Page application took a non-standard path outside the typical FBI processes and procedures.  That there should have been greater transparency wrt the origins of Steele's material, and that there were irregularities around the entrance of the Steele materials into the FBI and his continuing engagement even after his formal relationship with the FBI was closed (e.g. perkins coie Baker interactions, Corn Baker back channel, Gaeta Steele conduit, and the Ohr back channel, etc.). Dahobbs is probably still looking up a definition of what back channel means, but all of this stuff is already in publicly released testimony. I think it will be critical of the Steele materials. Auditors gonna audit. This type of shit is a slam dunk unless it gets ruled out of scope or redacted for some reason. As with the Clinton investigation OIG report, I think that he will stop short of suggesting political bias influenced any of the decisions. Nor do I think that he will address other aspects alluded to by FBI agents in their "private" communications, such as the CIA leaking re: the Russia investigation. 

I think you’re wrong, but “we’ll see what happens.”

[Anastasis 23394]

3 minutes ago, DDD Dad said:

I think you’re wrong, but “we’ll see what happens.”

Fair enough.  Who knows, maybe the OIG report will totally prove my assessment wrong.  If so, I will acknowledge such and give you guys a good target for neg reps. But I am curious as to what you think is wrong exactly in my assessment as quoted. Have you read Baker's congressional testimony?  There appears to me to be a bunch of low hanging fruit that an auditor would zero in on. But what do I know. 

[Anastasis 23394]

3 hours ago, Jabberwocky said:

Just more evidence that this president has continued to try to use the Justice Department as a political tool, as well as his own personal law firm.

The DOJ IG was appointed by Obama. Maybe wait for the report, before you dismiss it out of hand. 

3 hours ago, Jabberwocky said:

Secondly, what exactly has come from all this investigating, and Republican huffpuffery about the Steele dossier that they themselves initiated and partly funded?

If I was a glue-eater, I would claim that you are lying.  But I know that you are not and that you are just uninformed. Steele was brought on long after the  Fusion work was transferred to DNC funding. 

3 hours ago, Jabberwocky said:

Carter Page was doing suspicious things with some suspicious foreign nationals, and found himself in the cross-hairs of surveillance. Trump did not like the consequences. That is the only bottom line.

Carter Page is a dumb fuck and anybody who has looked at this guy for more than 10 seconds knows this.  He literally has a hard time not drooling on himself in the clip that follows. But that didn't stop people here from gassing this board out with the notion that he was a centerpiece of Trump Russia coordination to influence the election. 

 

[triplehorn 2664]

52 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

Fair enough.  Who knows, maybe the OIG report will totally prove my assessment wrong.  If so, I will acknowledge such and give you guys a good target for neg reps. But I am curious as to what you think is wrong exactly in my assessment as quoted. Have you read Baker's congressional testimony?  There appears to me to be a bunch of low hanging fruit that an auditor would zero in on. But what do I know. 

Would Carter Page's FISA warrant have been approved by the FISC judge without inclusion of the dossier material in the application ?  I'm guessing that's a Yes.  Does inclusion of properly represented dossier material disqualify application of other material that, used alone, would result in approval of the Page FISA warrant?  I don't see how.

[JimmyJames 12271]

Blah blah blah. FISA warrant. Blah blah blah Carter Paige. Blah blah blah Obama spying. Blah blah blah I’m not taking sides.

[henrygandorf 29174]

yeah, once the 40th person got indicted, can we please stop talking about fisa warrants and "how this whole thing got started"?

if you find a cache of explosives and weapons grade narcotics in someone's apartment, i'm not asking any questions about probable cause. 

[notre dame joe 172]

3 hours ago, triplehorn said:

Would Carter Page's FISA warrant have been approved by the FISC judge without inclusion of the dossier material in the application ?  I'm guessing that's a Yes.  Does inclusion of properly represented dossier material disqualify application of other material that, used alone, would result in approval of the Page FISA warrant?  I don't see how.

Doesn't matter.  IF you lie to your spouse about where you were last night, you can't cleanse it by showing you didn't really have an affair.  Your honesty and motives are warped for good.

[Al Bundy's Napoleon Hand 13546]

You're suggesting none of the information in the dossier is true. Like it's one big lie. That suggestion, or in Trump's case, explicit statements, that the entire Steele dossier is fake is in itself a lie. Also, you're conflating unverified raw intel with intentional lies. Even in a court of law with a higher bar to clear, you can be charged with a multitude of crimes, be convicted of some and aquitted of some. That still makes you guilty. 

 

 

 

 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23356]

 

[jimmyjazz 45554]

4 hours ago, notre dame joe said:

Doesn't matter.  IF you lie to your spouse about where you were last night, you can't cleanse it by showing you didn't really have an affair.  Your honesty and motives are warped for good.

WTF?  That's not a good analogy at all. 

The Steele dossier was presented as unverified intelligence.  That's what it was.  To imply that any false statements within impugn the FISA warrant is lunacy.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23356]

On 5/1/2019 at 11:47 AM, Hugo Stiglitz said:

If someone wants a good internet domain to own, www.msnbcatthismomentintime.com is a good investment. 

...And Nicole Wallace/ChuckRosenberg are awesome.

Did anyone look into this?  Is this website available for purchase?

[Captainant 27447]

5 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Did anyone look into this?  Is this website available for purchase?

this is a dumb bit, but it's availble lol. You really could get more creative with the new URL suffixes

[Hugo Stiglitz 23356]

11 minutes ago, Captainant said:

this is a dumb bit, but it's availble lol. You really could get more creative with the new URL suffixes

 

 

Edited May 9, 2019 by Hugo Stiglitz
https://www.surlyhorns.com/board/index.php?/topic/172-the-robert-mueller-investigation/page/522/

[Hugo Stiglitz 23356]

North Korea

[elguapo 4583]

7 hours ago, notre dame joe said:

IF you lie to your spouse about where you were last night, you can't cleanse it by showing you didn't really have an affair.  Your honesty and motives are warped for good.

You mean similar to how Trump tried to get everyone around him to lie in order to obstruct the Mueller investigation.

[Loco 3752]

Plot twist

 

 

[Foosters 17730]

9 hours ago, henrygandorf said:

yeah, once the 40th person got indicted, can we please stop talking about fisa warrants and "how this whole thing got started"?

if you find a cache of explosives and weapons grade narcotics in someone's apartment, i'm not asking any questions about probable cause. 

I care. I care a great deal. But I've yet to see any evidence that the warrants were primarily based off insufficient or incorrect information.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23356]

Mark Zuckerberg 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23356]

34 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Did anyone look into this?  Is this website available for purchase?

 

27 minutes ago, Captainant said:

this is a dumb bit, but it's availble lol. You really could get more creative with the new URL suffixes

What about this one?

www.noregulatoryindustryfacebookcanundo.com

[Anastasis 23394]

3 hours ago, jimmyjazz said:

The Steele dossier was presented as unverified intelligence.

The answer is "unverified intelligence".

What are two words not included in the FISA application, Alex.

Correct.

I'll take "Surveillance state under guise of terrorism threat re-purposed to surveil American citizens" for $750. 

[Biff Tannen 45492]

48 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

North Korea

 

30 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Mark Zuckerberg 

Tuberculosis

 

 

 

 

What's going on?  Is Hugo's bot algorithm broken?

[jimmyjazz 45554]

3 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

The answer is "unverified intelligence".

What are two words not included in the FISA application, Alex.

You've seen the unredacted application?  You have proof that the Steele dossier was presented as fact?

[SmokeyTheBear 5562]

8 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

The answer is "unverified intelligence".

What are two words not included in the FISA application, Alex.

Correct.

I'll take "Surveillance state under guise of terrorism threat re-purposed to surveil American citizens" for $750. 

if the dossier never existed but everything else is the same, would you be fighting this fight as hard? would you be more apt to assume that evidence was provided to the courts that justified the order? 

*fyi - i question a surveillance state, against the patriot act as it is, i think TSA is a ridiculous overstep in security. just dont understand your needling of this issue. 

Edited May 9, 2019 by SmokeyTheBear

[Fozzz 152]

Great interview regarding the Mueller investigation.

 

[David Dennison 18655]

9 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

The answer is "unverified intelligence".

What are two words not included in the FISA application, Alex.

Correct.

I'll take "Surveillance state under guise of terrorism threat re-purposed to surveil American citizens" for $750. 

Have you read the unredacted application? Have you read the transcripts of the evidentiary hearings? How do you know the judge was not aware that intelligence gleaned from the dossier was unverified?

[Anastasis 23394]

Just now, jimmyjazz said:

You've seen the unredacted application?  You have proof that the Steele dossier was presented as fact?

No. I would love to and think it should all be declassified. I will concede that it is quite possible that those words are in redacted portions.  There are some redactions in footnotes that could be compatible with that theory, however I am not sure why those words would have been redacted while the applications representations that "Source #1's reporting has been corroborated and used in criminal proceedings and the FBI assesses Source #1 to be reliable" and "...the FBI believes Source #1's reporting to be credible." are unredacted. In sum, I'd bet against those words showing up linked together in the redacted portions. 

[David Dennison 18655]

4 minutes ago, Fozzz said:

Great interview regarding the Mueller investigation.

 

The premise of this interview is false.

[jimmyjazz 45554]

1 minute ago, Anastasis said:

No. I would love to and think it should all be declassified. I will concede that it is quite possible that those words are in redacted portions.  There are some redactions in footnotes that could be compatible with that theory, however I am not sure why those words would have been redacted while the applications representations that "Source #1's reporting has been corroborated and used in criminal proceedings and the FBI assesses Source #1 to be reliable" and "...the FBI believes Source #1's reporting to be credible." are unredacted. In sum, I'd bet against those words showing up linked together in the redacted portions. 

"Credible" doesn't mean "infallible".  I also expect that the general assumption going in is that there can be errors or false steps in the application.  To demand 100% accuracy would be absurd.

[Anastasis 23394]

6 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

Have you read the unredacted application? Have you read the transcripts of the evidentiary hearings?

There were no hearings at FISC associated with the Page applications. As such there are no transcripts. 

[GW Hayduke 1952]

You won’t be able to catch that chicken with your pants around your ankles

[seven 1366]

I'm not the ana basher a lot of the surl is, but dude, the obsession with this dossier and the FISA warrant is hugoesque