ChiefsPlanet Mobile
Page 4 of 17
< 1234 567814 > Last »
Washington DC and The Holy Land>Durham Arrest Watch - Tracking impending arrests in DOJ/FBI criminal investigation
Taco John 05:46 PM 12-15-2019
This interview seems like "required reading" at this point:


[Reply]
Donger 08:48 AM 12-16-2019
Originally Posted by Shields68:
Just like we were vocal when saying there was FISA abuse and you kept insisting that there was not?
I didn't say there wasn't. I said that I hadn't seen any evidence of it.

How do you define "FISA abuse"?
[Reply]
Pennywise 08:50 AM 12-16-2019
Neat little MSM story.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/opini...mn/2637744001/
[Reply]
Trolly McTrollson 08:50 AM 12-16-2019
Originally Posted by Donger:
How do you define "FISA abuse"?
How do *you* define FISA abuse?
[Reply]
Shields68 08:56 AM 12-16-2019
Originally Posted by Donger:
IIRC, they reported that Horowitz found no political bias in the opening of the investigation. Which he didn't.

They both said that they didn't agree with his conclusions. So, I presume that they HAVE found evidence that the investigation was opened because if bias. They better, anyway.

The Clinesmith guy? Certainly improper. I don't know if it was/is illegal.
FBI/DOJ agent altering/falsifying evidence, he knows is going into a court document is just improper. Wow. Unbelievable. He straight up changed the evidence he knows would lead to a denial of the Page FISA warrant. I mean if he discloses Page is a CIA asset and the contacts with Russians are on behalf of the CIA the warrant is denied.
[Reply]
Shields68 08:57 AM 12-16-2019
Originally Posted by Donger:
I didn't say there wasn't. I said that I hadn't seen any evidence of it.

How do you define "FISA abuse"?
Using the dossier in a FISA warrant. Which you did know about but defended.

But read the IG report there was 17 good examples of FISA abuse.
[Reply]
IowaHawkeyeChief 08:57 AM 12-16-2019
Originally Posted by Donger:
IIRC, they reported that Horowitz found no political bias in the opening of the investigation. Which he didn't.

They both said that they didn't agree with his conclusions. So, I presume that they HAVE found evidence that the investigation was opened because if bias. They better, anyway.

The Clinesmith guy? Certainly improper. I don't know if it was/is illegal.

Lying to a court is illegal, specifically with manufactured material... It's not that hard.


Clinesmith will flip like a fish when it gets down to it...
[Reply]
Marcellus 08:59 AM 12-16-2019
Originally Posted by neech:
Far from “gutting” assistance, the Trump administration approved the transfer of tank-busting Javelin missiles to Kiev — something the Obama administration refused to do. More than 200 of those weapons have been sold to Ukraine since Trump took office. And the sale and delivery of Javelins never stopped even during this year's temporary suspension of military aid to Ukraine that is now the subject of the Democrats’ impeachment proceedings.

The liberals refuse to admit that their own president Obama was helping Russia while Ukraine was pleading for help. Hypocrites
:-) Check this out, Donger was wrong yet again. Shocking!!
[Reply]
Donger 09:00 AM 12-16-2019
Originally Posted by Shields68:
FBI/DOJ agent altering/falsifying evidence, he knows is going into a court document is just improper. Wow. Unbelievable. He straight up changed the evidence he knows would lead to a denial of the Page FISA warrant. I mean if he discloses Page is a CIA asset and the contacts with Russians are on behalf of the CIA the warrant is denied.
An email from the other government agency's liaison was sent to Clinesmith, who then "altered the liaison's email by inserting the words 'not a source' into it, thus making it appear that the liaison had said that Page was 'not a source' for the other agency" and sent it to "Supervisory Special Agent 2," Horowitz found.

As I said, certainly improper. I don't know if it was/is illegal. Perhaps it is. What specific law was broken?
[Reply]
Donger 09:01 AM 12-16-2019
Originally Posted by Shields68:
Using the dossier in a FISA warrant. Which you did know about but defended.

But read the IG report there was 17 good examples of FISA abuse.
Okay. I only defended it when Trumpers declared it 100% hoax.
[Reply]
Donger 09:02 AM 12-16-2019
Originally Posted by IowaHawkeyeChief:
Lying to a court is illegal, specifically with manufactured material... It's not that hard.


Clinesmith will flip like a fish when it gets down to it...
If he broke the law, indict, try and convict him.

I have no issues with that at all.
[Reply]
Donger 09:02 AM 12-16-2019
Originally Posted by Marcellus:
:-) Check this out, Donger was wrong yet again. Shocking!!
Wrong? Do you think that I claimed otherwise?
[Reply]
Marcellus 09:03 AM 12-16-2019
Originally Posted by Donger:
Okay. I only defended it when Trumpers declared it 100% hoax.
:-)
[Reply]
Donger 09:04 AM 12-16-2019
Originally Posted by Marcellus:
:-)
It's okay. You know I'm accurate with that statement. Just as I have always been.
[Reply]
Shields68 09:06 AM 12-16-2019
Originally Posted by Donger:
An email from the other government agency's liaison was sent to Clinesmith, who then "altered the liaison's email by inserting the words 'not a source' into it, thus making it appear that the liaison had said that Page was 'not a source' for the other agency" and sent it to "Supervisory Special Agent 2," Horowitz found.

As I said, certainly improper. I don't know if it was/is illegal. Perhaps it is. What specific law was broken?
They altered evidence to be used in a court filing made under oath. Really you need that spelled out for you?
[Reply]
stevieray 09:09 AM 12-16-2019
Originally Posted by Marcellus:
:-) Check this out, Donger was wrong yet again. Shocking!!
DONger is amoral.
[Reply]
Page 4 of 17
< 1234 567814 > Last »
Up