The Robert Mueller Investigation

[Lagunamadre 1975]

How is the Q crowd going to spin this one? I was assured this report would lead to mass arrests of the deep state. 

[triplehorn 2664]

DOJ IG report reveals Manafort was under FBI investigation two months before he joined Trump campaign ---> money laundering.

 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

Shocking the Republicans were completely full of shit again.  Good thing for them there’s no consequences and they will just keep throwing shit at any institution of accountability. 

[Foosters 18290]

7 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Shocking the Republicans were completely full of shit again.  Good thing for them there’s no consequences and they will just keep throwing shit at any institution of accountability. 

Full of shit you say?

I think not.

https://www.mediaite.com/radio/sean-hannity-proclaims-victory-with-release-of-ig-report-everything-we-told-you-was-dead-on-center-accurate/

[kevwun 16461]

The truth is whatever you want it to be when your audience is too lazy to ready anything for themselves.

[Biff Tannen 46287]

2 minutes ago, Foosters said:

Full of shit you say?

I think not.

https://www.mediaite.com/radio/sean-hannity-proclaims-victory-with-release-of-ig-report-everything-we-told-you-was-dead-on-center-accurate/

What you are seeing and what you are hearing is not happening.

[triplehorn 2664]

5 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Shocking the Republicans were completely full of shit again.  Good thing for them there’s no consequences and they will just keep throwing shit at any institution of accountability. 

It's not just being full of shit.  This crop of GOP is engaging in widespread systematic disinformation.

[Captainant 28634]

40 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

Don’t worry, I will. Gonna be later in the week. But maybe in the meantime you can tell me what it says about Steele’s credibility. I recall that you opined on  the result of an interview between the OIG and Steele and how a leak from his lawyers reflected on a determination of his credibility. Anything in there that leads you to reconsider?

Care to refresh my memory of that post?

[David Dennison 19585]

13 minutes ago, kevwun said:

The truth is whatever you want it to be when your audience is too lazy to ready anything for themselves.

Don't forget stupid. Lazy and stupid.

[ChuckNorrisActionJeans 2692]

Barr AND Durham signalling the fix.  What a disgrace.

[triplehorn 2664]

Every single fucking claim Trumpers have made to call the Mueller investigation and everything that spawned from it "illegitimate" is in ruins.  complete ruins.  every.single.one.

Trump campaign.  Mike Flynn.  Paul Manafort.  Roger Stone.  

And yet, just as he did with the Mueller report, here is Barr again trying to spin a false narrative.  As head of the DOJ, Barr is abusing the public trust to cover-up for a mobbed up fraudster.  Criminal pieces of shit, all of them.

[BrickHorn 18479]

40 minutes ago, Lagunamadre said:

How is the Q crowd going to spin this one? I was assured this report would lead to mass arrests of the deep state. 

Repent, ye sinners!  The Kingdom of Q is at hand!  

[David Dennison 19585]

42 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Shocking the Republicans were completely full of shit again.  Good thing for them there’s no consequences and they will just keep throwing shit at any institution of accountability. 

There were consequences for a bunch of Republican representatives last November, but I digress.

[triplehorn 2664]

Just now, David Dennison said:

There were consequences for a bunch of Republican representatives last November, but I digress.

All the R's shouting that impeachment is about 'trying to overturn the 2016 election result' have selective amnesia for the 2018 result.  2018 was about the public wanting to curb the results of 2016.  Dems should consider offering that choice rebuttal a bit more often.  

[triplehorn 2664]

 

[Horndog 2324]

2 hours ago, BrickHorn said:

All of this.  We’ve been bitching about FISA generally since its conception.  Conservatives loved that shit when it served their fascist impulses.  They only turned all ACLU on us when the system was used to attempt to thwart fascism.  

Par for the conservative course, really.  The defining principle of “conservative” ideology these days is preservation of unfair advantages and pathetic whining when those advantages are opened to others.  

[triplehorn 2664]

Gaslit Nation

 

 

[zork 629]

This is a Trump guy that is reading and tweeting on the whole report(if interested read down through the comments as he is doing an almost live log ) :

 

Edited December 9, 2019 by zork

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

Because fuck America that’s why.

[JimmyJames 12271]

1 minute ago, zork said:

This is a Trump guy that is reading and tweeting on the whole report(if interested read down through the comments as he is doing an almost live log ) :

 

Talk about a nothing burger there. 

What else ya got?

[zork 629]

3 minutes ago, JimmyJames said:

Talk about a nothing burger there. 

What else ya got?

Read it or not.  It is a different perspective perhaps.  

[JimmyJames 12271]

15 minutes ago, zork said:

Read it or not.  It is a different perspective perhaps.  

I did read it. Doesn’t fit your preferred narrative. Move on to the next lie I guess. There will always be one, right? Sorry it didn’t work out this time. Maybe the next lie will work out better for you. 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

 

[Anastasis 23730]

5 hours ago, JimmyJames said:

 

In all seriousness they basically said there was probable cause but missteps along the way. 

Regarding probable cause and the FISA application, I am not sure that I had the same take away in my quick read of the ES. I saw it suggest that the FBI has shelved the FISA against page because they couldn’t overcome the probable cause threshold until they recurved the Steele dossier, which they used to push the application over the threshold. Further that the omissions and errors in the process prevented a full and accurate assessment of the basis for probable cause by misrepresenting the full picture. Maybe I just misread the thing though. I was skimming. 

[JimmyJames 12271]

6 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

Regarding probable cause and the FISA application, I am not sure that I had the same take away in my quick read of the ES. I saw it suggest that the FBI has shelved the FISA against page because they couldn’t overcome the probable cause threshold until they recurved the Steele dossier, which they used to push the application over the threshold. Further that the omissions and errors in the process prevented a full and accurate assessment of the basis for probable cause by misrepresenting the full picture. Maybe I just misread the thing though. I was skimming. 

They had probable cause to investigate the trump campaign. If you want to argue that the standard is too low, fine. But the standard is low and they easily met it.

If your cause is FISA warrants and their abuse, this is not the hill you want to die on. Pick a better defendant and a better cause. 

[Anastasis 23730]

Here is the relevant section from the ES that I am referring to. I am speaking specifically to the FISA application to surveillance Page.  Wildcat and I, and probably others, had a number of different exchanges regarding the sufficiency of the probable cause without the Steele materials. Appears to me that a quick read of the ES puts that debate to rest. Will have to dig into the detailed chapters later as time permits. 
 

Shortly after opening the Carter Page investigation in August 2016, the Crossfire Hurricane team discussed the possible use of FISA-authorized electronic surveillance targeting Page, which is among the most sensitive and intrusive investigative techniques. As we describe in Chapter Five, the FBI ultimately did not seek a FISA order at that time because OGC, NSD's Office of Intelligence (OI), or both determined that more information was needed to support probable cause that Page was an agent of a foreign power. However, immediately after the Crossfire Hurricane team received Steele's election reporting on September 19, the team reinitiated their discussions with or and their efforts to obtain FISA surveillance authority for Page, which they received from the FISC on October 21.

The decision to seek to use this highly intrusive investigative technique was known and approved at multiple levels of the Department, including by then DAG Yates for the initial FISA application and first renewal, and by then Acting Attorney General Boente and then DAG Rosenstein for the second and third renewals, respectively. However, as we explain later, the Crossfire Hurricane team failed to inform Department officials of significant information that was available to the team at the time that the FISA applications were drafted and filed. Much of that information was inconsistent with, or undercut, the assertions contained in the FISA applications that were used to support probable cause and, in some instances, resulted in inaccurate information being included in the applications. While we do not speculate whether Department officials would have authorized the FBI to seek to use FISA authority had they been made aware of all relevant information, it was clearly the responsibility of Crossfire Hurricane team members to advise them of such critical information so that they could make a fully informed decision.

[JimmyJames 12271]

                                                                                                                                                                                                 

4 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

Here is the relevant section from the ES that I am referring to. I am speaking specifically to the FISA application to surveillance Page.  Wildcat and I, and probably others, had a number of different exchanges regarding the sufficiency of the probable cause without the Steele materials. Appears to me that a quick read of the ES puts that debate to rest. Will have to dig into the detailed chapters later as time permits. 
 

Shortly after opening the Carter Page investigation in August 2016, the Crossfire Hurricane team discussed the possible use of FISA-authorized electronic surveillance targeting Page, which is among the most sensitive and intrusive investigative techniques. As we describe in Chapter Five, the FBI ultimately did not seek a FISA order at that time because OGC, NSD's Office of Intelligence (OI), or both determined that more information was needed to support probable cause that Page was an agent of a foreign power. However, immediately after the Crossfire Hurricane team received Steele's election reporting on September 19, the team reinitiated their discussions with or and their efforts to obtain FISA surveillance authority for Page, which they received from the FISC on October 21.

The decision to seek to use this highly intrusive investigative technique was known and approved at multiple levels of the Department, including by then DAG Yates for the initial FISA application and first renewal, and by then Acting Attorney General Boente and then DAG Rosenstein for the second and third renewals, respectively. However, as we explain later, the Crossfire Hurricane team failed to inform Department officials of significant information that was available to the team at the time that the FISA applications were drafted and filed. Much of that information was inconsistent with, or undercut, the assertions contained in the FISA applications that were used to support probable cause and, in some instances, resulted in inaccurate information being included in the applications. While we do not speculate whether Department officials would have authorized the FBI to seek to use FISA authority had they been made aware of all relevant information, it was clearly the responsibility of Crossfire Hurricane team members to advise them of such critical information so that they could make a fully informed decision.

And what was their ultimate conclusion with respect to that? Maybe you could quote that for us as well. 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

 

[JimmyJames 12271]

It really is amazing the lengths that people who claim they don’t support trump will go to attempt to deflect and distract from his obvious criminal activity, while at the same time not raising one word or finger in any sort of outrage to the criminal behavior of our criminal president.

The morons, and the olds, have their excuse. What that means is that the more intelligent among us are either complicit, profiting, nihilistic, or just outright evil. They have no excuse. 

Edited December 10, 2019 by JimmyJames

[Anastasis 23730]

20 minutes ago, JimmyJames said:

                                                                                                                                                                                                 

And what was their ultimate conclusion with respect to that? Maybe you could quote that for us as well. 

Help me out buddy. I just have missed it among the listing of 15 or so errors, omissions and misstatements in the various applications. 

[JimmyJames 12271]

14 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

Help me out buddy. I just have missed it among the listing of 15 or so errors, omissions and misstatements in the various applications. 

Here is the conclusion. Everything else, including your fantasies, is bullshit.:

The decision to open the Crossfire Hurricane investigation was made by the FBI's then Counterintelligence Division (CD) Assistant Director (AD), E.W. "Bill" Priestap, and reflected a consensus reached after multiple days of discussions and meetings among senior FBI officials. We concluded that AD Priestap's exercise of discretion in opening the investigation was in compliance with Department and FBI policies, and we did not find documentary or testimonial evidence that political bias or improper motivation influenced his decision. While the information in the FBI's possession at the time was limited, in light of the low threshold established by Department and FBI predication policy, we found that Crossfire Hurricane was opened for an authorized investigative purpose and with sufficient factual predication.

 

Spin away asshole. 

[JimmyJames 12271]

Low threshold. Which I’ve been trying, without success, to get your mind wrapped around for months now.

but you refuse to acknowledge or even argue against. Just ignore, troll and gif. 

[Anastasis 23730]

No spin necessary. We are talking two very different matters. The predicate for the overall investigation, which as you say has a very low threshold, versus the probable cause for the FISA surveillance request. You are conflating two separate issues. I suspect that you are smart enough to recognize this distinction. But maybe not. Preferring to deflect. 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

Can we get a gif for this abortion? 

[JimmyJames 12271]

2 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

No spin necessary. We are talking two very different matters. The predicate for the overall investigation, which as you say has a very low threshold, versus the probable cause for the FISA surveillance request. You are conflating two separate issues. I suspect that you are smart enough to recognize this distinction. But maybe not. Preferring to deflect. 

Well maybe you can educate me. I’m very familiar with the standards of probable cause on a regular warrant. How exactly is a FISA warrant standard different, because if it is,  I would truly like to know. 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

 

[Anastasis 23730]

20 minutes ago, JimmyJames said:

Well maybe you can educate me. I’m very familiar with the standards of probable cause on a regular warrant. How exactly is a FISA warrant standard different, because if it is,  I would truly like to know. 

Not really my job to educate you. I quoted the of summary related to the process as it relates to the page application. Hopefully wildcat or somebody else will chime to discuss the findings in a substantive way. 

[Bozo_Casanova 27016]

My contribution was a SpongeBob image macro

[Brisketexan 107112]

Not really my job to educate you. I quoted the of summary related to the process as it relates to the page application. Hopefully wildcat or somebody else will chime to discuss the findings in a substantive way. 

1) the plight of the 4th amendment, particularly as it relates to warrants, and even more particularly as it relates to the FISA mechanism, is well-trod ground. That seems to be the biggest negative takeaway from this

2) ummm...everything else. Everything else about the report tells us that it was as legit investigation, and we are in a shitload of trouble.

Put a pin in point 1. It’s important. And we need to deal with it. AFTER we deal with the existential threat that’s the subject of point 2. Always deal with the existential threat first.

[Anastasis 23730]

9 minutes ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

My contribution was a SpongeBob image macro

Didn’t really get it, but I’m distracted at the moment. 

[Anastasis 23730]

3 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

1) the plight of the 4th amendment, particularly as it relates to warrants, and even more particularly as it relates to the FISA mechanism, is well-trod ground. That seems to be the biggest negative takeaway from this

And yet lots of curious silence when I was pointing out the many problematic points related specifically to the FISA problems in this situation. The use of unverified political opposition research to bolster a surveillance warrant in a fraught political context. Don’t worry. I will rehash those exchanges at some point. 

[Brisketexan 107112]

And yet lots of curious silence when I was pointing out the many problematic points related specifically to the FISA problems in this situation. The use of unverified political opposition research to bolster a surveillance warrant in a fraught political context. Don’t worry. I will rehash those exchanges at some point. 

Because you’re focusing on a pet issue that’s eclipsed by the existential threat. Forest, trees, etc. and it makes you look asinine.

[JimmyJames 12271]

35 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

Not really my job to educate you. I quoted the of summary related to the process as it relates to the page application. Hopefully wildcat or somebody else will chime to discuss the findings in a substantive way. 

Of course it’s not your job to educate me. I’m just to see if you might try to validate your opinion on the matter. Which you apparently aren’t gonna do. 

While you have points on FISA warrants, it’s just a lame red herring. Criticize trump on anything and you might have some semblance of credibility. 

[JimmyJames 12271]

42 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

Not really my job to educate you. I quoted the of summary related to the process as it relates to the page application. Hopefully wildcat or somebody else will chime to discuss the findings in a substantive way. 

And once again you avoided the question. How are they different?

[JimmyJames 12271]

31 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

And yet lots of curious silence when I was pointing out the many problematic points related specifically to the FISA problems in this situation. The use of unverified political opposition research to bolster a surveillance warrant in a fraught political context. Don’t worry. I will rehash those exchanges at some point. 

We have a president taking a wrecking ball to the centuries old established norms of this country who has expressly “joked” about becoming a dictator and you’re worried about FISA warrants? What’s the matter with you?

[Anastasis 23730]

1 hour ago, Brisketexan said:

Because you’re focusing on a pet issue that’s eclipsed by the existential threat. 

Intersection of politics with 4th amendment and surveillance state abuses. Pet issues.

[Judge Roybeanbag 11865]

I think the solution to this never ending peach of a problem is, we go find a different, perhaps less publicized case of FISA abuse, and you can argue about it there.  It would be more productive than here.  I mean throwing the quintuplets out with the bath water and all tends to stir people up.  There’s bound to be a tub with a half dead guppy you can use.  

Edited December 10, 2019 by Judge Roybeanbag

[Gil Bang 26303]

 

[Brisketexan 107112]

14 hours ago, Anastasis said:

Intersection of politics with 4th amendment and surveillance state abuses. Pet issues.

Groovy.  I agree.  Put a pin in it.

I mean, I may have lots of problems with sweetheart deals with defense contractors, and internal politics figuring in to promoting military officers, and flaws in conmbat training programs, etc.....but when the fucking Zeros are hitting us at Pearl, I say we focus on throwing everything we've got at the existential threat, and dealing with my pet issues (that are relevant to the overall situation) later.

We have a currently sitting administration that is an organized criminal enterprise that has engaged in naked corruption, actively solicited the assistance of foreign powers in connection with our elections and continues to do so.  And will continue to do so, and even worse, every fucking day.  

Aim at the Zeros and Kates and Vals.....we'll deal with our process problems after the bombs stop falling.  Doing otherwise makes you look like an idiot standing on the deck of the Arizona saying "see, we should have been better trained!  And we should have competent officers who wouldn't let us get caught with our pants down!"....as the fucking bombs are going off all around us.

[Bozo_Casanova 27016]

But her emails tho