The proof that he willfully deceived investigators appears strong, but the Justice Department likely felt there were too many obstacles to convicting him.
That sounds a little bit like McCabe's boss on July 5, 2016.
More from the article:
quote
It will be a while before we learn the whole story of why the Justice Department walked away from the McCabe case, if we ever do. I have some supposition to offer on that score. First, however, it is worth revisiting the case against McCabe as outlined by the meticulous and highly regarded IG, Michael Horowitz. If you want to know why people are so angry, and why they are increasingly convinced that, for all President Trump’s “drain the swamp” rhetoric, a two-tiered justice system that rewards the well-connected is alive and well, consider the following.
This is followed in the article by an itemized list that is worth reading, for anyone who cares about the integrity of our justice system.
America is now officially more confused than Boris Johnson’s barber.
President Trump’s campaign adviser, Roger Stone, was arrested by an FBI SWAT team, tried and convicted for lying to Congress and messing with a witness, and nearly had a book the size of a blue state thrown at him at sentencing. Meanwhile, Andrew McCabe, the fired FBI deputy director who, while in his official capacity, lied under oath in violation of a federal statute, won’t be charged by the Department of Justice (DOJ) for any criminality. Go forth, Andrew, and make more money as a CNN analyst.
Towards the end, he proposes a few possible answers to the question which frames my previous post.
Andrew Weissmann, a former Justice Department official who was known as Mueller's "pit bull" during the Russia investigation, said the Justice Department swapped out the "loser case" of Andrew McCabe, who escaped criminal charges on Friday for allegedly lying to investigators about authorizing media disclosures, for a fresh one targeting top former FBI officials, including McCabe, led by Jeffrey Jensen, the U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of Missouri.
I told you it wasn't over. Hillary Clinton and Cheryl Mills will be deposed as part of discovery for a lawsuit concerning the infamous "closet server".
A federal judge on Monday ordered former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to sit for a deposition in a lawsuit related to her use of a private email server while at the State Department.
U.S. District Judge Royce Lamberth issued the order in response to a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit filed more than five years ago by Judicial Watch, a conservative watchdog group.
Senate Judiciary Chairman Lindsey Graham has started deposing witnesses in his committee’s investigation into abuse of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act during the 2016 election.
Sen. Ron Johnson notified the Senate Homeland Security Committee of his intent to seek a subpoena against Burisma Holdings, a Ukrainian company tied to Hunter Biden.
"I don't remember" is the answer to everything. You can't lose with that answer. It cannot be proven that you remember even if presented with written evidence. "Did I write that? I don't remember" So many people are hit with lying charges.
As the entire world is focused on the coronavirus, there has been a steady trickle of news regarding the FISC and Russian collusion with the DNC during the 2016 elections.
Here is an example (although I know that no one cares):
Also, last month there were numerous stories showing that almost every single FISC warrant application during the waning days of the Obama administration was fraught with procedural flaws.
Ah, but James Comey is a choirboy and Trump is trying to kill us all.
Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain. Oh look! A squirrel! With the RONA!!!!
House Intelligence Committee Republicans are "laser-focused" on investigating information the CIA gave to the FBI in 2016, according to ranking member Devin Nunes.
For the first time, the California congressman described in great detail the next steps of a broad congressional inquiry into possible misconduct during the Russia investigation, which he said includes scrutiny of three "dossiers" and questions about three Russian Americans. All of this follows the declassification of key documents over the past couple weeks, including footnotes showing the FBI was warned British ex-spy Christopher Steele’s anti-Trump dossier was likely influenced by Russian disinformation and yet continued to use it, and Nunes's pledge to send more criminal referrals to the Justice Department.
Slow but steady progress. The picture becomes a little more clear with each passing week.
There have been articles over the last week which speculate that comments made by Barr indicate that indictments are coming. I have not linked any of those articles because they are no more than opinion.
There have been articles over the last week which speculate that comments made by Barr indicate that indictments are coming. I have not linked any of those articles because they are no more than opinion.
I have lost faith, and possibly many of us have been lied to. I don't listen to Glen Beck by any stretch of the word... but last week I was off work, and I was working in my garage and he seemed to be on in the morning every day. I know his history with Gold Line, and maybe Monday or Tuesday... he was on talking with some investment guy and he was literally saying that everyone should sell EVERYTHING. Glenn Beck was also reiterating the importance of selling everything. He said everyone should sell their homes, sell all their stocks, everything.
This was a *serious* discussion he was having... not like when they were making fun of that guy suffering from psychosis that said Democrats had put nanobots in his brain. I just think to myself, for the people who do listen to Glenn Beck and take everything he says seriously... how many of those people have now cashed out their retirement accounts? Just ridiculous. I'm thinking almost all of those guys on Fox News are like this... Sean Hannity, and even Bill O'Reilly who used to be on. This is one of the reasons why I stopped watching Fox News about 3 years ago. It's all garbage... no better than MSNBC.
While I'm convinced these people are guilty, I think Republicans are too fixated on trying to be honorable that they never prosecute these things, while alternately... many Democrats live by the idea of "the end justifies the means," so they have no problem bending rules or being unethical if it furthers their goals. It's part of the reason why we have so many faked hate crimes.
Convert it to cash that would be worthless if everything tanked? Convert it to gold or other precious metals that you can't spend?
Still need a place to live, and food to eat.
However, selling off and downsizing to eliminate debt could be a very good thing.
Beck is always selling something, usually gold or survival food. Many of his stories end up with a sales pitch.
He was (and probably still is) a "never Trumper" but has seen the writing on the wall and has sung a different tune lately.
He is an incessant oracle of doom and gloom. I think if anyone were to listen to his show everyday for a month, they would be compelled to jump off a building.
[This message has been edited by williegoat (edited 04-20-2020).]
Originally posted by olejoedad: Sell everything and do what?
He was being slick... he wasn't being explicit in saying that you should buy Gold, but did throw that in a few times, and I noticed both segments of the show were capped with advertisements by Gold Line. The guy he was talking to was a financial analyst who suggested that his viewers needed to buy assets that would not be affected by an economic down-turn.
Basically he talked at length about the Great Depression. First he said we were going to suffer from inflation, and then he said we would suffer from severe deflation where homes would be worthless. He said if you own a rental, to sell it immediately. The guest speaker and Beck tag-teamed about creating a very gloomy perspective on the economy.
Beck was literally telling everyone to sell everything, and then casually mentioned Gold a few times. Again... but the guest speaker would throw in tid-bits like... "Gold is recession and depression proof..."
quote
Originally posted by williegoat:
Beck is always selling something, usually gold or survival food. Many of his stories end up with a sales pitch.
He was (and probably still is) a "never Trumper" but has seen the writing on the wall and has sung a different tune lately.
He is an incessant oracle of doom and gloom. I think if anyone were to listen to his show everyday for a month, they would be compelled to jump off a building.
That's pretty much what I was doing. I was off from work for a week, plus the weekend before and the weekend after. So I sat in my garage, re-organizing it, working on various projects, throwing things out, and doing some work in my workshop. I was there every day from about 9 in the morning until 3 in the afternoon... so I heard his show continuously for a week.
Rush was pretty good... Hannity is better on the radio than he is on TV... but still annoying.
Please tell me ya'all' do get it. It's ALL "entertainment", and always has been. The varying severity of the current situation dictates the loss-leader.
I know we like to pretend that the "News" USED TO BE "The Truth". But it was NEVER that, nor was it ever intended to be, at least not how modern man see's it. It was ALWAYS "somebody's view" (eye/ear witness).
There can only be 2 kinds of "news": You either see it yourself or are told about it by someone who saw it. And that's as close as you'll ever get to "the truth". It was always "This is what I saw or what I've been told"
"News" and "truth" are not the same thing, and never have been. And we can test it!
Back in time. A Pony Express rider rides up to your homestead and shares "news" of all he has seen & heard. Is that "news" (to you)? Yup.
But, is it truth? Ummmmm.
Exactly. It's left up to each individual to decide what they do or don't believe of the things they didn't see themselves*.
Facts and Truth are not required to exist on the same plain. How they ever got tied together is beyond me. It's only what you saw or someone told you they saw! That don't make it true (fact)!
P.S. All I'm saying is the news used to sell character (i.e.trust). Now they sell Image (i.e. pleasure).
WE are the market. Not "Truth".
Ooooops.
*and don't even get me started on how faulty Human memory can be on what they think they saw verses what they actually saw. It's scary how flawed it can be.
[This message has been edited by Boondawg (edited 04-21-2020).]
Please tell me ya'all' do get it. It's ALL "entertainment", and always has been. The varying severity of the current situation dictates the loss-leader.
Most radio and TV talk shows are at least some level of entertainment, and others are billed outright as comedy shows... that pretend to have news. Shows like the Rush Limbaugh show have entertainment value of course, but they are news and commentary. Whether it's the kind of news you want to hear is a different story, but it's news none the less.
Glenn Beck's program seems to be on a whole other level... and tends to be somewhat conspiratorial. Just like some of those late-night Democrat comedy news shows... there are people who believe everything they hear on them.
quote
Originally posted by Boondawg:
I know we like to pretend that the "News" USED TO BE "The Truth". But it was NEVER that, nor was it ever intended to be, at least not how modern man see's it. It was ALWAYS "somebody's view" (eye/ear witness).
News was a bit more mainstream back in the day, because the overwhelming vast majority of the country was politically centrist. So that being what it was, politics wasn't the primary thing that people discussed. For the record, I largely don't talk about politics in any given day, except when I come on here, and most of my friends are Democrats.
But with social media and the "information age," people are more "educated" on policies. I use that term loosely, because I don't know that they are getting smarter, but they're getting influenced far more by their leanings. So that being the case, news has become decidedly biased. Fox News became popular as an alternative to the other large news organizations (ABC, CBS, NBC, etc.). These news stations became heavily biased towards left-leaning philosophies. We're beyond the point where this is even debatable. They've taken this direction as much as Fox News has decided to go the other way.
But there is still truth in news. If you've ever bothered to watch One America News, you might be pretty impressed. What I like about OAN is in the way the news is presented. They literally just tell you the news, they don't give opinion while doing it.
Watch any other news station, and they say things like... "Senator Corncobber from Kansas *excoriated* Senator Fagettaboutit from New York about the Save the Babies bill."
On OAN, this would be worded like this: "In a discussion yesterday about HR2103A, the "Save the Babies" bill, Senator Corncobber from Kansas expressed disagreement to NY Senator Fagettaboutit on aspects of language used within the bill."
It's subtle... but words really do matter. The "excoriated" word is meant to get you worked up. Also... in the previous news station, it would have been said in a very emotional and leading manner. On OAN, Peter Hussion says everything relatively emotionless. This is done intentionally so as not to lead into a story with a predisposition of how you should think about it. He reads the news in the same way that Walter Cronkite did.
I know you won't like the topic, and I know you won't appreciate the content, but I want you to pay attention to the words that Patrick Hussion uses when speaking to representative Matt Gaetz. He's calm, expressive, but doesn't use any leading words. For the record, this was the only one I could really find of him:
Originally posted by 82-T/A [At Work]: I don't listen to Glen Beck by any stretch of the word ...
I just think to myself, for the people who do listen to Glenn Beck and take everything he says seriously ...
I also do not follow him but have heard him quite a bit when he was on Fox News. He kind of had me hooked. Heh, he once spoke just in front of the Alamo and I went to watch in person, .
I liked the way he exposed the CCX. The Chicago Climate Exchange. Perhaps it was not Glen Beck who put all the dots together but I saw no one else doing it. If not for Glen I never would have known about the scam.
The Chicago Climate Exchange was envisioned to be the key player in the trillion-dollar "cap and trade" market. Think New York Stock Exchange and the wealth it created. It was initially funded by a $1.1 million grant from the Joyce Foundation of Chicago, and President Obama was a board member at the time.
Glen Beck listed all the key players, initial stakeholders, who "inside traded" from the get go. It was a who's who of the Global Warming hoax and other powerful liberals (including the likes of George Soros). After the Democrats won the White House, the House and the Senate in 2008, businesses and investors flocked to the exchange, believing Congress would quickly approve the program. It almost happened.
quote
Originally posted by 82-T/A [At Work]: ... I stopped watching Fox News about 3 years ago. It's all garbage... no better than MSNBC.
... news has become decidedly biased. Fox News became popular as an alternative to the other large news organizations (ABC, CBS, NBC, etc.). These news stations became heavily biased towards left-leaning philosophies. They've taken this direction as much as Fox News has decided to go the other way.
But there is still truth in news. If you've ever bothered to watch One America News, you might be pretty impressed. What I like about OAN is in the way the news is presented. They literally just tell you the news, they don't give opinion while doing it.
Watch any other news station, and they say things like... "Senator Corncobber from Kansas *excoriated* Senator Fagettaboutit from New York about the Save the Babies bill."
On OAN, this would be worded like this: "In a discussion yesterday about HR2103A, the "Save the Babies" bill, Senator Corncobber from Kansas expressed disagreement to NY Senator Fagettaboutit on aspects of language used within the bill."
It's subtle... but words really do matter. The "excoriated" word is meant to get you worked up. Also... in the previous news station, it would have been said in a very emotional and leading manner.
On OAN, Peter Hussion says everything relatively emotionless. This is done intentionally so as not to lead into a story with a predisposition of how you should think about it. He reads the news in the same way that Walter Cronkite did.
I watch Fox, MSNBC, CNN, and NBC. To some extent ABC and CBS. I can filter out the hyperbole and rhetoric. Just as easy as knowing if I buy one, I get one for free, no matter what the salesman / reporter says. I also do not believe that shipping is free.
I have seen OAN, its good. I do though like to hear both sides of an issue and the way it is presented gives more away about intentions than persuades me.
Provide this information as soon as possible but no later than May 18, 2020. Thank you for your attention to this important matter, and we trust you will respond expeditiously and completely.
Reps. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, and Mike Johnson, R-La., on Monday night said FBI Director Christopher Wray "has declined to respond" to their May 4 letter seeking information and interviews with key FBI officials after the bombshell revelations in the Michael Flynn case -- prompting the lawmakers to take matters into their own hands.
In the ensuing five months since this investigation has been ramped up, the FBI's response to demands for information has run the gamut from inadequate to non-existent. Do you think a private American citizen would be able to get away with ignoring inquiries from Congress and federal courts?
So tell me, if the national police do not have to answer to the federal courts or the legislative branch as they attack the executive branch, to whom do they answer?
[This message has been edited by williegoat (edited 05-19-2020).]
In the ensuing five months since this investigation has been ramped up, the FBI's response to demands for information has run the gamut from inadequate to non-existent. Do you think a private American citizen would be able to get away with ignoring inquiries from Congress and federal courts?
So tell me, if the national police do not have to answer to the federal courts or the legislative branch as they attack the executive branch, to whom do they answer?
Since the FBI works for the Executive Branch it should be up to Trump to get rid of his enemies and stack the Bureau with friendlies. You know, just like Obama did before him.
Since the FBI works for the Executive Branch it should be up to Trump to get rid of his enemies and stack the Bureau with friendlies. You know, just like Obama did before him.
That doesn't seem to do any good. Comey was (temporarily) replaced by McCabe and then Wray. Are there any honest, qualified men?
Yeah, they should all answer to the president, but instead they are like insolent, incorrigible children; a pack of gangsters trying to terrorize the neighborhood, with the blessing of "the mob".
The left operates exactly like an organized crime syndicate, not unlike the power structure in Ukraine and Mexico. In many parts of Mexico, law enforcement is coopted and clergy is intimidated.
[This message has been edited by williegoat (edited 05-19-2020).]
The Justice Department’s charging document stated that Clinesmith “did willfully and knowingly make and use a false writing and document, knowing the same to contain a materially false, fictitious, and fraudulent statement and entry in a matter before the jurisdiction of the executive branch and judicial branch of the Government of the United States.”
Four years of history have been based on lies. Just think of where this country could have been if we had been able to use the time and resources productively.
[This message has been edited by williegoat (edited 08-14-2020).]
A federal circuit ruled Hillary wont have to testify because all the information was already released. Sounds like she is getting some court cover her rear.
Director of National Intelligence John Ratcliffe on Tuesday declassified documents that revealed former CIA Director John Brennan briefed former President Obama on Hillary Clinton’s purported “plan” to tie then-candidate Donald Trump to Russia as “a means of distracting the public from her use of a private email server” ahead of the 2016 presidential election, Fox News has learned.
quote
“We’re getting additional insight into Russian activities from [REDACTED],” Brennan notes read. “CITE [summarizing] alleged approved by Hillary Clinton a proposal from one of her foreign policy advisers to vilify Donald Trump by stirring up a scandal claiming interference by the Russian security service,” Brennan’s notes read.
[This message has been edited by williegoat (edited 10-06-2020).]
Hey Williegoat, not trying to rub it in... but I'm still waiting for those arrests.
Hillary didn't win, and that's the worst thing that could have ever happened to her, second only to no one caring what she has to say anymore. But I still occasionally think of her sitting there with her bull **** smug look and can't help but think she got away with the biggest scandal in the history of this country.
There will be no arrests, and everyone will get away with everything.
The charge against Sussmann from a Washington grand jury is the first outward sign of activity in Durham’s investigation in nearly nine months. Republicans have grown impatient with the probe, while still hoping for a report that will vindicate former President Donald Trump’s charge that the original inquiry was a thinly veiled and unfounded political attack.
Durham was reportedly investigating whether Michael Sussmann, a former federal prosecutor and a lawyer at Perkins Coie, lied to the FBI regarding who — if anyone — he was representing when he tipped off the Bureau about communications between the Trump Organization and the Kremlin-connected Russian bank Alfa Bank.
The indictment states that Sussmann lied to top FBI lawyer James Baker in a meeting on September 19, 2016. In that meeting, Sussmann presented data and analysis from cybersecurity researchers who suspected the Trump Organization was using a secret server to communicate with Alfa Bank.
The rumor of a secret server, which was fanned by Hillary Clinton and sympathizers
Perkins Coie’s internal billing records, which Durham obtained, suggest something potentially more nefarious.
Sussmann billed the hours he spent on the Alfa Bank probe to Hillary Clinton’s 2016 campaign
Mr. Sussmann's upcoming "suicide" will be related in the media as a tragedy.
[This message has been edited by randye (edited 11-04-2021).]
A Russian analyst who contributed to a dossier of Democratic-funded research into ties between Russia and Donald Trump was arrested Thursday on charges of lying to the FBI about his sources of information, among them a longtime supporter of Hillary Clinton.
The case against Igor Danchenko is part of special counsel John Durham’s ongoing investigation into the origins of the FBI’s probe into whether Trump’s 2016 campaign and Russia had conspired to tip the outcome of that year’s presidential campaign.
Igor Danchenko was taken into custody Thursday morning as part of special counsel John Durham's investigation into the origins of the FBI's Trump-Russia probe. Danchenko has been charged with five counts of making false statements.
The 43-year-old was a primary source of information for the so-called Steele dossier, a collection of reports compiled by former British spy Christopher Steele. The dossier contained salacious claims about then-candidate Trump as well as allegations that people within Trump's orbit were conspiring with Russia to win the 2016 U.S. presidential election.
That's Apples and Oranges . . . the "Oranges" (as DJT called it) of the FBI's Crossfire Hurricane investigation, that morphed (after the firing of James Comey and the appointment of a Special Counsel, as if anyone could forget) into the "Mueller probe." In other words, the "Russia, Russia, Russia" thing.
The "Oranges" of the Russia investigation. Has John Durham finally "hit the jackpot"..?
The Mueller probe. But it's not on its way to investigate one of the Solar System's other planets.
[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 11-04-2021).]
That's Apples and Oranges . . . the "Oranges" (as DJT called it) of the FBI's Crossfire Hurricane investigation, that morphed (after the firing of James Comey and the appointment of a Special Counsel, as if anyone could forget) into the "Mueller probe." In other words, the "Russia, Russia, Russia" thing.
CLICK FOR FULL SIZE
The "Oranges" of the Russia investigation. Has John Durham finally "hit the jackpot"..?
No, to "hit the jackpot" is a leftist dream. Conservatives believe in working diligently to build a reliable, sustainable future. Hopefully, in the future we will all be allowed to enjoy the fruits of our labor, unencumbered by socialist policy.
quote
CLICK FOR FULL SIZE
The Mueller probe. But it's not on its way to investigate one of the Solar System's other planets.
AND IT IS NEVER WHAT THE LEFTIST MEDIA ORIGINALLY TOLD YOU
(randye)
.................................................
THE "MUELLER PROBE" IS OVER....LONG GONE....DONE....TOAST....VORBEI....
IT SEEMS THAT SHIFF-FOR-BRAINSFINALLY ADMITTED WHAT WAS OBVIOUS TO EVERYONE
" (Schiff), admitted that he instructed Democrats on the committee to simplify their questioning strategy after the first session to accommodate Mueller's cognitive inhibitions.
"No questions calling for a narrative answer," Schiff told the committee, according to his book. "No multipart questions. If you think your question may be too long, it is. Cut it down."
Originally posted by williegoat: The Mueller probe did indeed, "bomb out".
I doubt that Paul Manafort actually thinks of it that way. Or Rick Gates, Mike Flynn, Roger Stone . . .
This new plot twist--the charge(s) against this guy, for lying to the FBI (nice rhyme, if I do say so myself)--has my attention.
Keep in mind the assertions that Crossfire Hurricane was not predicated upon the Steele dossier. And that is what is in the crosshairs with this guy and the charge(s) against him--the Steele dossier.
I "get" that the Steele dossier was referenced in some of the subpoenas or surveillance requests that went before judges, as Crossfire Hurricane and then the Mueller investigation played out, but if you ask me (why not?) I don't see that this new development has the potential to wipe out the results of the Mueller investigation--to do a "Servpro" (so to speak) on it and make it like it never even happened.
The indictments that came from the Mueller investigation, the convictions and guilty pleas, and Mueller's final presser where he highlighted Team Trump's willingness to "play ball" with the Russians during the 2016 national election cycle--I think that all stands, regardless of what could come from this new, Steele dossier-related plot twist..
[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 11-05-2021).]
