Home FAQ Search Memberlist User Groups Register Login   

BloggingTories.ca Forum IndexBloggingTories.ca Forum Index
    Index     FAQ     Search     Register     Login         JOIN THE DISCUSSION - CLICK HERE      

*NEW* Login or register using your Facebook account.

Not a member? Join the fastest growing conservative community!
Membership is free and takes 15 seconds


CLICK HERE or use Facebook to login or register ----> Connect



Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3  

Post new topic   Reply to topic Page 3 of 3
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Bugs





Joined: 16 Dec 2009
Posts: 4696
Reputation: 254.4
votes: 8

PostPosted: Wed Feb 07, 2018 6:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

This must be what Morris knew when he wrote his piece.

Quote:
Texts between FBI lovers reveal Obama wanted to be briefed on EVERYTHING happening in Clinton email investigation – after he 'guaranteed' he wouldn't get involved
* Lisa Page wrote her lover Peter Strzok about the Clinton probe: Obama 'wants to know everything we're doing'
* Obama had said he could 'guarantee' he wouldn't interfere and there would be 'no political influence' in the FBI investigation
* The September 2, 2016 text message was among more 50,000 texts the pair sent during a two-year extramarital affair
* Page was an FBI lawyer, and Strzok was a leading investigator on both the Clinton probe and the more recent Trump-Russia investigation
* Strzok, though expected to be nonpartisan, also called Trump 'a f***ing idiot' and texted Page about a cryptic 'insurance policy' against a Trump presidency
* 'NEW FBI TEXTS ARE BOMBSHELLS!' President Trump tweeted on Wednesday
By David Martosko, Us Political Editor For Dailymail.com

PUBLISHED: 08:49 EST, 7 February 2018 | UPDATED: 13:16 EST, 7 February 2018

An FBI lawyer wrote in a text to her lover in late 2016 that then-president Barack Obama wanted updates on the Hillary Clinton email investigation.

Two months before the presidential election, Lisa Page wrote to fellow FBI official Peter Strzok that she was working on a memo for then-FBI director James Comey because Obama 'wants to know everything we're doing.'

Obama had said five months earlier during a Fox News Channel interview that he could 'guarantee' he wouldn't interfere with that investigation.

'I do not talk to the attorney general about pending investigations. I do not talk to FBI directors about pending investigations. We have a strict line,' he said on April 10, 2016.

'I guarantee it. I guarantee that there is no political influence in any investigation conducted by the Justice Department or the FBI, not just in this case but in any case. Full stop. Period,' he said.'

The September 2, 2016 text message was among more 50,000 texts the pair sent during a two-year extramarital affair.

Fox News was first to report on the latest batch, which is to be released by Republicans on the Senate Homeland Security Committee.

The committee members will soon publish a report titled 'The Clinton Email Scandal and the FBI's Investigation of it.'

President Donald Trump tweeted on Wednesday: 'NEW FBI TEXTS ARE BOMBSHELLS!'

Comey testified to Congress in June 2017: 'As FBI director I interacted with President Obama. I spoke only twice in three years, and didn't document it.'

He didn't address possible memos or other written reports he may have sent to the Obama White House.

But Comey did document his 2017 meetings with President Donald Trump, he said, because he feared Trump would interfere with the Russia probe.

Strzok was the lead investigator on the probe examining Clinton's illicit use of a private email server to handle her official State Department messages while she was America's top diplomat.

He was later a member of special counsel Robert Mueller's team investigating alleged links betwen Donald Trump's presidential campaign and Russia.
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/new.....z56T9r1uRF
Bugs





Joined: 16 Dec 2009
Posts: 4696
Reputation: 254.4
votes: 8

PostPosted: Mon Feb 12, 2018 11:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

It appears that some scores are about to be settled. The House Intelligence Committee is going to investigate some previous cases of other cases where there is a suspicion that officials lied to Congress.

John Brennan is mentioned as a first target, who is almost certainly guilty of lying under oath to Congress -- and he has never been punished. Clapper is another one that must be sleeping poorly. This is from 2014.

Quote:
Obama should fire John Brennan
By James Downie July 31, 2014 Email the author

CIA Director John O. Brennan speaks at the Council on Foreign Relations in Washington on March 11. (Carolyn Kaster/Associated Press)
In March, at the Council on Foreign Relations, CIA Director John Brennan was asked by NBC’s Andrea Mitchell whether the CIA had illegally accessed Senate Intelligence Committee staff computers “to thwart an investigation by the committee into” the agency’s past interrogation techniques. The accusation had been made earlier that day by Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), who said the CIA had “violated the separation-of-powers principles embodied in the United States Constitution.” Brennan answered:

Quote:
As far as the allegations of, you know, CIA hacking into, you know, Senate computers, nothing could be further from the truth. I mean, we wouldn’t do that. I mean, that’s — that’s just beyond the — you know, the scope of reason in terms of what we would do. {…}

And, you know, when the facts come out on this, I think a lot of people who are claiming that there has been this tremendous sort of spying and monitoring and hacking will be proved wrong.

Now we know that the truth was far different. The Post’s Greg Miller reports:

CIA Director John O. Brennan has apologized to leaders of the Senate Intelligence Committee after an agency investigation determined that its employees improperly searched computers used by committee staff to review classified files on interrogations of prisoners. {…}
https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-partisan/wp/2014/07/31/obama-should-fire-john-brennan/?utm_term=.66d1e16b9d2f


My sense is that the investigation is already widening. On another front, one wonders when the arrests will start. This has the potential to ruin the Democrat Party -- not because of its politics, but because of its corruption.
Bugs





Joined: 16 Dec 2009
Posts: 4696
Reputation: 254.4
votes: 8

PostPosted: Thu Feb 15, 2018 8:27 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Feb 15th, and still nothing official has happened.

But the signs are there. There has been open speculation about Obama's role. It was reported that the existence of the dossier, and its contents, were revealed to Obama in a briefing. This is the signficance of the Susan Rice memo, sent two weeks after the new administration had been sworn into office, and asking questions about what info should be turned over to the new administration. This could easily be construed as a crime. Rice reported directly to Obama. She looks to me as if she will be the sacrificial victim to save Obama.

Obama has disappeared. He's not answering questions.

The situation of the FBI gets worse daily. The most recent revelations show that McCabe, the deputy director of the FBI, sat on a stack of Hillary emails until days before the election, and possibly after Comey had closed the investigation. McCabe's wife received a $500,000+ "donation" from the Clinton people -- purportedly to run for office -- but it could qualify as a bribe, and that would have Hillary's campaign paying McCabe to jam up on the emails, and pervert the course of Justice for political gain.

And that means jail time.
Bugs





Joined: 16 Dec 2009
Posts: 4696
Reputation: 254.4
votes: 8

PostPosted: Sat Feb 17, 2018 1:59 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Meuller indicts 13 Russians for disparaging Hillary on the internet

That headline was taken from a Rush Limbaugh video. It about says it all.

As best I can figure, some Russians spent $300,000 on ads that have been construed as an interference in the election. To put it in perspective, Hillary spent over a $billion and Trump spend a third to a half of that. (All these are estimates.)

The Russians are charged with something called "aggravated identity theft" and "mail fraud". They aren't being accused of sabotage. Maybe they hope to use this as a "hammer" to trade off in return for evidence against the President.

Not only that, but the ads were reportedly clumsily done. They had no impact. They wrote comments on the internet! Everybody uses false identities. I don't know if this is what they mean by 'identity theft', frankly ... it seems they "posed" as a US organization.

Oh, and did I mention that these people are in Russia, and will never face a trial.

By rights, since none of this has a connection to Trump, the investigation should close down. It probably won't, since it's a political weapon more than a search for truth.

All the public attention is on "the dossier". Limbaugh makes this point: how are they going to indict these Russians and not indict Steele, the author of the "dossier"?

Stay tuned ...
Bugs





Joined: 16 Dec 2009
Posts: 4696
Reputation: 254.4
votes: 8

PostPosted: Tue Feb 20, 2018 10:21 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Some independent journalists have been digging into the actual Russian 'interference' in the election. Nobody would call this collusion ... but it is a minor interference in the political process, although not really the elections.

Quote:
CNN and MSNBC Helped Russia Sow Discord by Promoting Fake Anti-Trump Rally

By Rich Noyes | February 19, 2018 1:09 PM EST
One of the revelations in Friday’s indictment handed down by Special Counsel Robert Mueller was that alleged Russian attempts to sow disunity in 2016 included the organization of both pro- and anti-Trump rallies in New York City on the Saturday after Election Day.

A check of their November 12 coverage showed both CNN and MSNBC gave enthusiastic coverage to the Russian-organized anti-Trump rally that day, with live reports every hour. Correspondents celebrated the idea that it was “a love rally,” and repeated the marchers’ anti-Trump mantras, such as: “We reject the President-elect.”

While the two liberal anti-Trump networks offered heavy coverage of the anti-Trump rally throughout the day, a check of coverage between noon and 5:00 p.m. Eastern found that the Fox News Channel offered only a short re-cap (66 seconds) at the start of their 4:00 p.m. Eastern hour.

Of course, none of the networks were aware of who was allegedly behind the march, but CNN and MSNBC reveled in the inflammatory messages of the march. At one point, MSNBC anchor Alex Witt credulously responded to the ridiculously alarmist rhetoric: “That woman, when she’s saying she’s concerned that black people will be shot in the street....Is that a legitimate concern for her? Because, that’s scary.”

Correspondent Morgan Radford cheerfully played along: “Alex, it’s not only a legitimate concern for her, it’s a legitimate concern for a lot of people I’ve spoken to....They’re wondering if this [Trump’s election] is almost a license to carry in terms of hate.”

If the goal of the secret Russian organizers was to inject nonsense like that into the American political dialogue, then their unwitting helpers on CNN and MSNBC certainly gave them plenty of assistance that day. [....]
https://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/rich-noyes/2018/02/19/flashback-cnn-and-msnbcs-enthusiastic-coverage-russian-sponsored-anti


You won't see this in the New York Times.

There is another little tickle. Trump re-tweeted a tweet from a VP of Facebook -- stating that the Russians were not trying to affect who won the election. How do we know? Because more than half of the ad expenditures were made AFTER the election!

What the Russians probably want is to increase the conflict in the country, no matter who wins. They want to make America weaker, not install a puppet.

The thing is -- this is the same theory the Democrats (under Obama) are using. That's the thinking about "never let a crisis go to waste". They feel that crisis after crisis is the way to bring the state down.
Post new topic   Reply to topic Page 3 of 3

Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3  


 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You can attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum


Clinton/Trump Russian Collusion thread

phpBBCopyright 2001, 2005 phpBB