• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Barr Assigns U.S. Attorney in Connecticut to Review Origins of Russia Inquiry

The Mark said:
I hope this investigation is thorough and complete, and everyone accepts the results as they are, just like everyone did with the Mueller investigation.
Click to expand...


agree 100%

:beer::cheers::beer:
 
vesper said:
This is very good news and sooner than I expected. This U.S. Attorney is going to have mountains of evidence already uncovered from previous investigations in Congress and IG Horowitz's investigation to assist him. And with this news tonight I am sure there are several people feeling a bit uneasy.
Click to expand...

If you follow Judicial Watch, Tom Fitten has been doing discovery using the Freedom of Information Act, and has saved Barr a lot of time, and made the prosecutor’s job easier.

A S.P. Goes too far and wide and is too slow.
 
Trump said:
A Note on FISA "Verification" - Just Security
Click to expand...

Meaning that I finally pushed you far enough to admit that you were not referring to verification of facts. You were referring to the verification of the use of the Woods Process. That was like pulling teeth. Thanks for playing.

The dotting of I's and crossing of T's in the woods process is quite specific and procedural in nature. This document has to go there. That must be signed off by such and such a Supervisor and Authorizations granted procedurally. I will be much surprised if this whole thing turns out to be a procedural dustup. However you are welcome to wait breathlessly for a different result.
 
chuckiechan said:
If you follow Judicial Watch, Tom Fitten has been doing discovery using the Freedom of Information Act, and has saved Barr a lot of time, and made the prosecutor’s job easier.

A S.P. Goes too far and wide and is too slow.
Click to expand...
Yes I do check out the Judicial Watch website from time to time and they have done some really good work.
I heard tonight U.S. Attorney Durham described as a bull dog, a charger...…..
 
Where is John Huber on this? Sessions appointed him over a year ago, what has he found?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
jnug said:
Meaning that I finally pushed you far enough to admit that you were not referring to verification of facts. You were referring to the verification of the use of the Woods Process. That was like pulling teeth. Thanks for playing.

The dotting of I's and crossing of T's in the woods process is quite specific and procedural in nature. This document has to go there. That must be signed off by such and such a Supervisor and Authorizations granted procedurally. I will be much surprised if this whole thing turns out to be a procedural dustup. However you are welcome to wait breathlessly for a different result.
Click to expand...

I'll wait.

I think Nellie Ohr invoking spousal privilege needs to be investigated further.

Nellie Ohr worked as a contractor for Fusion GPS, the research firm that hired ex-British intelligence agent Christopher Steele to compile the dossier. She is an academic and Russia expert, and relied on open source documents to pull together information on Russian oligarchs as part of her employment with Fusion GPS, according to a person with knowledge of her work for the firm.
But most of the Republicans lawmakers' key questions involved conversations with her husband about Fusion GPS and the dossier, which she didn't answer, invoking a spousal privilege.
Click to expand...

Fusion GPS contractor Nellie Ohr doesn't say much at House interview - CNNPolitics
 
TurtleDude said:
I still am wondering what objective harm so many of the Trump haters have sustained. Less employment? A tanking economy? etc?
Click to expand...

Higher electricity bills due to having CNN on 24/7.
 
jnug said:
You are welcome to. But I fail to see what conversations between the Ohr's have to do with anything. Either the procedures were followed and the right sign offs requested and granted or they were not. Anything else is a an effort to make a mountain out of a mole hill.
Click to expand...

you could be right....just want to see it all...including 302s

just don't think McCabe Page Strzok are brightest bulbs...mistakes are likely imo
 
jnug said:
Nobody verified anything. Just because raw intel material finds its way into a FISA Warrant request does not mean it was "verified". Intel is intel. Seeking a warrant is not the same thing as seeking a conviction through prosecution. We are going to find that the FISA Warrants were properly applied for and properly granted and that the Steele Dossier is nothing more than a meaningless dustup in that regard.
Click to expand...

I heard somebody say you beat your wife.
There you go, raw Intel. Get the warrant- Athanasius68 has spoken.
The reality is that the FBI own internal standards mandate that my claim would have to be verified before being used.
 
Athanasius68 said:
I heard somebody say you beat your wife.
There you go, raw Intel. Get the warrant- Athanasius68 has spoken.
The reality is that the FBI own internal standards mandate that my claim would have to be verified before being used.
Click to expand...

The bar is crazy low....they'd just have to say we checked out the person giving us the info and found them to be credible in this case you Athanasius68

That could be a problem if they claim Steele was credible and a paper trail says not credible and yet they submitted it and received FISA based on false info
 
Trump said:
you could be right....just want to see it all...including 302s

just don't think McCabe Page Strzok are brightest bulbs...mistakes are likely imo
Click to expand...

I don't know how much I want the American public seeing. Fine with a prosecutor reviewing. The current state of the American public is "dumb as a rock". Currently there is a fairly large contingent that cannot tell the dif between the use of the term "Spying" as a term of art and "potential unauthorized surveillance".

MSM makes a big deal of the term Spying as a colloquialism as a means to justify all this uproar and nonsense. Going back to a comment I made in an earlier post, a citizen may well be convicted at trial without his ever acknowledging the existence of a single fact as evidence and facts are not necessarily the same things. He will have no valid complaints in that regard if convicted. However if said citizen is convicted on a "colloquialism" he will have every right to complain. Colloquialisms have no place in the Federal Code.
 
Trump said:
The bar is crazy low....they'd just have to say we checked out the person giving us the info and found them to be credible in this case you Athanasius68

That could be a problem if they claim Steele was credible and a paper trail says not credible and yet they submitted it and received FISA based on false info
Click to expand...

Total BS. Why don't you educate yourself before spouting off Hannity and Rush Bull****....
 
So we now have three active investigations into the origins of an investigation whose legitimate origins we already know, an investigation which was begun to protect America from foreign influence and found copious evidence of wrongdoing which resulted in criminal charges.

If you cannot see how this is an abuse of power, then you're probably a propagandist or an idiotic Trump supporter regurgitating paid propagandists.
 
So the other 2 ongoing investigations into this aren't good enough? Horowitz has been at it for one year. Where is his report? And John Huber is already investigating this, too. What, no faith in him?

Where is all that concern we saw about the costs of investigations?

And where is the typical response from Trump Fan Nation that anonymous sources aren't to be believed? Did Barr leak this? Someone sure did. I thought Trump Fan Nation was appalled by leakers?
 
tres borrachos said:
So the other 2 ongoing investigations into this aren't good enough? Horowitz has been at it for one year. Where is his report? And John Huber is already investigating this, too. What, no faith in him?

Where is all that concern we saw about the costs of investigations?

And where is the typical response from Trump Fan Nation that anonymous sources aren't to be believed? Did Barr leak this? Someone sure did. I thought Trump Fan Nation was appalled by leakers?
Click to expand...
But, but, but...that's....DIFFERENT!

Obviously. ;)
 
tres borrachos said:
So the other 2 ongoing investigations into this aren't good enough? Horowitz has been at it for one year. Where is his report? And John Huber is already investigating this, too. What, no faith in him?

Where is all that concern we saw about the costs of investigations?

And where is the typical response from Trump Fan Nation that anonymous sources aren't to be believed? Did Barr leak this? Someone sure did. I thought Trump Fan Nation was appalled by leakers?
Click to expand...

The Mueller investigation wasn’t enough for Democrats. [emoji2369] Twice the standards.
 
Aberration said:
The Mueller investigation wasn’t enough for Democrats. [emoji2369] Twice the standards.
Click to expand...

Cool story and has nothing to do with what I posted.

How many investigations do you want into this? Were you and the others lying when you expressed concern about costs and ongoing investigations? Or was that different?

Mueller specifically listed instances that prohibited him from exonerating the campaign of obstruction of justice. They will investigate it. If you don't want them to do it, write to your representative and tell him or her.
 
tRumps own little hands and big fat mouth were the reason the Special Council was appointed. IF tRump had not fired Comey and then went on National T.V. to tell the Nation that he fired Comey because of "the Russer thing" there would never have been a Special Council.<--PERIOD McGann and Bannon told him as much the day after the Holt interview.

On the other hand this "Barr investigation" is just smoke an mirrors to deflect attention from all the "Barr's Mueller Coverup"; NOTHING will ever come of it. Barr is handing this off because he's already proved himself to be in tRumps pocket; he can't afford further embarrassment.
 
TurtleDude said:
I never denied being partisan-you have and that is the real joke. I get the fact you are really upset that Hillary lost, after most of the media had promised you that she had it wrapped up-so rather than accepting the fact that Hillary sucked as a candidate, and her campaign sucked even more, you try to pretend that she lost due to some nefarious actions by everyone from Bernie to Putin.
Click to expand...

Why do you keep going back to this irrational thinking, TD? Am I to assume that every negative comment you made about Obama (and you made plenty of them) was strictly because you were mad that McCain and Romney didn't win? That you had no real objection to him or his Presidency?

You're better than this. This is weak and churlish.
 
Trump said:
Someone in DOJ verified Steele dossier for FISA court.....a document which Steele himself admitted under oath could not be verified.

the squeeze begins until last person standing takes the fall....McCabe is probably the fall guy imo
Click to expand...

The bolded is false. Yet another Trumpster who doesn't understand the concept of "probable cause".
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom