No political bias but FBI made mistakes in probe of Trump 2016 campaign - watchdog

[Tippaporn]

6 minutes ago, candide said:

 

Quote from Trump. Is that what happened?

How low has President Obama gone to tapp my phones during the very sacred election process. This is Nixon/Watergate. Bad (or sick) guy!

1:02 PM · 4 mars 2017·Twitter for Android

You aren't seriously arguing the point, are you?

[Tippaporn]

3 minutes ago, candide said:

As far as I remember the IG stated that he talked about it with Barr and Barr did not provide any evidence. So It's a matter of 'faith' it seems.

It's an ongoing investigation.  Barr wouldn't need to provide any of his evidence to Horowitz.  Their investigations are separate.  They were not working together on the IG report.

 

There is so much evidence existing in the public realm which proves that the entire Russia hoax was a set up and a scam to 1) prevent Trump from acceding to the Presidency and when that failed 2) to remove him.  The term is harsh but not without merit:  It was treason.  Soon we will be in the justice phase.

[Tippaporn]

Pete Williams makes the point during the interview, "He (Page) wasn't in the campaign at the point when they began the surveillance."

 

Fer Christ's sake, any idiot understands that a FISA allows you to collect information such as emails, phone conversations, etc. going back into time.  And the 3 hop rule applies to target Page's contacts and the contacts of those contacts.  I bring it up to point out disingenuous attempts that so called journalists like Pete Williams make to obfuscate the truth.

[Eric Loh]

4 minutes ago, Tippaporn said:

So true.  Like the Keystone cops or Inspector Clouseau.  They never thought she would lose.

She can’t win with all those Russian help. Even Magoo will stumble across the finish line with that kind of Russia interference. 

[heybruce]

2 hours ago, Tippaporn said:

55555555555

 

Choose your own poison, heybruce, and feel free to call it what it isn't.  Downplay their fake reporting all you like, just as they downplay the Horowitz report.  Facts are facts and the facts are that the New York Times reports falsely.

 

"Nobody thinks the NY Times is perfect, . . . "

 

555555555555

 

And I've stated as well that I wouldn't waste my time with Fox News, so I'm not making comparisons.

Right.  I assume that, like most posters who criticize legitimate news sources, you don't want to tell us what news sources you use.

[heybruce]

1 hour ago, Tippaporn said:

. . . . they did not use the Steele dossier to open the investigation, etc...

 

Trump War Room tweet:

 

BOMBSHELL:

 

Inspector Horowitz admits that the warrant to spy on the Trump campaign was based "entirely" on information from the debunked Steele Dossier. The media continues to deny this fact!

 

What else have your sources gotten wrong, candide?  The future will tell?

You assume a Trump tweet is factual?  Seriously?

[Tippaporn]

8 minutes ago, heybruce said:

Right.  I assume that, like most posters who criticize legitimate news sources, you don't want to tell us what news sources you use.

Let's see, heybruce, so far your sources are being proven false day by day while mine have always been correct.  Yet still you prefer to stick with propaganda.

 

Dan Bongino, for one.  One of the most authoritative sources for the Russia hoax, which he accurately terms "spygate."  Just two of his books which deal with spygate.

 

Exonerated: The Failed Takedown of President Donald Trump by the Swamp

 

Spygate: The Attempted Sabotage of Donald J. Trump

 

And his fact-filled report on the Horowitz report and some of the gems contained within it.  A must watch for anyone interested in the truth.

 

 

And in case you get the foolish idea to pass him off as a conspiracy theorist or right wing nut job he's credible enough to have been granted an interview with President Trump himself.

 

 

 

 

[Tippaporn]

14 minutes ago, heybruce said:

You assume a Trump tweet is factual?  Seriously?

That wasn't a Trump tweet.  Are you serious thinking it was?

[Tippaporn]

This would apply specifically to the media:

 

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/2385

[Kelsall]

Even anti-Trump talking head Andrea Mitchell admits the FISA application was egregious.

 

https://www.foxnews.com/media/msnbc-andrea-mitchell-fbi-fisa-application-errors-egregious

 

 

[Tug]

ill Have what thease trump supporters are having I could use an escape from reality lol the sounds of desperation for sure

[rabas]

14 minutes ago, Tug said:

ill Have what thease trump supporters are having I could use an escape from reality lol the sounds of desperation for sure

You can! It starts on page 413 in the conclusions. Even senator Kennedy said reading it was like dropping acid.  Enjoy.

 

[gamb00ler]

On 12/10/2019 at 2:44 AM, Sujo said:

5 pages in and its obvious there are trump supporters that have not read the IG report.

I have the cure right here:

IG Report

 

enjoy!

[Sujo]

3 minutes ago, gamb00ler said:

I have the cure right here:

IG Report

 

enjoy!

I read it, its not what you guys think it is. Even Barr doesnt agree with it. Its nothing.

 

The origin of the investigation was not the dossier compiled by ivankas friend. So that alternative fact is debunked.

 

no political bias, not that it matters as facts dont have bias.

 

Nothing to see. Now back to impeachment.

[rabas]

Now that the FISA process's horrors are coming out and listening to Horowitz's testimony, I suspect he had to find the application justified because the FISA courts are literally too big to fail. Without another 911, they would never again get such power.

 

Durham on the other hand, has no such restrictions and is also able to investigate those involved.

 

[heybruce]

57 minutes ago, Tippaporn said:

Let's see, heybruce, so far your sources are being proven false day by day while mine have always been correct.  Yet still you prefer to stick with propaganda.

 

Dan Bongino, for one.  One of the most authoritative sources for the Russia hoax, which he accurately terms "spygate."  Just two of his books which deal with spygate.

 

Exonerated: The Failed Takedown of President Donald Trump by the Swamp

 

Spygate: The Attempted Sabotage of Donald J. Trump

 

And his fact-filled report on the Horowitz report and some of the gems contained within it.  A must watch for anyone interested in the truth.

 

 

And in case you get the foolish idea to pass him off as a conspiracy theorist or right wing nut job he's credible enough to have been granted an interview with President Trump himself.

 

 

 

 

Wow!  Granted an interview by the President?  Like other notables such as Alex Jones?  He is definitely a right wing nut job and conspiracy theorist.

 

What other "legitimate" news sources have you got?

[heybruce]

57 minutes ago, Tippaporn said:

That wasn't a Trump tweet.  Are you serious thinking it was?

So it was a "Trump War Room" tweet but not a Trump tweet?  What's the difference?

[heybruce]

51 minutes ago, Tippaporn said:

This would apply specifically to the media:

 

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/2385

Which media are attempting to overthrow of the government through force or violence?

[Tippaporn]

Attorney General Barr at Wall Street Journal CEO Council Meeting

 

An informative interview by Bill Barr on Dec. 10th.  Jump to the 2:23 mark for his remarks about the Horowitz report.

 

https://www.c-span.org/video/?467254-3/attorney-general-barr-wall-street-journal-ceo-council-meeting&start=143

 

"O.K., we're not going to talk to the campaign, we're going to send people in to the campaign, wire them up, and have them talk to the individuals.  That happened.  That happened in August, September, October.  And it all came back exculpatory."

 

Remember the FBI Oct. 26, 2017 letter responding to Charles Grassley's request asking if the FBI presented a counterintelligence briefing to the Trump campaign?  They wrote that a defensive briefing was given to both the Clinton and Trump campaigns.

 

https://www.judiciary.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/2017-10-26%20FBI%20to%20CEG%20(Trump%20Campaign%20Defensive%20Briefing,%20rec'd%2010-30).pdf

 

But it turned out that the FBI used that intelligence briefing to spy on the Trump campaign.

 

See V. ODNI Strategic Intelligence Briefing Provided to Candidate Trump, Flynn, and Another Campaign Advisor on page 340 in the Horowitz report.

 

For the libs here, do you understand what's happened?  Do you understand the gravity of the facts coming out?

 

I can't wait for Durham to finish his investigation.

[Tippaporn]

39 minutes ago, Tug said:

ill Have what thease trump supporters are having I could use an escape from reality lol the sounds of desperation for sure

Refute any of what I posted, Tug.  Go ahead and try.

 

Desperation!  555555555555

[Eric Loh]

2 minutes ago, Tippaporn said:

I can't wait for Durham to finish his investigation

In the words of regular poster here and I quote “it’s a nothing burger”. Don’t hang your hopes on that mate. 

[Tug]

1 hour ago, Tippaporn said:

It's an ongoing investigation.  Barr wouldn't need to provide any of his evidence to Horowitz.  Their investigations are separate.  They were not working together on the IG report.

 

There is so much evidence existing in the public realm which proves that the entire Russia hoax was a set up and a scam to 1) prevent Trump from acceding to the Presidency and when that failed 2) to remove him.  The term is harsh but not without merit:  It was treason.  Soon we will be in the justice phase.

Amen to that brother the sooner trump is locked up the better lol it’s so obvious rember helensky?rember russa if your listening and on and on I’m not a mark I know a con when I see one the vast majority of Americans aren’t marks we are tired of the lying the gas lighting and the spreading of russan disinformation by this potus I think I know who stands the best chance to be brought up on a treason charge

[Tippaporn]

12 minutes ago, Sujo said:

I read it, its not what you guys think it is. Even Barr doesnt agree with it. Its nothing.

 

The origin of the investigation was not the dossier compiled by ivankas friend. So that alternative fact is debunked.

 

no political bias, not that it matters as facts dont have bias.

 

Nothing to see. Now back to impeachment.

Donald Trump, Jr.:

 

"What (conveniently) no one is saying about IG Horowitz’s testimony today is that while he said in the report there no bias as to how the investigation started (low threshold)... based on everything else he said there is an insane amount of bias from that point forward."

 

No bias!  5555555555

 

"We'll stop it!"  Infamous words by Peter Strzok.  Who in their right mind can deny the bias?  I, for one, understand what bias is and recognize it when confronted with it.  I can't speak for others.

 

 

[Tippaporn]

20 minutes ago, heybruce said:

Wow!  Granted an interview by the President?  Like other notables such as Alex Jones?  He is definitely a right wing nut job and conspiracy theorist.

 

What other "legitimate" news sources have you got?

Again, your sources are being proven wrong day by day.  Mine have always been correct.  Live with it.

[Tippaporn]

19 minutes ago, heybruce said:

So it was a "Trump War Room" tweet but not a Trump tweet?  What's the difference?

A feeble, substanceless response.  Have you no counter arguments, refutations, counter facts, for any of the facts I've been posting this morning?

[rabas]

9 minutes ago, Eric Loh said:

In the words of regular poster here and I quote “it’s a nothing burger”. Don’t hang your hopes on that mate. 

You know the rules, can't post unsubstantiated information without a link! And it must be a reputable source.

 

[Tippaporn]

16 minutes ago, Eric Loh said:

In the words of regular poster here and I quote “it’s a nothing burger”. Don’t hang your hopes on that mate. 

The FBI continued to apply for FISA renewals with full knowledge that the basis for which they submitted the original FISA application was groundless and you consider that a "nothing burger?"

 

Are you serious, mate?

[Eric Loh]

2 minutes ago, rabas said:

You know the rules, can't post unsubstantiated information without a link! And it must be a reputable source.

 

You got me there. Those sources were unreputable. Just that they never stopped regurgitating the same stuff. 

[heybruce]

9 minutes ago, Tippaporn said:

Again, your sources are being proven wrong day by day.  Mine have always been correct.  Live with it.

Your sources include nonsense such as an excerpt of what Barr said during a Wall Street Journal CEO meeting.  I don't dispute that Barr said that, I simply maintain it is meaningless.

 

You may be impressed by your interpretation of events and determination of who is an isn't trustworthy, but no one else is.

[heybruce]

32 minutes ago, Tippaporn said:

Attorney General Barr at Wall Street Journal CEO Council Meeting

 

An informative interview by Bill Barr on Dec. 10th.  Jump to the 2:23 mark for his remarks about the Horowitz report.

 

https://www.c-span.org/video/?467254-3/attorney-general-barr-wall-street-journal-ceo-council-meeting&start=143

 

"O.K., we're not going to talk to the campaign, we're going to send people in to the campaign, wire them up, and have them talk to the individuals.  That happened.  That happened in August, September, October.  And it all came back exculpatory."

 

Remember the FBI Oct. 26, 2017 letter responding to Charles Grassley's request asking if the FBI presented a counterintelligence briefing to the Trump campaign?  They wrote that a defensive briefing was given to both the Clinton and Trump campaigns.

 

https://www.judiciary.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/2017-10-26%20FBI%20to%20CEG%20(Trump%20Campaign%20Defensive%20Briefing,%20rec'd%2010-30).pdf

 

But it turned out that the FBI used that intelligence briefing to spy on the Trump campaign.

 

See V. ODNI Strategic Intelligence Briefing Provided to Candidate Trump, Flynn, and Another Campaign Advisor on page 340 in the Horowitz report.

 

For the libs here, do you understand what's happened?  Do you understand the gravity of the facts coming out?

 

I can't wait for Durham to finish his investigation.

I read the section you indentified.  I didn't see anything against FBI regulations or that would not have been done in other investigations if the opportunity arose.  Perhaps you can point out what laws and regulations were violated.