Patterico's Pontifications

12/13/2017

Yes, the Strzok Text Messages Are a Problem

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 10:00 am

So one of the top FBI guys investigating the Russia stuff for Mueller hates Trump, as revealed in several text messages published yesterday. Sarah Lee posted about them last night. My first reaction upon reading them was that many of them sound a lot like my own private (and public) statements about Trump:

“I just saw my first Bernie Sanders bumper sticker. Made me want to key the car,” Page wrote in an August 2015 exchange.

“He’s an idiot like Trump. Figure they cancel each other out,” Strzok replied.

Whoa. He thinks both Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump are idiots? Who doesn’t — besides fanbois who are super-impressed that a guy can inherit a lot of money?

In a March 2016 message, Page exclaimed: “God trump is a loathsome human….omg he’s an idiot.”

“He’s awful,” replied Strzok.

Someone thinks Donald Trump is awful? Get out!

Of course, Strzok went further than I ever did or would, actively wishing for the election of Hillary Clinton by saying “God Hillary should win 100,000,000 – 0.” But many of his rants about Trump and his idiocy are shared by, well, millions of people in the country. Including people who voted for the guy.

Andrew C. McCarthy says no biggie:

Well, I’m not OK with Trump’s outbursts, but I’m not sure I’m OK with this either.

I’m of two minds about this. Before the Strzok texts came out, but after their existence was reported, McCarthy made the case that people in law enforcement can work political cases while holding political beliefs:

People who work in law enforcement tend to be engaged citizens, well-informed about current events. Many of them are passionate in their political convictions. In the New York metropolitan area, those convictions tend not to jibe with mine — although rank-and-file FBI agents tend to be more conservative than their high-ranking superiors, and than prosecutors educated in elite American schools. Political differences are fodder for good-natured ribbing in the hallway or over beers after work. But they get checked at the courthouse door, even in political-corruption cases. Law enforcement is a straightforward exercise: Figure out what the facts and law are, then apply the latter to the former.

I actually agree with this. I have no specific reason to believe that Peter Strzok is anything less than professional at his job. I don’t do political cases, but I think if people could see how the day-to-day operation of criminal investigation and prosecution works, they would have more confidence in the system than they get from Big Media’s often unfair portrayals.

But here, there is an issue that goes beyond whether the work is actually getting done right: the public’s perception. And while having general political opinions should not necessarily render a prosecutor or an investigator unfit for prosecutions of political cases — again, like McCarthy says, they tend to be engaged citizens — a very strong bias against a particular person, as we see here, has a negative effect on the perception of the integrity of the investigation.

At this point, I would like to quote a question from a correspndent whom I respect, who wrote me an email asking in the subject line: “Isn’t Bias Good in a Prosecutor?”

Not corruption, bias.

Doesn’t our system demand an aggressive prosecutor who has a jaundiced eye for suspected criminals? The defense is lionized for doing most anything to get a defendant off. Don’t The People need an energetic/passionate person to prosecute?

I believe Mueller was corrupted as an FBI Director, and maybe before. I am not defending him. There shouldn’t even be an IC without hard and fast limits as to scope. If an IC learns anything outside that scope, they should/would be free to refer to DOJ just as any U.S. Attorney can.

What troubles me is the meme that a prosecutor (or defense counsel, for that matter) is somehow wrong for having a bias. Isn’t that a core trait necessary to the job?

I’d answer this with an unqualified “no.” Yes, you want an energetic and passionate person to be a prosecutor. But their zeal must be for justice —
and it must be tempered zeal. Having a strong pre-existing bias against the target is not the kind of zeal that promotes justice or that gives the public confidence.

So I’m fine with Mueller taking Strzok off the investigation. He should not have been on it. Even though I agree with many of his views of Donald Trump.

[Cross-posted at RedState and The Jury Talks Back.]

437 Responses to “Yes, the Strzok Text Messages Are a Problem”

  1. ‘ha ha ha Grab ’em by the pussy because they won’t stop you if you’re rich’ = no big deal

    ‘That guy is an idiot’ = Proof of the shadow government illuminati

    Dustin (ba94b2)

  2. I agree, but this doesn’t make me trust Mueller. He should either know the biases of his lead investigators or (more likely) make an effort to inform his team of the ground rules — which include no appearance of impropriety. And then in disciplining or removing Strzok, Mueller should have announced the guidelines and that Strzok violated the guidelines.

    It is not unlike the football coach who benches a player for violating team rules. It sends a message to players and the public that the rules exist and will be enforced.

    Strzok is human and has human opinions, but part of being a professional is setting aside those emotions and opinions because he had a job to do. That is not the same as hiding his opinions and emotions and trusting no one would reveal them. But I would like to know if this was revealed in standard FOIA email reviews of it there was a whistleblower.

    DRJ (15874d)

  3. One of the reasons Ike has always been a hero to me is the fact that he was intentionally non-partisan until he retired from the Army. He voted, but never declared his party, nor took part in partisan politics. Who knows, maybe he sent letters disparaging political figures, but none have become public as far as I know.

    I chose to follow that example, and registered independent during my career in the USMC.

    Today the zeitgeist is that everything in life is political, combined with everyone being on social media — so Ike’s example is only followed by Rs who think they might want to be a judge, or others who don’t want a paper trail.

    But just maybe Ike had a point, and being a purported public officer should be a non-partisan endeavor where you suck up your personal feelings about elected officials and just do your F’in job. And by the way adultery with coworkers shouldn’t be a benefit of Federal employment either.

    Shit, in the military we still jail fraternizers just before giving them the boot. The DOJ and FBI promotes them.

    Patterico, why am I supposed to think this bum will provide due process again, his oath to defend the Constitution is as good as his oath to his spouse.

    Steve Malynn (296daf)

  4. The texts cited above aren’t the damning texts.

    These texts are:

    LP – And maybe you’re meant to stay where you are because you’re meant to protect the country from that menace. (links to NYT article)

    PS – … I can protect our country at many levels, not sure if that helps

    AND:

    Text-from Peter Strzok to Lisa Page (Andy is Andrew McCabe): “I want to believe the path u threw out 4 consideration in Andy’s office-that there’s no way he gets elected-but I’m afraid we can’t take that risk.It’s like an insurance policy in unlikely event u die be4 you’re 40″

    These aren’t “That guy’s an idiot” texts. These are texts talking about Strzok using his position to “protect the country against Trump” and about discussing “an insurance policy” against Trump in the office of Andrew McCabe, Deputy Director of the FBI.

    bfwebster (c3c3ef)

  5. Yes, what bfwebster points out. We are starting to see hints that would allow us believe that Peter Strzok is less than professional at his job

    SPQR (240837)

  6. Wow, I’m in moderation limbo.

    [I released your comment, but as DRJ points out you have to watch the expletives. – JVW]

    Steve Malynn (296daf)

  7. You probably used a banned word, Steve. There are dozens in the software, not to ban commenters like us but to ban spam that typically use certain words.

    DRJ (15874d)

  8. Trying to bust up two marriages on company time tends to suggest you aren’t very professional. And it’s not just about sins of commission but sins of omission ,like CNN for instance.

    Lots of cases get reviewed when it appears a cop or prosecutor is dirty, don’t they?

    Pinandpuller (3c3357)

  9. As I said on the other thread — and forgive me for reposting it here — I’m sure a lot more will be revealed about improper actions and cover ups, and I hope this will be the start of uncovering them and making them transparent for everyone to see. Transparency is where change comes from, and the point to me isn’t the anger but the change.

    The real arguments should be about how to change things to fix this problem without creating more problems. There will never be a perfect fix but we can try. To me, the best fix is transparency.

    DRJ (15874d)

  10. there’s a culture of corruption in the DOJ and the FBI

    happyfeet (a037ad)

  11. Your comment is posted now, Steve Malynn. Good points.

    DRJ (15874d)

  12. Strzok might not be guilty of trying to throw the match to the other side but he’s definitely shaving points. See Judge Adalaide Byrd :Triple G vs Canelo Alvarez.

    Pinandpuller (3c3357)

  13. the texts are just a smokescreen for much much deeper corruption on the part of strzok and his mistress

    clearly they want us to be talking about the texts

    happyfeet (a037ad)

  14. The only “bias” a prosecutor can indulge is towards the facts.

    There is a saying with regard to the scope of cross-examination which is “bias is never irrelevant.” This is why cross-exam of a witness on the issue bias is allowed with almost no limits. The existence of bias goes to the issue of the witness’s credibility, and once credibility is called into question, all judgments and decisions made by that witness come under scrutiny and doubt. And while its easier to evaluate the things the witness did, it’s oftentimes more productive to look at things that weren’t done and explore the witness’s reasons for not doing them.

    Shipwreckedcrew (b30750)

  15. 4 – I’m far from convinced that “Andy” in that message is Andrew McCabe. I’ve seen nothing other than one reporters wishful assumption that that is the case.

    Shipwreckedcrew (b30750)

  16. swc

    A witness named Hillary Rodham Clinton was never sworn in and no notes were taken as I recall. And Strzok changed gross negligence to extreme carelessness and non-prosecutor Comey said no prosecutor would pursue extreme carelessness. They shaved the spread in PA, WI and MI.

    Pinandpuller (3c3357)

  17. But… but… Trump joked about P-grabbing!

    Colonel Haiku (c8a9e1)

  18. Could be Andy Griffith… just sayin’…

    Colonel Haiku (c8a9e1)

  19. Eisenhower was an effective bureaucrat, if that’s not an oxymoron.

    But he an Truman proved bureaucrats are pusillanimous widgets allowing the travesty National Security Act to punk the American People. His warning about the Mil/industrial complex was proof of his being so gelded he waited until he could do nothing about it.

    Admiral Ben Bunsen Burner (3abbdb)

  20. Someone questioned by the FBI does not have to be under oath. It’s a crime to make a false statement – no oath required. There is an FBI 302 form (Memo of Interview) and in the FBI file for the investigation there will be a 5×7 envelope called a “1A” file for that interview, and inside that envelope are the handwritten notes of the 2 agents who conducted the interview. These are all standard FBI procedures followed in all investigations.

    If these procedures were not followed and those items don’t exist, then that would give rise to questions that shud be answered. But I remember reading the Clinton 302 when it was released so I know that exists.

    Shipwreckedcrew (b30750)

  21. 15 – there are lots of Andy’s in the FBI. There is no reason to believe that this one FBI attorney – and there are a couple hundred of those, one agent, and the Deputy Director would be sitting in the Dep Dir Office shooting the breeze about the election. That’s just a fantasy.

    Shipwreckedcrew (b30750)

  22. The bigger problem was the FBI’s highly respected counter-intel agent had a zipper problem that would cause any of the rest of us to have top clearances suspended. Together with his loose lips he compromised every case he touched.

    crazy (d99a88)

  23. Rosenstein just jjumped the shark. He said that political affiliations and political contributions are different from political bias.

    That’s it for him. My guess is he doesn’t last another 6 months.

    Shipwreckedcrew (b30750)

  24. Pete Strzok was not just any agent – he was in the upper echelons by mid-2016. He may very well have been in the office of McCabe.

    MacGruber (15cfac)

  25. I agree with Patterico, it was wise for Mueller to remove Strzok, in an abundance of caution, once Mueller became aware of the messages. Not because his participation necessarily compromised the investigation in fact, but because appearances are important.

    I posted this in the other thread:

    Unless there is evidence that their personal views led them to do something unlawful or unethical in their professional duties, there is nothing to condemn.

    What they are accused of, in effect, is thoughtcrime. But in our country, government employees, like Donald Trump, for instance, are allowed to have, and, yes, even express, personal opinions. All they are required to do is obey the law.

    In the excerpt I’ve read, they criticized Trump for saying Putin wasn’t a killer. Any honest, thinking person would do the same (also remember that Strzok was a Russia intelligence specialist with extensive knowledge of the facts Trump was ignorantly denying).

    I find it pretty scary that private messages exchanged between two people in a close personal relationship are the subject of a thoughtcrime investigation by the government. Could we please see all text and other messages exchanged between Trump, Kushner, Trump Jr. and Ivanka for the last 2.5 years?

    DRJ replied:

    As a law enforcement officer and a lawyer, they can have personal opinions but they can’t do anything that casts doubt on their impartiality in a particular investigation. You can’t say Trump is an idiot if there is a chance you will be investigating him. Strzok and Harper should have declined any role in Mueller’s investigation.

    I think this goes too far. These were messages privately exchanged between two people who were apparently in an intimate personal relationship. What you appear to be saying is that nobody who has ever said “Trump is an idiot” to their wife/husband or girl-/boy- friend can investigate Trump. Would the same apply to anyone who has ever said “Trump is awesome” or “Hillary is a idiot”? If not, there is an obvious problem (it’s OK for people who love Trump to investigate him, but not people who dislove him). And if so, there is nobody left – you’ve excluded over 90% of the population.

    It’s reasonable to expect investigators to not already hate their targets, especially in government investigations. If that means they can’t express opinions about potential political targets, that’s the cost of working for the government … and for the military. This has been the case for military personnel for a long time.

    Did Eliot Ness have a neutral opinion of Al Capone?

    Dave (445e97)

  26. Let’s keep it simple. shipwreckedcrew already alluded to it. Strzok shows me a piece of evidence against Trump. If I know Strzok hates Trump, I’m just as inclined to believe that Strzok faked it as I am inclined to take it at face value.

    nk (dbc370)

  27. The law granting the FBI super memo powers is a travesty. “ My hand written notes prove your false statement.” Modern Star Chamber.

    Steve Malynn (296daf)

  28. Dave, my hunch is they suspended his clearance locking him out of access to the information needed to do his job which likely he explains why he’s counting paperclips in HR.

    crazy (d99a88)

  29. So it’s OK for a prosecutor to be biased … and you figure that makes it OK for an investigator to be biased, too?

    That makes about as much sense as a general being a bit vague on the difference between his scouts and his cavalry. Or intelligence and his siege train.

    tom swift (37efc8)

  30. What election did Capone win again?

    Dave you are deluded.

    Steve Malynn (296daf)

  31. He had these “private” opinions them pushed Comey to change the language to excuse Hillary’s crimes.

    And as bfwebster posted, you neglected the worst comments where he implied that he and others would do what is necessary to save the government.

    NJRob (c3af29)

  32. If Strzok got sent back to DOJ because of his problematic text messages alone he’d be back at work in his old job, wouldn’t he? There’s more going on with Strzok’s dismissal from the Mueller team than just his political view of Trump and Clinton.

    crazy (d99a88)

  33. Bret Baier tweeted:

    Text-from Peter Strzok to Lisa Page (Andy is Andrew McCabe): “I want to believe the path u threw out 4 consideration in Andy’s office-that there’s no way he gets elected-but I’m afraid we can’t take that risk.It’s like an insurance policy in unlikely event u die be4 you’re 40″

    To which Andy McCarthy tweeted this morning in reply:

    Obviously, this is not political banter. Clearly indicates professional duties infected by political viewpoints, which is disqualifying. I was going on the published accounts I’d seen, which didn’t include this one. Should follow my own advice to wait til all facts in.

    Dana (023079)

  34. Weissman is the other possibility,

    thehill.com/opinion/white-house/356253-judging-by-muellers-staffing-choices-he-may-not-be-very-interested-in

    The journal expects us to believe the doj chief oc expert, ohr was not involved in the witchhunt

    narciso (d1f714)

  35. Had it happened this year, I would say weissman, the destroyer of Arthur Anderson, the scourge of that Powell fellow. So he was running interference for red queen,

    narciso (d1f714)

  36. We’re told, ad nauseum, that Donald Trump, as the chief law enforcement officer of the United States, has the power to end or tamper with investigations, and to fire FBI directors or special counsels at will, for any reason or no reason. Moreover, we’re told that exercising this power to shield himself, his family or his close associates from legal jeopardy cannot, even in principle, constitute obstruction of justice.

    Has Donald Trump ever expressed any opinion of himself? If so, why does that not disqualify him as a law enforcement officer, in the same manner as Strzok?

    Dave (445e97)

  37. They didn’t suspend aanantha powers or Susan races yet they did so with Cohen ratnick,
    with townley with lovinger, anyone who has a (redacted) clue and gives a farthing.

    As for the first two, they deserve to be tied to a jeep in a simoon (sandstorm)

    narciso (d1f714)

  38. But… but… Trump joked about P-grabbing!

    Colonel Haiku (c8a9e1) — 12/13/2017 @ 11:12 am

    My point is that a whole lot of people are saying these texts show the man is not professional or can’t make decisions without bias, but they are a lot less egregious than the stuff they rolled their eyes about Trump saying. but but but it’s a pretty direct point.

    Seems like every time Trump’s supporters are angry about something, it’s something Trump already did worse and they didn’t really care at that time.

    If some law enforcement official said Hillary was an idiot and he hoped she would lose, most partisans would completely flip flop on the importance of it. The people saying it’s not important would say it is, and the people saying it is important would say it’s not.

    Personally, I would rather see some actual evidence that he was wrong in his judgment, which Flynn already proved is not the case, right?

    Dustin (ba94b2)

  39. And yet we are told by the likes of tillerson, we should deal with his bastard, who funded the Munich massacre:
    https://mobile.twitter.com/sfrantzman/status/940880054002864129

    narciso (d1f714)

  40. “I want to believe the path u threw out 4 consideration in Andy’s office-that there’s no way he gets elected-but I’m afraid we can’t take that risk.It’s like an insurance policy in unlikely event u die be4 you’re 40″

    Sounds like a discussion of electoral map scenarios. No hint of anything work-related.

    Dave (445e97)

  41. Strzok was taken off the Trump investigation. But he was allowed to stay on the HRC investigation. After which he gave her a tongue bath. His bias with the Trump investigation was properly dealt with. His pro-Hillary bias during her investigation apparently was not.

    Scott (fa165a)

  42. The evidence is how the matter was disposed off. Covered up with a pillow.

    narciso (d1f714)

  43. Fits targeted cobras black, cuddled radler, didn’t go after any other hillinger director, flipped rezko but didn’t pursue any of daleys inner circle, or any path that led to Obama.

    narciso (d1f714)

  44. Mrs gleasons social meduawas all full of resist geegaws and encomiums from the salon, but she was a lifelong republican, give me a break.

    narciso (d1f714)

  45. But here, there is an issue that goes beyond whether the work is actually getting done right: the public’s perception.

    Cox was a Kennedy man and Jaworski a Texas Dem. They weren’t tweeting inner angst in 250 characters but no doubt had personal perceptions of the characters they were investigating. They more or less let the law carry the weight of any biases for the public to see, the ‘work got done’ and The Big Dick was resigned to his fate. History often rhymes. Efforts to undermine the GOP pedigree of Mueller and his team will backfire.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  46. These aren’t the douches you’ve been looking for…

    Colonel Haiku (c8a9e1)

  47. Here is what we know:

    The Steele document was fake, paid for by the Hillary campaign. It contained salacious details on trump. The Steele document was given to the FBI. We strongly suspect the FBI used this document to get a FISA warrant to tap Trump colleagues (they won’t say if they did or didn’t, which probably means they did). This FISA warrant was previously refused. The FISA warrant captured conversations with Trump campaign people. Powers acted to unmask the names (she says someone used her security classification for this – it wasn’t her). Obama acted to distribute those names as far and wide as possible. the contents of the wiretaps were immediately leaked to the press. Comey went to the president to present him the results of the phony document created by the Clinton campaign. That meeting was immediately leaked. The story of “Russian collusion” was launched in the press. All of this was used as an excuse to investigate Trump using a special prosecutor.

    In that context, a series of e-mails by one of the principal people involved in this entire fiasco, expressing strong support for Hillary and hatred of Trump are highly problematic. How am I supposed to take “I can protect our country at many levels, not sure if that helps.” and “I want to believe the path u threw out 4 consideration in Andy’s office-that there’s no way he gets elected-but I’m afraid we can’t take that risk. It’s like an insurance policy in unlikely event u die be4 you’re 40

    In what context am I supposed to take that? I strongly suspect the insurance policy was the Steele dossier/phony Russian collusion story/special prosecutor.

    I don’t like Trump, and didn’t vote for him. But it takes an enormous stretch of the truth to say there is no fire in that burning house. Also, why did justice lie and dissemble over why Strzok was demoted? Why did they only fess up
    when the truth was coming out anyway?

    I agree that political beliefs can be compatible with justice. But they are rarely so strongly tested as they have been here. When a government bureaucrat starts saying, essentially, “I have a plan to fix it so Trump is not a problem..” that person should be removed immediately from any and all sensitive positions.

    Geoman (a815b9)

  48. The Steele document was fake, paid for by the Hillary campaign.

    A great deal of the information in the dossier has been confirmed. It was correct in every detail about Manafort’s corrupt ties to Putin.

    Dave (445e97)

  49. What election did Capone win again?

    Public Relations. Criminals pretend to care about the common man to get public support, which Capone did. Amongst other things he gave free turkeys at christmas. Of course this doesn’t have anything to do with Trump.

    Admiral Ben Bunsen Burner (f67fa2)

  50. Ben, Dave brought up Capone.

    Steve Malynn (296daf)

  51. “I want to believe the path u threw out 4 consideration in Andy’s office-that there’s no way he gets elected-but I’m afraid we can’t take that risk. It’s like an insurance policy in unlikely event u die be4 you’re 40″

    They’re talking about the electoral college, not work.

    “The path [you] threw out [for] consideration” is somebody’s hypothesis about how Clinton had a lock on 270 electoral votes. From the context, it sounds like a “Clinton can reach 270 even if she loses Florida and Ohio” type of scenario, which people were discussing shortly before the election.

    The “insurance policy” would be taking one of Trump’s “must-win” states just in case something goes wrong with “the path [you] threw out [for] consideration”.

    It’s actually a very astute political observation, because Clinton turned out to need such an “insurance policy,” and didn’t have one.

    Dave (445e97)

  52. Ben, Dave brought up Capone.

    Someone insisted that an investigator must not have negative opinions about the target of their investigation.

    I asked if Eliot Ness had a neutral opinion of Al Capone.

    And Steve, bizarrely, suggested that the rules for politicians are different than the rules for mobsters.

    Dave (445e97)

  53. Peter Strzok

    I just saw my first Bernie Sanders bumper sticker. Made me want to key the car,” Page wrote in an August 2015 exchange.

    “He’s an idiot like Trump. Figure they cancel each other out,” Strzok replied.

    I didn’t know waht “key the car” meant.

    Apparently, it means take a key (or other metal object that can scratch) and scratoh the paint or surface of a car of someone you hate. In thisd case, the person who put a Bernie Sanders bumpers sticker on his car.

    This does not sound good.

    Here we have an FBI agent taklking of wanting to commit a crime. This kind of vandalism is illegal. And it’s worse if it is politically motivated.

    He’s not serious, but it doesn’t speak well of him or the quality of his thinking.

    It also shows a shared very strong pro-Hillary bias.

    Sammy Finkelman (02a146)

  54. David, if you don’t think there is a material difference between investigating political opposition and organized crime you are past redemption.

    Steve Malynn (296daf)

  55. My comment was directed at the White Whale, Steve. Sorry.

    Admiral Ahab (f67fa2)

  56. How many ways can you say it?

    It’s about turnout

    https://www.thecut.com/2017/12/black-women-turnout-roy-moore-doug-jones.html

    Admiral Ahab (f67fa2)

  57. 4. bfwebster (c3c3ef) — 12/13/2017 @ 10:40 am

    These are texts talking about Strzok using his position to “protect the country against Trump” and about discussing “an insurance policy” against Trump in the office of Andrew McCabe, Deputy Director of the FBI.

    Although could be baed on abelief on Trump actually being a crimial, or on the take from Russia.

    You also need to know whate xactly he was talking about.

    The suspicion is that this shows only part of the political bias or politcal activism.

    Would a person like this, to say teh least, want to find Hillary Clinton guilty of any crime? Would a person like this feel free to do something that might deny her the Democratic nomination? Did he in fact act on it?

    He actually appears to done something that is very cnsistent with a politically motivated law enforcement decision.

    Sammy Finkelman (02a146)

  58. Test

    Admiral Ben Bunsen Burner (f67fa2)

  59. To me bias is something that leads a Nifong or a Milwaukee DA to twist the law to his own advantage. So no, I don’t want that.

    My question about these texts is, why did Mueller hire him in the first place knowing his views? They couldn’t have been secret. And why is someone with such strong partisan views the number one in the political investigations like around Hillary’s server and now Trump being in office at all? What’s the insurance plan he talks about? Ask him, Gowdy or Nunez!

    I think Mueller suddenly knew the texts were coming out and fired him before.

    No way to run an FBI.

    Patricia (5fc097)

  60. David, if you don’t think there is a material difference between investigating political opposition and organized crime you are past redemption.

    I think the laws are the same for everybody.

    And the reason we have laws and other institutions is precisely because we acknowledge that men and women are imperfect, that they can’t be objective in every private moment or thought, and that they may will have biases. So we set up a system where there is as little scope as possible for such biases to affect others.

    Get back to us when you find a text from Strzok or Page discussing fabrication of false evidence, suborning perjury, intimidation of witnesses, etc.

    Dave (445e97)

  61. Then don’t complain when another greenlight is called: http://www.yahoo.com/sports/liangelo-ball-says-thanked-donald-trump-ucla-made-213342393.html

    urbanleftbehind (9240ed)

  62. “I want to believe the path u threw out 4 consideration in Andy’s office-that there’s no way he gets elected-but I’m afraid we can’t take that risk. It’s like an insurance policy in unlikely event u die be4 you’re 40″

    They’re talking about the electoral college, not work.

    “The path [you] threw out [for] consideration” is somebody’s hypothesis about how Clinton had a lock on 270 electoral votes. From the context, it sounds like a “Clinton can reach 270 even if she loses Florida and Ohio” type of scenario, which people were discussing shortly before the election.

    The “insurance policy” would be taking one of Trump’s “must-win” states just in case something goes wrong with “the path [you] threw out [for] consideration”.

    It’s actually a very astute political observation, because Clinton turned out to need such an “insurance policy,” and didn’t have one.

    Dave (445e97) — 12/13/2017 @ 2:06 pm

    “….we can’t take that risk” I’d believe your interpretation if the two of them were on Hillary’s campaign team. Who knows, maybe they were.

    Note also the delusions of grandeur – they and only they can mitigate the risk.

    Strzok was not some low level agent. He was involved in the Hillary email and Russia investigations. And, there is reason to believe he was directly involved with the FISA shenanigans. He’s also the chump that’s going to take the fall for any repercussions from the FBI’s actions.

    Lenny (5ea732)

  63. #13, happyfeet is right. The texts are a diversion designed to focus attention on a relatively embarrassing aspect of Muller’s investigation in order to shield much more important developments from public exposure.

    In the government’s world of clandestine operations, it’s such a well known and effective technique, especially when the establishment media is on-board, that it’s known as a limited hangout.

    ropelight (a06b33)

  64. I have no specific reason to believe that Peter Strzok is anything less than professional at his job.

    I do. When he lets Huma off after she lies her teeth out regarding [his favored] Hillary’s mishandling of Top Secret and SCI documents — a serious federal felony people have gone to prison for DECADES for — then turns around and throws the book at a political opponent who lies about something that IS NOT A CRIME in itself.

    Does anyone care to defend that, and try to convince me that “it’s just normal discretion”?

    Kevin M (752a26)

  65. The limited hangout is often employed when names of big shots are about to be connected to incidents of major corruption: like Hillary’s involvement in pushing for wiretaps on Donald Trump and using a bogus dossier to con the FISA court into approving FBI surveillance on her political opponent.

    ropelight (a06b33)

  66. A witness named Hillary Rodham Clinton was never sworn in and no notes were taken as I recall.

    Pretty sure that Flynn wasn’t sworn either. “Lying” is not synonymous with “perjury.”

    Kevin M (752a26)

  67. If these procedures were not followed and those items don’t exist, then that would give rise to questions that shud be answered. But I remember reading the Clinton 302 when it was released so I know that exists.
    Shipwreckedcrew (b30750) — 12/13/2017 @ 11:20 am

    Fair dinkum. But in the end product Strozk could choose “stupid” or “liar” and he checked the “stupid” box.

    Pinandpuller (eb65c6)

  68. That’s it for him. My guess is he doesn’t last another 6 months.

    It should be, but the sad fact is that Sessions is less competent than Trump. The DoJ seems to work around him.

    Kevin M (752a26)

  69. 15 – there are lots of Andy’s in the FBI. There is no reason to believe that this one FBI attorney – and there are a couple hundred of those, one agent, and the Deputy Director would be sitting in the Dep Dir Office shooting the breeze about the election. That’s just a fantasy.
    Shipwreckedcrew (b30750) — 12/13/2017 @ 11:24 am

    A lot of randy too.

    Pinandpuller (eb65c6)

  70. #66 is verbatim, taken from here, substituted for original thought and Nixonian-like honour

    https://www.google.com/amp/s/theruggedindividualist.wordpress.com/2016/09/13/modified-limited-hangout/amp/

    Admiral Ben Bunsen Burner (f67fa2)

  71. gRopelight:

    You are unmasked..

    Admiral Ben Bunsen Burner (f67fa2)

  72. My curiosity has killed many cats.

    Admiral Ben Bunsen Burner (f67fa2)

  73. I think this goes too far. These were messages privately exchanged between two people who were apparently in an intimate personal relationship.

    Dave (445e97) — 12/13/2017 @ 11:45 am

    I don’t think you get to write out your personal opinions about your “CEO” with company ink. Like if you work at Wal Mart and steal paper to make up Union handouts.

    Pinandpuller (eb65c6)

  74. I didn’t know waht “key the car” meant.

    Apparently, it means take a key (or other metal object that can scratch) and scratoh the paint or surface of a car of someone you hate. In thisd case, the person who put a Bernie Sanders bumpers sticker on his car.

    This does not sound good.

    Here we have an FBI agent taklking of wanting to commit a crime. This kind of vandalism is illegal. And it’s worse if it is politically motivated.

    Sammy Finkelman (02a146) — 12/13/2017 @ 2:24 pm

    Hands up! Don’t key!

    Pinandpuller (eb65c6)

  75. Test
    Admiral Ben Bunsen Burner (f67fa2) — 12/13/2017 @ 2:32 pm

    D-

    Pinandpuller (eb65c6)

  76. #71,’verbatim’ doesn’t mean what you think it means.

    ropelight (a06b33)

  77. The Lois lerner spin, getting ahead of the IRS ig report was more in the mode.

    narciso (d1f714)

  78. I don’t know if I should shit or go blind trying to figure out what department is more corrupt, the DOJ or the FBI.

    mg (60b0f7)

  79. You know what you did. Not only did steal someone else’s words you Trump-fu*ked the author’s logic and intent.

    Gropelight: you are a mutha fukka.

    Admiral Ben Bunsen Burner (f67fa2)

  80. I don’t know if I should poop or go blind trying to figure out which is more corrupt, the DOJ or the FBI?

    mg (60b0f7)

  81. LOL — CNN’s big scoop last week that turned into a dud. Remember the September 14 email about wikileaks documents, which CNN reported as being dated Sept. 4, and all day ran stories playing it up because Sept. 4 was before Wikileaks put the documents online?

    Have now read a couple of articles raising the possibility that this all came out of a DOJ disinformation exercise meant to smoke out a member of Congress suspected of leaking classified material to the press.

    The documents in question were given over to the House Intelligence Committee. CNN ran the story based on its claim that the document had been confirmed by 2 independent sources. Then CBS News and MSNBC followed up, reporting that they also confirmed independently the story, also reporting that the email in question was dated Sept. 4.

    But later, an actual copy of the email was published by the NYT, and it clearly showed that the date was 9/4/16, not 9/14/16.

    So how is it that the error in reporting the date was done by 3 new agencies and supposedly corroborated independently by two different sources for each agency?

    Well, AG Sessions made it clear a couple months ago in Congressional testimony that there was underway a serious investigation into the leaking of classified material. And CIA Director Pompeo made a comment at a think tank session referencing a legal saying “The law is entitled to every man’s evidence.” That phrase comes from a Supreme Court decision which compelled a journalist to appear before a grand jury to answer questions about the content and source for story — there was no First Amendment privilege that shielded him from being compelled to testify.

    So, the working theory of these two articles was that the sources for the CNN, CBS, and MSNBC stories provided perfectly accurate information to each news outlet according to the documents the sources saw.

    But the documents in question were actually a DOJ sting. If the reporters would not cooperate by revealing their sources to the investigation into leaks of national security, then the reporters would become an unwitting part of the mechanism used to have the sources out themselves.

    No idea if this is correct or not.

    But its ROTFLMAO if it turns out to be true.

    shipwreckedcrew (56b591)

  82. @62 ulb

    You know anything about “rabbit schemes” and where can I sign up?

    Friedman was referring to the appeals court’s decision upholding Smith’s dismissal of another claim Combs had brought over an incident at another Power & Light establishment, the Tengo Sed Cantina restaurant. Combs claimed that in July 2011, while texting friends to see if they were in the restaurant, a white man walked up, knocked his cellphone out of his hand and screamed obscenities at him.

    Combs claimed that the man was a rabbit hired by Cordish. The appeals court, however, found that there was insufficient evidence the man was part of a rabbit scheme.

    Source

    Pinandpuller (eb65c6)

  83. I don’t think you get to write out your personal opinions about your “CEO” with company ink.

    I think people should go read their Employee Manual, especially the section about “use of computers.” The boss can read EVERYTHING and use it against you if he wants. You better believe that Republicans in the bureaucracy aren’t so stupid as to post their opinions using government servers.

    Kevin M (752a26)

  84. 74 — hey Dave. Do you think the DOJ Inspector General got his hands on the personal cell phones of Paige and Strzok??

    I don’t think so. I think they were both idiotic enough that they were sending TMs to each other over their FBI issued cell phones, not heeding the warning all federal employees who are issued such phones are given which states that everything you send on your phone, everything you view on your phone, and every conversation you have on your phone is not covered by any expectation of privacy, and you should assume that everything you do on a government phone is stored somewhere in a gov’t data farm.

    Gov’t phones and gov’t computers are backed up continually. Nothing is ever really lost.

    shipwreckedcrew (56b591)

  85. 81 — got that backwards. Actual email dated 9/14. News outlets reported that email was dated 9/4.

    shipwreckedcrew (56b591)

  86. Test
    Admiral Ben Bunsen Burner (f67fa2) — 12/13/2017 @ 2:32 pm

    HGH; Morphine; HIV Positive

    Pinandpuller (eb65c6)

  87. Grope is my first block

    Admiral Ben Bunsen Burner (f67fa2)

  88. Don’t worry pin. Your irrelevance is your strength.

    Admiral Ben Bunsen Burner (f67fa2)

  89. Then again..mebbe I should keep these lamps lit for every mf.

    Admiral Ben Bunsen Burner (f67fa2)

  90. Pretty sure that Flynn wasn’t sworn either. “Lying” is not synonymous with “perjury.”
    Kevin M (752a26) — 12/13/2017 @ 3:29 pm

    Yeah, that’s one of the many reasons IANAL. Me and Tony Villar.

    Pinandpuller (eb65c6)

  91. honour

    Admiral Ben Bunsen Burner (f67fa2) — 12/13/2017 @ 3:34 pm

    You Madonna now?

    Pinandpuller (eb65c6)

  92. Test
    Admiral Ben Bunsen Burner (f67fa2) — 12/13/2017 @ 2:32 pm

    Pattern

    Pinandpuller (eb65c6)

  93. I still found the story, unsurprising because it was an open source release,

    Ot I checked out a book on the Panama papers, it appears that papa mossback was not a war criminal,
    Unlike the early reports in the daily mail and other places,

    narciso (d1f714)

  94. Dave 25,

    I stand by what I said. Investigators should not prejudge their targets. Capone is a good example. Ness should not decide Capone is guilty before seeing any evidence of guilt. These emails suggest these investigators have prejudged their potential targets, and that bias is why they should not be on Mueller’s team.

    Furthermore, as I said on the other thread, there is a report that the emails were discovered in response to an FOIA request. If so, the emails were government emails so there is not a free speech issue. You don’t get to woo your lover with sweet nothings about how you hate Trump at government expense.

    DRJ (15874d)

  95. Don’t worry pin. Your irrelevance is your strength.
    Admiral Ben Bunsen Burner (f67fa2) — 12/13/2017 @ 4:24 pm

    You spelled irreverence wrong.

    Pinandpuller (eb65c6)

  96. Great points being brought up regarding a post that seemed to ignore a lot of available info.

    Cliff’s on the “this is nothing” side.

    1) Lots of people named Andy

    2) Trump is Al Capone

    harkin (0d876d)

  97. 74 — hey Dave. Do you think the DOJ Inspector General got his hands on the personal cell phones of Paige and Strzok??

    I don’t think so. I think they were both idiotic enough that they were sending TMs to each other over their FBI issued cell phones, not heeding the warning all federal employees who are issued such phones are given which states that everything you send on your phone, everything you view on your phone, and every conversation you have on your phone is not covered by any expectation of privacy, and you should assume that everything you do on a government phone is stored somewhere in a gov’t data farm.

    Quite possible. Nothing they said or did, that I’ve seen (and admittedly that’s a small subset of the traffic), would have violated any law or ethical rule.

    The Hatch Act expressly allows employees of the FBI to express opinions about candidates and issues, while at work or on duty, as long as they do not engage in political campaigning (distributing literature, collecting donations, making campaign speeches, organizing rallies, wearing political pins, etc).

    Dave (445e97)

  98. Thanks harkin. 😉

    Steve Malynn (296daf)

  99. 91. Kevin M (752a26) — 12/13/2017 @ 3:29 pm

    Pretty sure that Flynn wasn’t sworn either. “Lying” is not synonymous with “perjury.”

    But there’s a separate federal law about it which they don’t prosecute very often.

    I read today in the Wall Street Journal that it could even apply to submitting comments on a federal website in someone else’s name

    https://www.wsj.com/articles/millions-of-people-post-comments-on-federal-regulations-many-are-fake-1513099188

    It is a federal felony to knowingly make false, fictitious or fraudulent statements to a U.S. agency.

    WSJ Video about the fake comments (outside of the paywall)

    http://www.wsj.com/video/thousands-of-fake-comments-on-net-neutrality-a-wsj-investigation/8E52172E-821C-4D89-A2AA-2820F30B8648.html

    Sammy Finkelman (69aa73)

  100. 98 — its not a Hatch Act issue.

    Those employees were involved in INVESTIGATING the very person they were exchanging views about. Its a matter of an ethical obligation to recuse yourself when your impartiality can be fairly called into question.

    It’s a matter of BIAS. When they possess a bias which they are well aware of, they have an obligation to decline to participate. There are thousands of other FBI agents, its not like the investigation would have lacked manpower without their involvement.

    And there are a lot of regulations which are not necessarily public that concern an agent who works in the Counter-Intelligence section with regard to what is considered allowable personal conduct even when not on the clock.

    Drinking problems, gambling problems, financial problems, and extra-marital entanglements are all forbidden. They all create potential exposure for efforts to compromise the agent. They also create issues for the Division Security Officer to review and make a judgment about.

    Agents doing counter-intelligence work fall under a completely different rubric of personal guidelines that apply to agents doing criminal investigation work. Agents in counter-intelligence chose that career path, so they take on those restrictions willingly. If someone doesn’t want to live by those rules, they can stay in criminal investigations. Strzok knew that.

    shipwreckedcrew (56b591)

  101. 100 — there is a “materiality” element to the offense of making a false statement to a federal agency. In general terms, that means that the agency must have concrete interest in the information you are providing, i.e., it is “Material” to a decision or act that the agency is undertaking.

    If you lie to an agent or agency about something they don’t care about, then its not “material”, and its not a crime.

    shipwreckedcrew (56b591)

  102. Driving home from my office today, I had the pleasure of listening to Mark Levin’s coverage of the House’s – Jim Jordan and Trey Gowdy, in particular – session with some of the people on the Mueller team who did their best to try and hide these messages from Congress and the American people. I think I’d read a post from someone here who called this a “Nothingburger”.

    Wow.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  103. BIAS

    Apocalypse

    Admiral Ben Bunsen Burner (f67fa2)

  104. I stand by what I said. Investigators should not prejudge their targets. Capone is a good example. Ness should not decide Capone is guilty before seeing any evidence of guilt. These emails suggest these investigators have prejudged their potential targets, and that bias is why they should not be on Mueller’s team.

    On the contrary, nothing I’ve seen indicates that they had formed any prejudicial opinion on whether Trump and his henchmen violated the law. Being an idiot (fortunately for Trump) is not a crime.

    Furthermore, as I said on the other thread, there is a report that the emails were discovered in response to an FOIA request. If so, the emails were government emails so there is not a free speech issue. You don’t get to woo your lover with sweet nothings about how you hate Trump at government expense.

    I am fairly confident that the material was obtained lawfully, somehow. That was not the point. But the Hatch Act permits FBI employees to express personal opinions, while at work or on duty. Again, as long as no campaigning took place (which is not alleged AFAIK), the law was not violated.

    As I said above, I agree with Patrick that Mueller made the right decision in removing them, to avoid the appearance of bias. This does not, despite the frantic efforts of Trump apologists to grasp any straw that might save him, have any bearing on the integrity of the investigation unless some evidence of corrupt/unlawful behavior in the performance of Strzok’s or Page’s official duties emerges.

    Dave (445e97)

  105. Those employees were involved in INVESTIGATING the very person they were exchanging views about. Its a matter of an ethical obligation to recuse yourself when your impartiality can be fairly called into question.

    So nobody who has privately expressed a negative opinion about Trump is allowed to investigate him?

    What about people who have privately expressed a positive opinion?

    Once you exclude those two groups, how many people do you suppose that leaves?

    Dave (445e97)

  106. That’s it for him. My guess is he doesn’t last another 6 months.
    It should be, but the sad fact is that Sessions is less competent than Trump. The DoJ seems to work around him.

    Kevin M (752a26) — 12/13/2017 @ 3:32 pm

    J. Christian Adams gave a speech this past weekend that included his take on Sessions (I was surprised based on what one hears and reads from conservative sources):

    “The point is that Sessions is the right guy. When you hear things like put Rudy in place — I’ve heard that a lot; Rudy would do a better job. I see it on Twitter, I see it on other places. That is sort of the moderate institutionalist answer to Jeff Sessions, so don’t buy it. Sessions gets it. It is very difficult to navigate through this swamp, and he’s just getting started so he needs everybody’s support. “

    Transcript and video at:

    http://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/268707/j-christian-adams-whats-happening-justice-frontpagemagcom

    Lenny (5ea732)

  107. Col- Has a congressional hearing ever produced a criminal?
    Seemed like a show for public consumption. Great gesture by Jordan and Gowdy-loser to clinton in Benghazi case.

    mg (60b0f7)

  108. The parallel had been if news had ignored capones tax evasion along with murder racketeering extortion, because he felt Italian Americans had been disadvantaged or something.

    narciso (d1f714)

  109. “The limited hangout” reads like a description of Rear Admiral Bunzbeenburning’s so-afflicted genitalia…

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  110. Yes its mostly a joke, except when democrats do it, and they committed procedural errors both in the case of the now departed city manager of San Diego that my friend clarice syccesfully defended on appeal and a decade later, colonel Oliver north for some of the same reasons.

    narciso (d1f714)

  111. 108… point taken, but it did serve to highlight that there was no legal reason to not provide answers to most of the questions that were asked… unless they are hiding something.

    Which they most certainly are.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  112. #79, Ben, yes, I know exactly what I did: I agreed with happyfeet at #13 and identified the FBI’s current attempt to divert attention away from Hillary’ involvement in illegally subverting law enforcement and investigative agencies within Obama’s administration as a well known tactic: a “limited hangout.”

    The texts are ‘red herrings’ falsely presented as major developments in order to focus attention on attractive juicy side issues and away from the person at the center of the conspiracy to wiretap her opponent in a presidental election.

    ropelight (a06b33)

  113. On the contrary, nothing I’ve seen indicates that they had formed any prejudicial opinion on whether Trump and his henchmen violated the law.

    I agree. They were pretty sure Trump had not violated the law. So they would need to manufacture evidence that Trump had violated the law. For insurance.

    nk (dbc370)

  114. As I said above, I agree with Patrick that Mueller made the right decision in removing them, to avoid the appearance of bias. This does not, despite the frantic efforts of Trump apologists to grasp any straw that might save him, have any bearing on the integrity of the investigation unless some evidence of corrupt/unlawful behavior in the performance of Strzok’s or Page’s official duties emerges.

    Dave (445e97) — 12/13/2017 @ 5:13 pm

    Nope. The texts are a diversion from the real crime, which is trying to overturn an election. I have yet to read a valid defense of the broad scope Mueller was given. Do you agree that a crime should have been specified before Mueller got his witch hunt under way? Do you really want to see this precedent set?

    Lenny (5ea732)

  115. Well we are getting just a tiny sampling of the emails, it would take judicial watch to properly mine the archive, lord knowsxthe news papers went do it.

    narciso (d1f714)

  116. ropelight 113 – exactly.

    Lenny (5ea732)

  117. I hope Jordan and Gowdy can produce.
    I think they would break the congressional hearings fail to convict cherry.

    mg (60b0f7)

  118. Oh, yes, one more thing: Don’t text pillow talk!

    nk (dbc370)

  119. Meanwhile…..

    Illegal Alien Found Guilty Of Murdering Family Of 5 While Committing Robbery So He Could Pay His Rent

    “This was a very gruesome, brutal murder, and we’re pleased we’re getting some accountability for the family and for the community,” District Attorney George Gascón said.

    Luc was supposed to be deported in 2006 when he was released from prison after serving nearly a decade for “robbery and assault with a deadly weapon for the 1996 armed robbery of a Chinese restaurant in San Jose,” the Daily Mail stated.

    Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials said that they were never provided with documents from the Vietnamese government needed to process his removal from the U.S., and as a result he was released back into the community in 2006.

    https://www.dailywire.com/news/24652/illegal-alien-found-guilty-murdering-family-5-ryan-saavedra

    That’s some high-falutin’ accountability there, but I think the family hammered to death would have preferred sanctuary.

    harkin (0d876d)

  120. Don’t pillow talk.

    ropelight (a06b33)

  121. I have yet to read a valid defense of the broad scope Mueller was given.

    Ask Trump appointee Ron Rosenstein, who drafted the charge to Mueller. And the charges brought so far have been quite narrowly focused on the attempts by Trump’s lackeys to illegally conceal their contacts with Russia.

    Do you agree that a crime should have been specified before Mueller got his witch hunt under way?

    The point of the investigation is to determine whether crimes were committed, and if so, which and by whom. If they knew specifically who committed what crimes, there would be no need for an investigation, would there?

    I also disagree with the premise that anything about Mueller’s investigation is unprecedented.

    Dave (445e97)

  122. The afminstration allowed kislyak’s access to the convention, fast tracked veselnitskayas visa, creating all the predicate of a dangle. Then the bureau shepherd omitted the lack of import re those meetings.

    narciso (d1f714)

  123. If they knew specifically who committed what crimes, there would be no need for an investigation, would there?

    That’s a rather poor misreading of Lenny’s clear intent. He said that a crime should have been specified, not that both the crime and perpetrator be named. Law enforcement officers investigate a lot of known crimes without a priori knowledge of who committed them.

    Chuck Bartowski (211c17)

  124. We knew back in 20q5, that red queen had transferred restricted and above material, in unsecured servers, that comes with a sizable penalty in it self. Then there are bribery chanrges as well as a whole host of other charges

    narciso (d1f714)

  125. I compare and contrast, I .earned it from sesame street, the awan extended family has been under investigation for multiple offenses since last April, crickets.

    narciso (d1f714)

  126. #1, Hillary puts US secrets on her private server.

    #2, Foreign interests are informed that in exchange for large cash ‘donations’ to the Clinton Foundation easy access to Hillary’s server will be arranged.

    #3, Money flows into Bill and Hill’s coffers and US soilders come home in coffins.

    ropelight (a06b33)

  127. That’s a rather poor misreading of Lenny’s clear intent. He said that a crime should have been specified, not that both the crime and perpetrator be named. Law enforcement officers investigate a lot of known crimes without a priori knowledge of who committed them.

    Right, but we aren’t talking about a burglary or shooting here, are we?

    Whitewater, for example, was a similar case where the investigation was necessary to determine specifically what crimes had been committed – and broadened enormously in scope to include sexual harassment charges and diddling interns in the Oval Office.

    Dave (445e97)

  128. Which is what makes the bias of the investigator so important. We don’t want somebody who picks a target just because he doesn’t like him and tries to pin a crime, any crime, on him. Or maybe “we” do?

    nk (dbc370)

  129. The deems memorized scalias dissent like college pledges and forgot about it during plame gate, shocker.

    narciso (d1f714)

  130. “And as bfwebster posted, you neglected the worst comments where he implied that he and others would do what is necessary to save the government.

    NJRob (c3af29) — 12/13/2017 @ 11:53 am”

    Suddenly conspiracy theories about the deep state don’t sound at all implausible.

    As a defense attorney who has sadly had clients go to jail for lying to an FBI agent, and and as a lowly ADA taken postarrest statements from criminal defendants charged with crimes up to and including murder, I have heard no explanation at all why Hillary Clinton’s statement was not sworn, nor recorded nor transcribed by a stenographer.SIMPLY THIS IS NOT DONE; EVER. The Q&A is critical. So even if she did in fact lie(and she did) there was no way to present such a statement to a grand jury nor any court. Neat trick. Why Flynn’s attorneys are not raising hell is beyond me. But by all accounts it was to spare his son.

    You can dislike Tump. But it is now clear The Obama Justice Dept did everything in their power to help their chosen candidate in a presidential election,and they went well beyond what was legal. The evidence points to a fabricated dossier being used to get FISA warrants to spy on the Trump campaign. That is now incontrovertible.

    Bugg (adfb92)

  131. The DOJ and the FBI had a Dossier/insurance policy.

    Steve Malynn (296daf)

  132. Ness should not decide Capone is guilty before seeing any evidence of guilt.

    And it’s not at all clear that Ness thought that booze should be banned. Just that it was banned and he was sworn to enforce the law. An Obama official would not only prejudge guilt, but also prejudge the crime itself. Bashing aborted babies brains out when they wouldn’t die? Fine by them. Just prosecutorial discretion, doncha know?

    Kevin M (752a26)

  133. But there’s a separate federal law about it which they don’t prosecute very often.

    Only Republicans, it seems.

    Kevin M (752a26)

  134. Bugg – as a long time commenter here who spent 23 years as an AUSA, I will say without qualification you have no idea what you are talking about.

    Shipwreckedcrew (dd411e)

  135. J. Christian Adams gave a speech this past weekend that included his take on Sessions

    Mr Adams has been pimping suggesting himself for a DoJ job for years now. He’d really like the Civil Rights division so he can fire everyone there.

    Kevin M (752a26)

  136. Once you exclude those two groups, how many people do you suppose that leaves?

    Hey, Dave, care for a little bet on the leanings of most of the folks working for Mueller?

    Kevin M (752a26)

  137. Ship wreck-how would you prove Clinton said anything, much less lied? There’s no tape, no transcript, and above all, no jurat in which she would sworn to be truthful and have to sign acknowledging her statement was under oath. You have a doc from some FBI agents, that’s it. Now it’s true, if the agent says you were not truthful, you could be charged. Or was it legally off the record, a mere proffer? Which would have been a complete charade; was that the idea? How would you present this statement to a grand jury or at trial? Because if you are going to charge Hillary Clinton with lying to a federal agent, he said/she said is not going to be a winning case. If that means I have no idea what I’m talking about, yes,guilty; the Hillary Clinton interview is the single oddest thing of I have ever heard in almost 30 years working on both sides of the courtroom. Again, unless the idea was to make sure she never had to worry at all.

    Bugg (adfb92)

  138. Hey, Dave, care for a little bet on the leanings of most of the folks working for Mueller?

    Most lawyers (working anywhere) are Democrats.

    The subset of lawyers who choose to work for the government is also somewhat more Democratic than the (already Democratic) population of lawyers as a whole, although the correlation of ideology with government employment is not very strong.

    Dave (445e97)

  139. #136, SWC, Bugg’s comment at # 132 reads on the mark to me. You don’t think he knows what he’s talking about, but you neglect to point out a single example to support your criticism. That’s not good enough.

    ropelight (a06b33)

  140. In Cook County, we got a copy of the Grand Jury transcript along with the indictment. It consisted of the prosecutor reading a portion of the arrest report to the jury. Just a simple narrative by the arresting officers. No signed statements by the defendant, tape recordings, or stenographic transcripts needed.

    That was one. Here’s two. shipwreckedcrew already explained the FBI procedure for noting down an unrecorded/non-transcribed interview. A lot of people have gone to prison for lying to the FBI just on the basis of the FBI agents testifying at trial using those notes to refresh their recollection. Famous people. Powerful people. Martha Stewart people. Dennis Hastert people.

    nk (dbc370)

  141. Yes its nit standard ptavtive , to have a tape and transcript, however this was a GMT cabinet official, the wife of a president and winsome eyes, the presumptive one.

    In light of everything there is only one conclusion, to any offense short of murder, they were gpi g to let her to walk. Conversely with trump, everything above jaywalking was an impeachable offense.

    narciso (d1f714)

  142. Meanwhile…….

    PBS has suspended late-night talk show “Tavis Smiley” amid misconduct allegations against its host and namesake……….

    …….The investigation found credible allegations that Smiley had engaged in sexual relationships with multiple subordinates, sources said. Some witnesses interviewed expressed concern that their employment status was linked to the status of a sexual relationship with Smiley. In general, witnesses described Smiley as creating a verbally abusive and threatening environment that went beyond what could be expected in a typical high-pressure work environment. Several expressed concerns about retaliation.”

    http://variety.com/2017/tv/news/tavis-smiley-pbs-1202639424/

    harkin (0d876d)

  143. In NY, you have the reporter or the person who took the sworn statement either read the entire transcript into the record, or testify about the circumstances of the recording to enter it into evidence and play it. Yes, I recall having clients make statement to FBI agents that were later to be be found to have been lying and merely presenting those docs along with the agent’s testimony was enough. But in each case the defendant was told this before talking to the agents. Also had clients say, in essence, go to hell, I will not answer any questions, drag me in front of a grand jury, end of interview. But in an instance where a a target is interviews, it’s sworn, taped and transcribed.

    Yes, you could in theory merely say Hillary Clinton lied to an FBI agent. But there is no way that’s holding up in a court proceeding. That you would not insist she swear to tell the truth nor memorialize it in some way is unfathomable. There’s no point to even bothering taking such a statement; it’s by design a waste of time,a dog & pony show, nonsense.

    Bugg (adfb92)

  144. Right, but we aren’t talking about a burglary or shooting here, are we?

    So, you admit to misrepresenting what Lenny said? Good.

    Chuck Bartowski (211c17)

  145. I used the lying to the FBI offense as an example of an entire prima facie case. In multitudes of other cases, involving other crimes, almost any statement of the defendant can be and is testified to by almost anyone as evidence against the defendant.

    nk (dbc370)

  146. Tavis Sleazy thought because he was a black man the sisterhood would do a passover.

    Haw haw. The purge respects no color of skin or former condition of servitude.

    papertiger (c8116c)

  147. Sorry. No, it’s not the entire prima facie case. The government will have to present other evidence that the statements to the FBI were untrue.

    nk (dbc370)

  148. Were dancing around the point, the legal system is for all intents and purposed lawless, it applies to ‘little people’ as Bryan told Decker, and only selected members of those above, men like general flynn. Who out of perhaps 100 top officers dated to challenge Obama, yes general Matt’s was one as well, although he relies on to many swamp dwellers who don’t mean him well. How could they presided over much of this disaster on three perhaps for continents.

    narciso (d1f714)

  149. The legal system has only one purpose and that is to insure the collection of next year’s taxes and this is more fact than metaphor; and all that other stuff in The Preamble is moonshine and hogwash more than it is anything else.

    nk (dbc370)

  150. This is why I’ve been binging on .ontalbano and deluca, very little else masked sense.

    narciso (d1f714)

  151. Dam’, that’s hilarious, Haiku. Everybody! Click Haiku’s link!

    nk (dbc370)

  152. 139 — 18 USC 1001 says “whoever, in any matter within the jurisdiction of the executive, legislative, or judicial branch of the Government of the United States, knowingly and willfully—

    (2) makes any materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement or representation; or

    shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 5 years…

    No oath is required. If you are being questioned by an FBI agent concerning a “matter within the jurisdiction of the executive, legislative, or judicial branch of the Government” you have a legal obligation to not provide false information.

    You prove a violation of that statute by having the FBI agent take the stand, explain the nature of the investigation, explain that they identified themselves as agents of the FBI, explain (sometimes) that it is a crime to make false statements in response to questioning, and then testify about the questions that were asked and the answers that were given by the defendant.

    You then put on the evidence of what a truthful response would have been.

    For example, when Flynn said “I did not have a conversation with the Russian Ambassador about lifting sanctions imposed by the Obama Administration”, you prove that statement is false by playing the recording of his conversation with the Russian Ambassador where that subject was discussed.

    As far as the FBI Agent’s testimony, you have his version of the interview memorialized in a FBI 302, which is the form number of a FBI Memorandum of Interview. The Agent who writes the 302, but policy, takes handwritten notes during the interview. After preparing the 302, the agents files his notes in a “1A” file, which is a 5×7 white envelope which is sealed and labeled, and placed in the case file. FBI offices have MASSIVE file rooms where all case files are maintained, and they have workers called “routers” whose job it is to file things away in the appropriate file using a classification system that has been in place for decades. They are in the process of moving towards electronic case files, but they are not there yet. The case files have electronic indexes where every document put in the case file is listed and give a control number.

    When a case goes to trial, the prosecutor asks for the “1A” files for every witness who will testify at trial. The prosecutor has a responsibility to make sure the handwritten notes are consistent with the 302s for each interview. If there are discrepancies, the prosecutor must turn them over to the Judge. The Judge then decides if the defense gets to see the handwritten notes.

    It is FBI policy that there are always at least 2 agents present during an interview. One is called the “scribing” agent, and he has the responsibility of taking notes and writing the 302 when the interview is over. But both agents must sign the 302, indicating that they both confirm the 302 is an accurate recounting of the interview.

    So, if it really came down to a “he said, she said” swearing contest at trial, both agents would testify about what the person being interviewed had said.

    And its never just a matter of a “he said, she said” on one little point. There is the entire context of the investigation, why the person was being questioned, what motive they might have to lie, what actions they might not want to become public, etc., which causes people to do something like Flynn did.

    The FBI has been criticized for a long time for not having some form of electronic recording. There are lots of reasons they give for that policy, and there are now guidelines that dictate that an interview be electronically recorded in certain circumstances. But for decades it was Bureau policy to not record interviews.

    shipwreckedcrew (56b591)

  153. 139 — there is no “legally off the record” or “proffers” when the FBI knocks on your door.

    You either answer their questions, or you decline to answer their questions.

    If you want to “proffer” then you tell them to contact your lawyer, and set something up.

    Then your lawyer secures for you what’s called a “Queen for a Day” agreement — use immunity — where you agree to answer questions on the condition that your answers will not be used against you as direct evidence in any later criminal proceeding.

    BUT, the use immunity letter states that it does not extend to false statements made during the interview.

    What I took issue with in Bugg’s original comment was his claim that he had defended someone who had gone to jail for lying to the FBI, and then professed to not understand how a case could be prosecuted without a recording or transcript of “Juret” — which is simply a notarized writing made under oath.

    Anyone who has defended a federal criminal case involving a 1001 count would not have asked the questions he asked. Its pretty basic stuff. Prosecuting a 1001 case is probably only surpassed in simplicity by prosecuting an illegal reentry case by an alien. That’s usually where AUSA’s start, and after doing about 10 of them you get to where you can indict a 1326 case in 5 questions.

    shipwreckedcrew (56b591)

  154. Except that transcript was about the Israel resolution in the security counsel. And sadly the euckenride affair re Libby colors my thoughts.

    narciso (d1f714)

  155. 95I stand by what I said. Investigators should not prejudge their targets. Capone is a good example. Ness should not decide Capone is guilty before seeing any evidence of guilt. These emails suggest these investigators have prejudged their potential targets, and that bias is why they should not be on Mueller’s team.

    This isn’t how things work in practice. In practice you have several types of investigations. In one type you start with a crime and try to find out who did it. In another type you start with the target and try to find a crime you can prove they committed. Obviously the second type of investigation is more prone to abuse than the first. But I have no problem with it when the target is someone like Al Capone. I do have a problem with it when the target is a politician.

    James B. Shearer (951d11)

  156. The question isn’t really prejudging, or having a opinion as to what is probably factual.

    The question is are people honest, and also do they have good judgment (and maybe temperament)

    Sammy Finkelman (69aa73)

  157. Most of the time it falls in-between. You have crimes, let’s say bootlegging and seven people gunned down in a garage on St. Valentine’s Day, and a suspect. You try to find evidence against the suspect and you discover that he did not pay his taxes.

    That’s what happened in Whitewater/Monicagate. There was a Whitewater crime and people did go to jail for it. While investigating the Clinton’s role in it, Starr came across Clinton’s perjury in the Paula Jones lawsuit. Monica was his proof that Clinton had committed perjury, not the crime itself, despite the “this is about sex” mantra by Clinton’s enablers.

    nk (dbc370)

  158. A more detailed narrative is coming out late on Wed night about how the Strzok text messages came to light, and the timeline for how they were handled. Once again, the revelations seem to be leading to more questions.

    The Inspector General has written a letter to Sen. Grassley, Chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee explaining the origin of the text messages, and the path of the investigation. Here are a few points from reporting by Chuck Ross at the Daily Caller.

    First, the IG’s investigation got started with regard to Comey’s public statements exonerating Hillary Clinton in July 2016, then his statement that he was reopening the investigation in Oct. 2016 after more emails were discovered on Weiner’s laptop. The IG is looking into whether Comey violated DOJ policy by making public comments on a case that was closed with out charges being filed. That is typically forbidden.

    Curiously, the story reminds people that it was Democrats who called for the IG investigation, as they believed that Comey’s late Oct. statement reopening the investigation cost Clinton the election in the end. Since Strzok was an integral player in the Clinton investigation, the IG sought his FBI phone email and text messages for a specified period of time using certain search terms the IG specified. Similar content from other FBI officials phone was obtained as well. The letter does not say when the IG made this request.

    The FBI turned over that information to the IG on July 20, 2017. A week later, the IG briefed Rosenstein and Mueller on the messages between Strzok and Page, and sought from the FBI all TMs between Strzok and Page from Nov. 20, 2016 — presumably the cutoff date of its earlier request — and July 20, 2017. The IG received these additional messages on Aug. 10, 2017.

    Strzok’s removal from Mueller’s team was first reported on Aug. 16, 2017.

    One of the key unanswered questions at this point is whether there are any similar exchanges between Strzok and others in either the Clinton investigation or Mueller’s investigation. The IG’s letter says it is continuing to investigate, conducting witness interviews, and will produce a public report of its findings when it is finished.

    shipwreckedcrew (56b591)

  159. fbi so trashy

    sick trashy losers

    no wonder everyone hates trashy sleazy fbi perverts

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  160. fbi will kill you if you are a conservative

    they will shoot you they will shoot your dog and then hide like cowardly comey trash behind the perverted scum-stained ted cruz constitution

    the fbi is trash and scummy

    lick lick lick

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  161. you worry about how Mr. Moore maybe touched a sweet young honey boo boo 40 years ago on her bra

    but the fbi cooked the honey boo boos alive at waco

    and fondled themselves as the honey boo boos screamed in agony

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  162. fbi so sick

    fbi so trashy

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  163. 132. Bugg (adfb92) — 12/13/2017 @ 7:09 pm

    I have heard no explanation at all why Hillary Clinton’s statement was not sworn, nor recorded nor transcribed by a stenographer.SIMPLY THIS IS NOT DONE; EVER. The Q&A is critical.

    This is he way all FBI interviews are done. Nobody usually gets indicted unless the false answers obstruct the investigation.

    The question is why was there no grand jury, and why were there no subpoenas issued? You could give a lot of explanations but he true reason is that nobody at upper levels in DOJ wanted to see her indicted.

    The whole investigation can be summed as follows:

    They didn’t want to find any problems.

    In that case then, why was there any kind of investigation in he first place?

    The answer is it was inadvertently brought on by Hillary Clinton herself – she had asked that all her (surviving) emails be made public, and that triggered a security review. The FBI investigated that in order to stop the Republican Congress from doing so.

    This was a very limited investigation – it only went into did she send classified information she did not intend to? (Because if she did, she would have used the telephone or let people see her in her office, etc, and/or deleted those attachments before sending copies of her emails to the State Department.

    Besides which it was supposed to be impossible to send classified information on that system, which substituted for an unclassified state.gov account. Others probably did what she did, but only her emails were examined, thanks to her request that they all be released.)

    Her interview was voluntary – but she needed to give it in order to have the FBI Director clear her.

    She kept on stringing the FBI along with her interview – that’s why Comey began preparing his statement so far in advance – then she suddenly agreed and it was done in three days. She didn’t want to be under a cloud during the general election campaign.

    Bill Clinton arranged that “accidental” meeting at the Phoenix airport with Loretta Lynch in order to find out if there were other investigations going on.. If there were investigations going on of both of them, which would probably be a RICO investigation, Loretta Lynch would have been warned not talk to Bill Clinton. She wasn’t, so she did meet Bill Clinton in circumstances when it would have been very obvious if she had avoided him.

    Why Flynn’s attorneys are not raising hell is beyond me. But by all accounts it was to spare his son.

    It’s a plea bargain and there were more serious issues about himself. They would have had a hard tie prosecuting him because at the end of the interview they gave him an opportunity to back down, as they apparently usually do, and he did. They told him that they might have, or ddi have, a recording or a transcript of the all, and he suddenly was unsure of his memory.

    I don’t know what would happen if somebody disputed the FBI’s account of what they told them. Usually I guess the person reinforces their story other ways.

    Sammy Finkelman (69aa73)

  164. Sammy is exactly correct — Andy McCarthy has explained this at length. The Clinton “investigation” was done exactly the OPPOSITE way you would do it if you really wanted to indict her. They could have used grand jury subpoenas to force witnesses to testify — they didn’t, they gave the immunity instead.

    They could have secured the computers with search warrants and had them evaluated by FBI technicians — they didn’t, they agreed to accept only what was offered to them, and only on the agreement that the computers would be destroyed after they were analyzed.

    There are probably a half-dozen other things I could describe that are routinely done in criminal investigations that were not done in the Clinton case.

    shipwreckedcrew (56b591)

  165. FBI technicians lol

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  166. I posted here after Flynn’s guilty plea a prediction that no one else would ever be charged, and that Mueller would ultimately end his investigation by writing a long report to Congress that recommends articles of impeachment.

    I posted exactly the same thinking Andy McCarthy wrote about — that giving Flynn a plea to a simple 1001 deal was really a white flag that the investigation hadn’t uncovered anything. IF there was a big scheme or conspiracy that Flynn knew about and was involved in, he would have forced Flynn to plead to that. Giving Flynn a 1001, AND a cooperation agreement was a guarantee before he had to do anything for Mueller that he would never spend a day in jail.

    I pointed out that FLynn’s plea came on a Friday, and the WaPo and NYT articles about Strzok came out the next morning.

    Now we know that Mueller has known about this since early August, BUT MORE IMPORTANTLY we know that after discovering the Strzok-Page communications, the IG set about looking at communications by others in Strzok’s orbit — and that would include Mueller’s team.

    Mueller’s team would NOT have been part of the IG’s first inquiry — that inquiry concerned Comey’s decision making on Clinton, and communications between FBI officials involved in that investigation.

    But after reviewing Strzok’s messages, recognizing the inappropriate nature, and knowing that Page was also on Mueller’s team for a while, the IG expanded its inquiry and now has TMs and emails for anyone one Mueller’s staff who shared the same sentiments in writing as were found for Strzok and Page.

    Sarah Carter, who writes for Circa now, and has had some of the best reporting on the Uranium One scandal, is saying tonight that many many more emails will be forthcoming, and they will implicate more than simply Strzok and Page.

    Mueller knows this is coming. He knows the implications for his investigation. He took Flynn’s plea for 2 reasons — first, once all this came out, Flynn might not have gone for the deal. Second, he now needs FLynn to maybe reset and restart the whole investigation. That is if Flynn has something to offer.

    Mueller is going to have to decide whether to replace most/all of his staff, and start over again. Or he’s going to have to accept that he can’t build cases that would withstand judicial scrutiny and cross-examination in Court with a compromised staff of attorneys and investigators. If the latter, he’ll simply have the existing staff write a report for Congress, and close up shop.

    shipwreckedcrew (56b591)

  167. happyfeet (28a91b) — 12/13/2017 @ 11:17 pm

    but the fbi cooked the honey boo boos alive at waco

    The children! Whom they did try to assert were abused. Newsweek ran a cover storu that six weeks after running another cover story as to how all these satanic child abuse allegations were manufactured. Shameful.

    But the FBI did not do this on its own. Bill Clinton carefully planned the whole thing.

    Clinton was in league with the conspirators within the FBI who trumped up an ethics case against the director, William Sessions, whom Clinton was careful not to fire until later, but he was kept from the scene in Waco, and his water cannon plan was rejected in favor of tear gas.

    All to protect Jay William Buford, the head of Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms in Little Rock, who had machine gunned three of the men under his direct command during the original raid, in front of KWTX-TV – Channel 10 in Waco – cameras (all personnel disguised though) with the intention of blaming David Koresh, so that no questions would be raised about the search warrant, which he had been heavily involved with, because the dead BATF agents would prove how dangerous Koresh/Howell was.

    There’s a lot more to this story.

    We had FBI witnesses to impossible things on the day of the fire, and we had the FBI demanding surrender, and then we had Janet Reno saying the next day that “this was not supposed to be D-Day” and on paper, that was true – there were orders to shrink the perimeter, with the proviso that if the Davidians fired any weapons, they could fire back or inject tear gas

    The FBI then claimed the Davidians had fired at them – denied by all survivors – they were being fired at – but Clinton had the whole compound knocked down before any impartial observers could examine it.

    And the FBI claimed the proof of how peaceful they were was that they had NOT fired back and had only injected tear gas – the truth the CS tear gas started the fire, and they knew it would happen I say.

    Somehow they were not surprised by the fire, and they “knew” the Davidians had started the fire.

    “That’s why they called it Ranch Apocalypse” said the FBI spokesman. Except that the Davidians did NOT call it Ranch Apocalypse – the Davidians called it Mount Carmel, and the Ranch Apocalypse claim had been planted in the March 17, 1993 issues of TIME and Newsweek – in Newsweek the name is only in a picture caption which you will not find by a standard search – you have to see the physical issue of the magazine itself, available now in very few libraries..

    For days it had been predicted that the Davidians would commit suicide. A BIG LIE. With not the slightest basis in fact. That’s how you can know they were intentionally murdered. This was done to prepare people for their deaths.

    All the reports Clinton arranged for were coverup.

    Later, after the Republicans took control of Congress in the 1994 election, and were going to hold hearings, President Clinton arranged, to try to choke off investigations, for the Oklahoma bombing,
    which somehow he knew, right away, before anyone could know, and while everyone’s assumption would be that it was Islamic terrorism * , had something to do with Waco.

    And what do you know he was right, so that must have been a logical assumption. Except that that motive is totally irrational.

    There’s more, and the whole thing is, I believe, not really that speculative.

    —————————
    * (which it actually was – that’s where Terry Nichols learned how to build a bomb that worked, and probably some Islamic terrorists helped actually put together the bomb – cf the other John Does)

    Sammy Finkelman (69aa73)

  168. Except that that motive is totally irrational

    Timothy McVeigh could have believed it, but neither he nor anyone else could have invented it out of genuine conviction.

    The notion of killing large numbers of unquestionably uninvolved federal employees as a response to injustice at Waco makes no sense at all.

    It’s the kind of idea that can maybe be sold to someone, but can never be genuinely thought, and this was not in the zeitgeist, anywhere.

    Sammy Finkelman (69aa73)

  169. looks like state rep. dan johson won’t be molesting anymore young girls!

    the grateful dead (aa0faa)

  170. the big deal you hope no one notices is the collusion (really conspiracy — which btw is a CRIME) in McCabe’s office.
    The other big deal is requiring purity on the part of DOJ (Session had to recuse) but purity is not required for Mueller and staff.
    This stinks to high heaven. But you hate Trump so much you cant see it.

    SD Harms (84960b)

  171. Most people want Uncle Mcconnell to tuck them in at night.

    mg (60b0f7)

  172. SWC-not entirely in disagreement. Merely pointing out that the FBI could have recorded the interview but did not. And as a policy do not swear in nor Mirandize witnesses and targets. They do in fact fall back on their beloved 302s. In this case, that to me is shoddy unless they were trying to be shoddy.

    And as Sammy has noted, basically a teenager who knocks over a gas station in almost every state who (stupidly) decides he wishes to make a postarrest statement is almost certain to have that statement recorded, will be Mirandized and in most jurisdictions have the statement on video.A former Senator, SecState and First Lady, nah, none of that technology for us, we got our 302s! And a defense attorney’s 1st question would be “Why didn’t you record it?”.

    Will grant you the FBI has enormous power and some very dedicated and professional agents. But many local cops think the acronym stands for Famous But Incompetent.

    Bugg (adfb92)

  173. Famous But Incompetent. Heh! I read Alvin Karpis’s autobiography when I was young. He had the rare honor of being arrested personally by J. Edgar Hoover who had gone out in the field at least that one time. According not only to Karpis but also the flock of reporters Hoover had invited along, no FBI agent had brought handcuffs and they had to tie Karpis’s hands together with their neckties.

    nk (dbc370)

  174. Why investigators bias matters. https://pjmedia.com/instapundit/283319/#respond

    Looks like everyone except Mueller worked for the Russians, in the investigation.

    Steve Malynn (296daf)

  175. 174, that’s cuz their daddy, uncle or brother is making Ms. Chao hit the high C in the guest quarters.

    urbanleftbehind (9240ed)

  176. Whatever anyone thinks of Trump, it looks like he did the right thing in firing James “the Mutt” Comey, and Mueller’s reputation as a forthright officer of The Law grows more tarnished by the day.

    Colonel Haiku (c8a9e1)

  177. He should have fired the SOB during the transition when he sidled up to him and started trying to blackmail him with the fake dossier. Told him to start packing on the spot. When Trump’s impulsiveness would have been a good thing, it wasn’t there.

    nk (dbc370)

  178. How could he do that with lynch, Yates boente, now we know or was part of the cabal.

    On the first episode of deluca, of course the blonde countess, who deluca was ahem friendly with, was of course the murderer, (who didn’t see this coming)

    narciso (d1f714)

  179. Yes, agreed, it should’ve been earlier. However, as things have unfolded, the firing was The Right Thing to do and the dolts that have characterized it as anything but justified fail to pass the intellectual rigor test.

    Colonel Haiku (c8a9e1)

  180. Please. Trump’s totally f***ed up the transition. His most boneheaded move was to fire Christie and replace him ostensibly with Pence but in reality with Jared Kushner. Christie would have gone through the Obamaumaus like they were a Big Mac with fries.

    nk (dbc370)

  181. Hed be like the belly bump and crush guy in A Bronx Tale.

    urbanleftbehind (9240ed)

  182. Right stay puft would have fired comey, dream on,

    narciso (d1f714)

  183. One Trump ally is making plans to commercialize Trump’s downfall. Longtime Trump confidant Roger Stone told me he is working on a book titled The Unmaking of the President as part of a multi-book deal with Skyhorse Publishing. (Last fall, Skyhorse published Stone’s campaign account, The Making of the President 2016.) “I’ve been writing it as we go along,” he told me.

    https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.vanityfair.com/news/2017/12/roger-stone-book-fall-of-trump/amp

    Admiral Ben Bunsen Burner (22fc24)

  184. James B Shearer:

    In another type you start with the target and try to find a crime you can prove they committed.

    But wouldn’t you have evidence or some factual basis for believing the target did something? If not, if all you have is that you hate the target and think he’s an idiot so you want to pin something on him, then I submit that would be improper.

    DRJ (15874d)

  185. Focus… the point was the Comey firing was justified… nothing to do with Krispy or Kushner.

    Colonel Haiku (c8a9e1)

  186. The thing was rigged, more thoroughly than the Chicago pd in the untouchables, comey got his job by being a duplicitous (redacted) in the bush administration.

    narciso (d1f714)

  187. Hed be like the belly bump and crush guy in A Bronx Tale.

    Yes! It was a bad move PR-wise, too. Christie would have been the Darth Vader with Trump staying back and being Presidential. Instead, Trump was the “bull in the china shop”; with the “Jews”, Jared and Ivanka, as “the voices of reason”. Still shaking my head.

    nk (dbc370)

  188. Yes, Haiku, firing Comey was definitely justified — I’m b!tching and moaning that it was not done sooner.

    nk (dbc370)

  189. Chris Christie would have cleaned house with a big smile on his face. It would have made a big difference in resetting DC and shown Trump meant business. Trump definitely blew the transition.

    DRJ (15874d)

  190. Fusion GPS, go-to company for DC fixing. So good they are endorsed by the FBI and DOJ.

    Steve Malynn (296daf)

  191. Not to mention sitting judiciary.

    Steve Malynn (296daf)

  192. They are wolf ram and heart, by larger scams you use apco which flocked uranium one represented by Kerry flack, Jonathan winer he was portrayed as the whistleblower in kill the messenger.

    narciso (d1f714)

  193. WOOT! Pirromaniac dies in fire.

    Civil rights activist DeRay Mckesson has sued Fox News and media personality Jeanine Pirro, alleging she defamed him while discussing a lawsuit brought against the Black Lives Matter movement.

    http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/maryland/bs-md-deray-mckesson-lawsuit-20171213-story.html

    Admiral Ben Bunsen Burner (22fc24)

  194. Tell me how, he would have done it, good grief its like ground hog day all over again.

    narciso (d1f714)

  195. There is a growing sense among political observers that the United States may be heading toward a wave election in 2018. Results of recent special elections, including Doug Jones’ (D) victory in the Alabama Senate race on Tuesday, along with Democratic victories in the New Jersey and Virginia gubernatorial elections and surprisingly large Democratic gains in the Virginia House of Delegates all point toward the likelihood of substantial Democratic gains in next year’s midterm elections, including a real possibility that Democrats could regain control of the U.S. House of Representatives. In addition, results of recent generic ballot polling generally show large Democratic leads.

    http://www.centerforpolitics.org/crystalball/articles/partisan-gerrymandering-and-the-outlook-for-the-2018-u-s-house-elections/

    Admiral Ben Bunsen Burner (22fc24)

  196. Trump may be the best thing to happen to Democrats since Social Security.

    Admiral Ben Bunsen Burner (22fc24)

  197. I don’t think that Trump is as dumb as people say he is. I think he knows the “If the Czar only knew” trick, where the leader maintains the appearance of saintliness and his underlings get the blame for the heavy stuff. It’s just that he does not want to practice it. He enjoys being seen as the heavy.

    nk (dbc370)

  198. http://www.cnn.com/2017/12/14/politics/pence-israel-visit-delayed/

    Forcefeeding like they say OBAMACARE was slipped in.

    Admiral Ben Bunsen Burner (22fc24)

  199. SWC and Bugg, thank you both for your informative comments. If I’ve learned anything about what to do if questioned by the authorities it’s that even a fish wouldn’t get caught if he’d keep his mouth shut.

    ropelight (e4a4c9)

  200. All this energy and tasks wasted…

    ROLL TRUMPUBLICAN AGENDA BACK AGAIN!

    2018

    Admiral Ben Bunsen Burner (22fc24)

  201. 3/4 of the Wimmens…

    http://www.suffolk.edu/academics/10741.php

    Admiral Ben Bunsen Burner (22fc24)

  202. 205 — EXACTLY.

    I have a lot of friends in the FBI. BUT, for a client, my advice will always be “Do not answer their questions. They are not there as your friend.”

    Bugg –I will retract my comment that you don’t know what you are talking about. I think your exposure is a bit limited, but you’re responses on this subject show you have had to deal with FBI tactics in some amount.

    There are two reasons — IMO — why they don’t record, and why they have resisted the calls from Congress that they start recording.

    The long-time justification, going back to Hoover, is that an Agent who is actively taking notes while engaged in the questioning is paying closer attention to what is being said, and the note-taking slows the process down so that both agents have more of an opportunity to think through what they are hearing, and how it meshes with other information they already have. Its intended to make them more deliberate, as opposed to having a recording device running where there is a greater likelihood of skipping past information because its importance isn’t immediately apparent.

    But, my personal view is that the real reason they do not record is that the agents — as is lawful to do — use tricks and confusion, and sometimes emotional blackmail, to get answers they want to questions. If their tactics were recorded, a jury watching or listening to the actual exchange between the agents and the witness might be offended or otherwise think the agents acted unfairly. Not having their tactics recorded in a fashion that can be seen by the jury protects them from that possibility.

    shipwreckedcrew (56b591)

  203. I used to visit my Dad on the 12th floor of the Westwood Federal Bldg and often ran into FBI on the elevator. Never met one that wasn’t a douche

    Admiral Ben Bunsen Burner (22fc24)

  204. Wouldn’t trust note taking

    Admiral Ben Bunsen Burner (22fc24)

  205. Here is what Trump should do with the Mueller investigation.

    Instruct the Dep. AG that all political appointees who are still holdovers from the Obama Admin should be dismissed from their positions.

    Instruct the Dep. AG to tell the Special Prosecutor that he can only hire for his staff current DOJ attorneys, and anyone on his staff who is not a current DOJ employee must be removed and replaced. The justification would be the ridiculous level of spending that the Special Counsel has engaged in, part of which is the cost of paying salaries to attorneys he has brought in from the outside to be on his staff.

    Third, the Dep. AG should tell the Special Prosecutor that while he can pick which DOJ attorneys he wants for his staff, his selections are subject to the approval of the supervisors at DOJ for whom that attorneys now work. His selections can’t join his staff unless their current supervisor determines that such an assignment won’t cause problems with the work those attorneys are already doing.

    Mueller can’t complain on the basis that he doesn’t get who he wants — he’s not entitled to who he wants. He’ll get a staff of competent DOJ prosecutors. If he’s not happy with that, he can resign.

    shipwreckedcrew (56b591)

  206. The practice of note-taking goes back to the 30’s. Its still part of the training they receive at the Academy.

    shipwreckedcrew (56b591)

  207. “Ironically, Democrats pushed for the investigation. Many Clinton supporters blamed then-FBI Director James Comey’s actions during that investigation for Clinton’s election loss.

    “This is highly encouraging and to be expected given Director Comey’s drastic deviation from Justice Department protocol,” Clinton campaign communications director Brian Fallon said back in January. “A probe of this sort, however long it takes to conduct, is utterly necessary in order to take the first step to restore the FBI’s reputation as a non-partisan institution.:

    Horowitz, writing to Iowa Sen. Chuck Grassley and Wisconsin Sen. Ron Johnson, said that his office obtained the Strzok texts after asking the FBI to produce communications from bureau-issued phones for a select group of employees who worked on the Clinton email probe.”

    http://dailycaller.com/2017/12/13/new-details-emerge-about-discovery-of-fbi-agents-anti-trump-texts/

    harkin (0d876d)

  208. A biased, inattentive, crooked, or overly zealous FBI agent could easily distort or misrepresent a subject’s responses to the point of outright criminal liability.

    Talking to an FBI agent is pretty much putting your head in a lion’s mouth and trusting that he’s not hungry.

    ropelight (e4a4c9)

  209. Meanwhile…..

    “I think it’s unfortunate that we are designing — that we are designing public policy in a way that, you know, comes down to how you voted in an election.” – Elise Jordan – MSNBC

    https://www.lifezette.com/polizette/msnbc-analyst-its-unfortunate-public-policy-results-from-how-you-voted-in-an-election/

    harkin (0d876d)

  210. We shall become a nation run by eunuchs and androgynes / Hollywood for Ugly People 101
    http://www.yahoo.com/news/gop-rep-blake-farenthold-not-152636727.html

    urbanleftbehind (5eecdb)

  211. So much for the presumption of innocence.

    papertiger (c8116c)

  212. Today’s Revelation of the Century:

    Strozok’s wife was suddenly promoted to Deputy Enforcement officer at the Security and Exchange Commission within hours of the FBI finding Hillary’s emails on Anthony Weiner’s computer.

    ropelight (e4a4c9)

  213. Today’s Blake Farenthold (R Tx.) Denny’s Breakfast Special: Toast w/a side order of toast.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  214. does pervy Mitt Romney’s slicked-up and ready boy toy Paul Ryan have a Harvey problem?

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  215. Good riddance. F’ing pig! Still, the $80,000 is not as bad as the $30 million the Chicago City Council just approved for four rapists the incompetent CPD cops messed up the DNA evidence against.

    nk (dbc370)

  216. Patericco: You may share anti-Trump opinions, but you are not persecuting him. Did you also think that Ronald Reagan was an idiot that needed 3 by 5 to know what to say? Some people are too clever for their own good.

    Raul Alessandri (223d20)

  217. A great deal of the information in the dossier has been confirmed. It was correct in every detail about Manafort’s corrupt ties to Putin.

    Dave (445e97) — 12/13/2017 @ 1:50 pm

    Dave, you are a sucker.

    The report gives a fly-on-the-wall account of just about every conceivable event associated with Donald Trump’s Russian connections. It claims to know more than is knowable as it recounts sordid tales of prostitutes, “golden showers,” bribes, squabbles in Putin’s inner circle, and who controls the dossiers of kompromat (compromising information). In 2011, when the courtship purportedly begins, Trump was a TV personality and beauty pageant impresario. Neither in the U.S. or Russia would anyone of authority anticipate that Trump would one day become the presidential candidate of a major U.S. political party, making him the target of Russian intelligence.

    The claims are ludicrous, and the few that can be verified were found to be false. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof. Start with the premise that the Clinton campaign paid $10 million to the Russians for dirt on Trump, and go from there – what sort of stuff do you thing someone might invent?

    One of the few verifiable facts in the report is the key role played by Trump’s “personal lawyer” Michael Cohen. Cohen purportedly went to Prague in August of 2016. The meetings took place in the offices of a Russian quasi-state organization, Rossotrudnichestvo. The evidence says this meeting never happened, and Cohen never left the country.

    As to Manafort – last I checked he was fired by Trump during the campaign, and his indictment was for activities that occurred before he ever worked with Trump.

    George Orwell's Ghost (a815b9)

  218. And miss risenatein, was a long time counsel to bill Clinton and a whole host of other conflicted principals

    narciso (d1f714)

  219. Gables fan fiction installment was decidedly weak,

    narciso (d1f714)

  220. @211. swc, tinkering w/t investigation at this point was more or less ‘tried’ similarly on a Saturday night- albeit in a different era- when Richardson had appointed Cox and Nixon ordred him fired as the heat was on. Didn’t go as The Big Dick had anticipated and he ended up w/Jaworski on his tail.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  221. Ghost,

    The Clinton campaign did not pay $10M for the dossier. The Clinton Campaign and the DNC retained a law firm to get the report from Fusion GPS in April 2016. The report was completed prior to the election in November 2016. The law firm was paid $5.6M for all services rendered from June 2015-December 2016. It is likely that much of the money was for legal services, not the report, especially since it covered 10 months before the report was commissioned and also since the Campaign’s general counsel worked for the firm.

    DRJ (15874d)

  222. Fusion claims it was paid $168,000 for the report and $1.2M total for all services and fees billed by the law firm.

    DRJ (15874d)

  223. Have we seen all the disbursements from Perkins and coie they also represented crowdatrike, the firm that records show did not block the dnc hack for the better part of a week, much like fireye failed to do for equifax.

    narciso (d1f714)

  224. Strozok’s wife was suddenly promoted to Deputy Enforcement officer at the Security and Exchange Commission within hours of the FBI finding Hillary’s emails on Anthony Weiner’s computer.
    ropelight

    That explains how the SEC totally missed the subprime trading crash as well as small timers like Bernie Madoff.

    Patricia (5fc097)

  225. Let me tell you about Hosenball, one of the recipients of steeles poison pens:

    https://hatfulofhistory.wordpress.com/category/ageehosenball/#_ednref13

    narciso (d1f714)

  226. All of the nefarious activity by our nation’s premier law enforcement being uncovered drip by drip and the MSM Democrat Operatives with bylines are fully committed to propping Mueller and their narrative up and they don’t care who knows it. It’s a revolting development.

    Colonel Haiku (c8a9e1)

  227. @232

    lol the tweet was refuted in the second reply

    Davethulhu (fab944)

  228. Those words you are using juches Dave:
    https://mobile.twitter.com/Doranimated/status/941292847432691712?p=v

    narciso (d1f714)

  229. You’ll be waiting in R’lyeh a bit longer. The Deep State is deep!

    https://theconservativetreehouse.files.wordpress.com/2017/12/the-scheme.jpg?w=640&h=462

    Rev.Hoagie (6bbda7)

  230. 232, dont you mean the British version of Asian? Here I was thinking it was some Cambodian thang or something, at least Moros/Abu Sayaf.

    urbanleftbehind (5eecdb)

  231. Middle east, but it also fits for north Africa.

    In both cases one of the lead players is belhadj for alqueda franchisee the likely real culprit behind Benghazi and definitely gave the order to kill the Libyan army general younis.

    narciso (d1f714)

  232. Mad Lib

    I used to [verb] my [relative] on the [noun] of the [location] and often ran into [noun] on the [location]. Never met one that wasn’t a [female hygiene product].

    If every [noun] you meet is a [female hygiene product] maybe the [female hygiene product] is you.

    Pinandpuller (16b0b5)

  233. your sleazy corrupt trannied-up US Military at work:

    The competitive review for the U.S. Army’s lucrative advertising contract has been irreparably compromised, according to an email written by concerned employees within the Department of Defense. Adweek has acquired a copy of the message, which the workers sent anonymously to WPP and Omnicom executives last week.

    […]

    According to the email, a personal relationship between James Ortiz, director of marketing at the Army Marketing and Research Group, and a former McCann executive “shows a conflict of interest on both parties.” The authors also wrote that the situation “shows a clear and present advantage and access to potentially critical information that could be used in the [McCann Worldgroup] proposal.”

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  234. Another shoe drops:

    It was already known that Fusion GPS hired the wife of DOJ Assistant AG Bruce Ohr.

    But in a declaration filed this week, Fusion GPS states that it hired Ohr’s wife in the summer of 2016, and did so for the purpose of conducting opposition research on GOP Candidate Trump during the election season.

    So, in the same time frame that DOJ opens its Trump-Russia investigation (late July according to Comey’s testimony) based in part of the dossier commissioned by Fusion GPS and the Dem Party, and placed into the hands of the FBI by Fusion GPS, that same firm hires the wife of a senior DOJ official to work on behalf of the Dem party against the GOP nominee.

    I hope Mr. Ohr has his resume up to date.

    shipwreckedcrew (56b591)

  235. FBI so sleazy-scummy

    and mueller’s vaunted integrity is but a bad joke anymore

    jailtime for Comey?

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  236. 4. bfwebster (c3c3ef) — 12/13/2017 @ 10:40 am

    The texts cited above aren’t the damning texts.

    These texts are:

    LP – And maybe you’re meant to stay where you are because you’re meant to protect the country from that menace. (links to NYT article)

    PS – … I can protect our country at many levels, not sure if that helps

    AND:

    Text-from Peter Strzok to Lisa Page (Andy is Andrew McCabe):

    “I want to believe the path u threw out 4 consideration in Andy’s office-that there’s no way he gets elected-but I’m afraid we can’t take that risk. It’s like an insurance policy in unlikely event u die be4 you’re 40″

    These aren’t “That guy’s an idiot” texts. These are texts talking about Strzok using his position to “protect the country against Trump” and about discussing “an insurance policy” against Trump in the office of Andrew McCabe, Deputy Director of the FBI.

    I figured this out.

    Lisa Page wanted Peter Strzok to quit his job and make more money so that he could divorce his wife and marry her. Peter Strzok argued he needed to stay in his job to protect the country against what Trump might possibly do if elected president. (they may not have gone into much specificity here)

    Lisa Page counter-argued – while they were both in Andrew McCabe’s office – maybe waiting around – maybe that’s when they got a chance to meet personally – that there was no way that Donald Trump was going to win, citing state by state analysis, maybe with printouts, that Donald Trump had no path to 270 Electoral votes.

    Peter Strzok argued it could happen, and staying in his job would be like an insurance policy against dying before he was 40. (People still take out insurance even though the likelihood is small.)

    But at another point in time, they seem to have almost adopted the other’s position:

    Lisa Page said maybe staying where he is was what was supposed to be (i.e, what heaven wanted), and Peter Strzok said, after all, he could protect the country from many different places (i.e. he didn’t have to be in the FBI.)

    Sammy Finkelman (3efdba)

  237. Make McConnell’s wife the Ryan Bingham Czar

    Trump point at a random swamp dweller:

    Chao, fellow!!!

    Pinandpuller (16b0b5)

  238. jailtime for Comey?

    happyfeet (28a91b) — 12/14/2017 @ 12:10 pm

    He has a head start on Chuck Colson with the Jesus thing.

    Pinandpuller (16b0b5)

  239. Patterico:

    yes the strzok text messages are a problem

    Correction were a problem. Mueller intervened, problem solved.

    Next

    Baziljet (822e93)

  240. I may be late to the party, but I just noticed that 66 year old Authur Ochs Sulzberger is stepping down effective January 1st and appointing his son, Arthur Gregg Sulzberger to take the helm at the NY Times.

    ropelight (e4a4c9)

  241. Has PBS used public funds to pay women off?

    Pinandpuller (16b0b5)

  242. Indeed, this is not the first time in recent memory that Republicans have coughed up an easy win by handing their nomination to a loose cannon. While the Tea Party wave of 2010 swept dozens of GOP lawmakers into office—including some future party stars like Senators Marco Rubio and Rand Paul—it also produced several decidedly terrible candidates who lost races that were well within reach for the Republican Party.

    Angle, for example, waged a strange and reckless campaign in Nevada and ultimately blew a chance to unseat Democratic Senator Harry Reid. Her candidacy would be remembered primarily for her claim—instantly debunked, and nationally ridiculed—that the threat of encroaching Sharia Law constituted a “militant terrorist situation” in the cities of Dearborn, Michigan, and Frankford, Texas. Meanwhile, O’Donnell (who is most famous for her “I am not a witch” campaign ad) defeated a former governor and nine-term congressman in the Republican primary, and then got blown out in the general.

    https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/12/alabama-and-2018/548327/

    Admiral Ben Bunsen Burner (22fc24)

  243. The strange career of Nellie H. Ohr A look at who she is and where she’s been.

    crazy (d99a88)

  244. ConDave is always “on the con”…

    Colonel Haiku (c8a9e1)

  245. I may be late to the party, but I just noticed that 66 year old Authur Ochs Sulzberger is stepping down effective January 1st and appointing his son, Arthur Gregg Sulzberger to take the helm at the NY Times.

    ropelight (e4a4c9) — 12/14/2017 @ 12:48 pm

    Get your kicks at 66

    Pinandpuller (16b0b5)

  246. A look at who she is and where she’s been.

    crazy (d99a88) — 12/14/2017 @ 1:01 pm

    Can they indict a HAM Operator?

    Pinandpuller (16b0b5)

  247. Nellie Ohr is a strange combination of Elizabeth Warren and Tokyo Rose.

    Pinandpuller (16b0b5)

  248. Ms. Ohr and her husband look like a Big Bang Theory couple.

    urbanleftbehind (5eecdb)

  249. As part of a sandwich, maybe? Hold the Russian dressing…

    crazy (d99a88)

  250. The Big Dick had anticipated and he ended up w/Jaworski on his tail.

    DCSCA (797bc0) — 12/14/2017 @ 10:30

    Yeah too bad Jaworski wasn’t married to Bob Woodward’s sister.

    Pinandpuller (16b0b5)

  251. Let’s go over to ABC’s This Week with Ron Ziegler…

    Pinandpuller (16b0b5)

  252. Ms. Ohr and her husband look like a Big Bang Theory couple.

    urbanleftbehind (5eecdb) — 12/14/2017 @ 1:22 pm

    With The Americans crossover special.

    Pinandpuller (16b0b5)

  253. @236

    Oh is this a guessing game? I pick “what does a crazy person have thumbtacked to their wall?”

    Davethulhu (fab944)

  254. The Clinton “investigation” was done exactly the OPPOSITE way you would do it if you really wanted to indict her.

    And the SAME people want to impeach Trump on Obstruction, for saying “hey, go easy on Flynn. Sure he lied, but not about anything important.”

    Meanwhile they conducted an investigation of Hillary and her coterie (regarding multiple serious felonies) that was such a sham from beginning to end it would make L Patrick Gray blush.

    Gotta love the irony.

    Kevin M (752a26)

  255. Met a guy named Richard who shook my hand and said My name’s Dick

    What could I say except I’m sorry

    Admiral Ben Bunsen Burner (22fc24)

  256. For being such dyed-in-teh-wool, self-described tuff guys, you conservatives really whine, weep and gnash your teeth a lot

    Admiral Ben Bunsen Burner (22fc24)

  257. Trump should ask his new FBI Director to review the Clinton email investigation and report on any irregularities, with a view towards obstruction charges.

    Kevin M (752a26)

  258. Been shopping for a Dodge Durango SET and found a black titanium with red leather in Redlands. Woot!

    Admiral Ben Bunsen Burner (22fc24)

  259. SRT…

    Admiral Ben Bunsen Burner (22fc24)

  260. Fusion claims it was paid $168,000 for the report and $1.2M total for all services and fees billed by the law firm.

    DRJ (15874d) — 12/14/2017 @ 10:38 am

    One part Office Depot, one part Lawyer client privilege and one part dead drop. Agitate liberally. Serves 65,853,516.

    Pinandpuller (16b0b5)

  261. Why’s it gotta be black?

    Pinandpuller (16b0b5)

  262. Was saving up for primo ’67 Chevelle SS396 but decided there is no way it’s comparable in price or performance.

    Admiral Ben Bunsen Burner (22fc24)

  263. He took Flynn’s plea for 2 reasons — first, once all this came out, Flynn might not have gone for the deal.

    swc–

    Does a prosecutor have to disclose exculpatory information, or information tending to impeach a witness to the defense prior to such an offer, or does that only apply to trials?

    Kevin M (752a26)

  264. Black for my Irish deadbeat relatives and red for my Blackfoot great granny.

    Admiral Ben Bunsen Burner (22fc24)

  265. Sounds nice, Ben. Those suckers are huge. Colors are right. Leather I presume?

    Rev.Hoagie (6bbda7)

  266. Leather keeps the new car smell hoagie, yes leather.

    The 392 Hemi is the Deal maker here.

    Admiral Ben Bunsen Burner (22fc24)

  267. Chris Christie would have cleaned house with a big smile on his face. It would have made a big difference in resetting DC and shown Trump meant business. Trump definitely blew the transition.

    Still could

    Kevin M (752a26)

  268. Better take advantage of my Christmas spirit. The good will has but a few shopping days left. It always happens when I buy my own gift.

    Admiral Ben Bunsen Burner (22fc24)

  269. I may be late to the party, but I just noticed that 66 year old Authur Ochs Sulzberger is stepping down effective January 1st and appointing his son, Arthur Gregg Sulzberger to take the helm at the NY Times.

    It would be funny if he was a libertarian.

    Kevin M (752a26)

  270. Cummins diesel and HEMI is a major contribution to American greatness.

    Admiral Ben Bunsen Burner (22fc24)

  271. Nellie O Choose Your Own Adventure:

    1. Accidentally shoot yourself eight times in the back with extreme carelessness.

    2. Contempt of Court a la Susan McDougal

    3. Special Prosecutor Karaoke go to: My Mama Told Me, You Better Shop Around

    Pinandpuller (16b0b5)

  272. ABBB recently took up yoga so he can kiss his black foot goodbye.

    Pinandpuller (16b0b5)

  273. http://talkingpointsmemo.com/dc/marco-rubio-im-a-no-on-tax-bill-unless-child-tax-credit-expanded

    Reinventing themselves, ditto, ditto, ditto.

    Admiral Ben Bunsen Burner (22fc24)

  274. Are you the jealous type, Pin?

    Hoocuddaknowed?

    Admiral Ben Bunsen Burner (22fc24)

  275. Why don’t you just call me Ben? ABBB sounds so formal.

    What will you reply when I’m Admiral Ben Broadsword Bunsen burner Benevolent bro?

    Wouldn’t Ben be easier?

    Admiral Ben Bunsen Burner (22fc24)

  276. Anonymous develops secure data over ham radio scheme. – not the only way to do it, but I wonder what Nellie used hers for…

    crazy (d99a88)

  277. 246. Baziljet (822e93) — 12/14/2017 @ 12:47 pm

    Mueller intervened, problem solved.

    He let it stay a secret, though.

    I suppose you would say they were waiting for the completion of the Inspector general’s report/

    It isn’t ready. The news was forced out.

    Sammy Finkelman (3efdba)

  278. 271 — No. The Supreme Court ruled on that very question in around 2005. The Ninth Circuit had decided a case saying “Yes”, but the SC reversed.

    For a period of time there was a big problem as some state bar associations tried to impose an ethical obligation on federal prosecutors to make such disclosures, with a threat against the law licenses if they didn’t make such disclosures even after the SC said it was not required. But a DOJ civil law suit put an end to that on Supremacy Clause grounds. Basically the ruling was that a statue licensing agency could not impose on federal employees work requirements greater than those imposed by law.

    shipwreckedcrew (56b591)

  279. Kevin M (752a26) — 12/14/2017 @ 1:44 pm

    Trump should ask his new FBI Director to review the Clinton email investigation and report on any irregularities, with a view towards obstruction charges.

    Rid Rosenstein says there’s no predicate for a criminal investigation of that by a special counsel. What alleged crimes, right now. he says?

    There is an Inspector General’s investigation.

    Sammy Finkelman (3efdba)

  280. If you aren’t my wife working side by side with Strzok of what do I have to be jealous?

    I have three cars, a JD 550 and I’d wager my Shank’s Mare is in better shape than yours.

    I live in a low tax county in a low tax state and I get great sunsets three hours before you do.

    Pinandpuller (16b0b5)

  281. Black for my Irish deadbeat relatives and red for my Blackfoot great granny.

    Admiral Ben Bunsen Burner (22fc24) — 12/14/2017 @ 1:50 pm

    Hoaxafontass?

    Colonel Haiku (c8a9e1)

  282. I’m impressed.

    You get your sunrise three hours late?

    I am so so sorry.

    Admiral Ben Bunsen Burner (22fc24)

  283. Does your Christmas Spirit come with chains for the High Sierras?

    Pinandpuller (16b0b5)

  284. “The 392 Hemi is the Deal maker here.”

    As any old-school Mopar guy can tell you, that engine ain’t a “hemi”

    Colonel Haiku (c8a9e1)

  285. RE;NY Times inheritance; Carlos Slim says, knock your Sulzberger asses out all day , have a coronation, play what ever reindeer games you want down the hall, I pay the bills. It’s my newspaper. And keep not calling attention to me, nor my remittance business nor any of my other sleazy businesses.

    Bugg (adfb92)

  286. Did I say original 426 hemi, haikookachoob?

    392 more efficient with more torque for this nor attached to the inferior past.

    Admiral Ben Bunsen Burner (22fc24)

  287. 392 Edit
    The 392 raised-deck engine released in 1957 had a 4.00 in (101.6 mm) bore and 3.906 in stroke. The deck height, at 10.87 in (276.1 mm), was 0.5 in (13 mm) taller than that of the previous blocks. Because its deck was taller, the heads were cast wider so that earlier manifolds could be used with the new heads on the new taller block. For 1958, Chrysler offered the 392 in two configurations: 325 bhp (242 kW) with 9.25:1 compression and 345 bhp (257 kW) with 10:1 compression, both with a single four-barrel carburetor. A dual four-barrel version of the 392 available in the 1957-58 Chrysler 300C & 300D cars was rated at 375 bhp (280 kW). An extremely rare option available on the 1958 300D was Bendix “Electrojector” fuel injection, with which the 392 was rated at 390 bhp (291 kW). Due to reliability problems with the primitive onboard computer which controlled the injection system, however, 15 of the 16 300D cars built with the fuel injection option were recalled and retrofitted with carburetors.[5]

    The 392 engine was used in the following applications:

    1957–1958 Chrysler New Yorker
    1957–1958 Imperial Custom, Crown, and LeBaron
    1957 Chrysler 300C
    1958 Chrysler 300D
    In the late 1950s and early 1960s, drag racers found the 392 to be a formidable engine and continued to run them competitively into the 1970s.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chrysler_Hemi_engine

    Admiral Ben Bunsen Burner (22fc24)

  288. Quoting Bret Baier on Twitter:

    Text-from Peter Strzok to Lisa Page (Andy is Andrew McCabe):

    “I want to believe the path u threw out 4 consideration in Andy’s office-that there’s no way he gets elected-but I’m afraid we can’t take that risk. It’s like an insurance policy in unlikely event u die be4 you’re 40″

    The risk would be leaving his job.

    It’s not clear from this whether Lisa Page had an outside job lined up for Peter Strzok. or there was some other job in the government where they couldbe together more often, r maybe one he liked better.

    In any case Peter Strzok could nt be certain that that the Hillary’s path to victory that Lisa Page outlined to him when they were in Andrew McCabe’s office not longg before, was irrefutable, although he would like to believe that analysis.

    Sammy Finkelman (02a146)

  289. 294, that would be like strangelove not saluting,

    narciso (d1f714)

  290. http://www.nationalreview.com/article/454649/robert-mueller-team-investigate-the-investigators

    They should certainly be investigated – at least by Congress.

    Sammy Finkelman (02a146)

  291. I’m just trying to point out that this is Patterico’s Pontifications not The Olive Garden.

    That’s all.

    Pinandpuller (16b0b5)

  292. Types “A”

    Holds down “B” X ms

    X=?

    TBD

    Pinandpuller (16b0b5)

  293. New App pitch:

    Coyote Uber

    Have Hemi, Will Smuggle

    Pinandpuller (16b0b5)

  294. @282

    And P&P Hoo shrunk his Internet Braggadocio by three sizes that day!

    Pinandpuller (16b0b5)

  295. You guys on the right are truly challenging my special education training/skills. Is it Educable Mentally Retarded or Trainable mentally retarded?

    Any input is appreciated.

    Admiral Ben Bunsen Burner (22fc24)

  296. You guys on the right are truly challenging my special education training/skills. Is it Educable Mentally Challenged or Trainable mentally challenged?

    Any input is appreciated.

    Admiral Ben Bunsen Burner (22fc24)

  297. You’re thinking re-education a la Harry Dean Stanton in Red Dawn.

    *drink*

    Obama ad hid Hillary’s call logs and schedule to counter FOIA???

    @Tom Fitton

    Pinandpuller (16b0b5)

  298. “Any input is appreciated.”

    That’s what she said.

    felipe (023cc9)

  299. And 3, 2, 1…

    felipe (023cc9)

  300. Yall should know you aren’t alone . My spouse finds me infuriatingly correct and she, like you look for any opening to expose my exasperating habit of being correct. If that will lower the blood pressure for all y’all…I do stipulate. Sheesh.

    Admiral Ben Bunsen Burner (22fc24)

  301. See? Flippy gets it even without self-awareness. It is rewarding doing the Lord’s work.

    Admiral Ben Bunsen Burner (22fc24)

  302. Comey writes report exonerating Hillary before he interviews her.

    Though the FBI had not yet interviewed Clinton, then the Democratic candidate for president, FBI officials had already determined that criminal charges were probably not warranted and had begun thinking about how to present that conclusion to the public.”

    https://www.apnews.com/074e7d62cbde455c8e72478aac1740b4/Senator:-Comey's-remarks-on-Clinton-probe-heavily-edited

    Mentally-challenged indeed.

    harkin (0d876d)

  303. 285 Sammy:

    The news was forced out.

    By whom, and their motivations?

    Recent disgusting performances by Trump boosters in congress and on Trump TV are indicative of why Mueller doesn’t leak.

    Baziljet (822e93)

  304. Mueller is proving to be the perfect person for posterity. Meetings with Unremarkable Men is not coincidental.

    History has touchstones placed like river rock by God’s own gravity hand.

    Admiral Ben Bunsen Burner (22fc24)

  305. At that level of editing, it is ebturely a different document.

    narciso (d1f714)

  306. She Who Must Be Shown The Error Of Her Ways…Each Passing Anniversary?

    Pinandpuller (16b0b5)

  307. Kayla Moore: It’s our golden anniversary honey, what’s wrong with you?

    Roy Moore: Kayla, when your daddy caught us together he said if I didn’t marry you he’d throw me in prison for 50 years.

    Kayla Moore: Sure, I remember, but why do you look so sad?

    Roy Moore: I’d be gettin’ out today.

    Pinandpuller (16b0b5)

  308. More like Blarney Stones hewn by your deadbeat Irish kinfolks.

    Pinandpuller (16b0b5)

  309. You sure it’s not Kayla Kleavage?

    Admiral Ben Bunsen Burner (22fc24)

  310. Meanwhile senator carper admitted he hit his wife, 20 years ago. Tell me about respect for decency, again, Boer flake and Shelby gt

    narciso (d1f714)

  311. This is the Roy honey trap

    https://g.co/kgs/Am7Nvp

    Admiral Ben Bunsen Burner (22fc24)

  312. Is this your idea of re-educating the masses

    From Madrid to Calabasas?

    At the gates and the walls of Montsegur

    Blood on the stones of the citadel

    Iron Maiden

    Pinandpuller (16b0b5)

  313. 188

    James B Shearer:
    “In another type you start with the target and try to find a crime you can prove they committed.”

    But wouldn’t you have evidence or some factual basis for believing the target did something? If not, if all you have is that you hate the target and think he’s an idiot so you want to pin something on him, then I submit that would be improper.

    In the case of someone like Al Capone it is general knowledge that he is a criminal but that doesn’t mean it is easy to prove he committed a specific crime.

    James B. Shearer (951d11)

  314. 285. 311.

    SF: The news was forced out.

    Baziljet (822e93) — 12/14/2017 @ 4:14 pm

    By whom, and their motivations?

    Acccording to a Wall Street Journal editorial that appeared, I think, on Tuesday, December 5, 2017:

    https://www.wsj.com/articles/muellers-credibility-problem-1512432318 (mostly nehind a paywall)

    The Washington Post and the New York Times reported Saturday that a lead FBI investigator on the Mueller probe, Peter Strzok, was demoted this summer after it was discovered he’d sent anti- Trump texts to a mistress. As troubling, Mr. Mueller and the Justice Department kept this information from House investigators, despite Intelligence Committee subpoenas that would have exposed those texts. They also refused to answer questions about Mr. Strzok’s dismissal and refused to make him available for an interview.

    The news about Mr. Strzok leaked only when the Justice Department concluded it couldn’t hold out any longer, and the stories were full of spin that praised Mr. Mueller for acting “swiftly” to remove the agent. Only after these stories ran did Justice agree on Saturday to make Mr. Strzok available to the House.

    So that would mean it was forced out by a subpoena from the House Intelligence Committee, and anything was turned over, it was pre-emptively leaked with spin praising Mueller.

    Now this may not be accurate.

    But the committee has been trying to find out why he was removed from the investigation.

    Recent disgusting performances by Trump boosters in congress and on Trump TV are indicative of why Mueller doesn’t leak.

    Maybe he doesn’t leak, but some other people do.

    Sammy Finkelman (3efdba)

  315. The first leak was about the fact >/i> of the text messages.

    Only then were some of the damaging (to Strzok) texts leaked. Which would get them less attention.

    Sammy Finkelman (3efdba)

  316. 315. It wasn’t really that way.

    By the time he introduced himself to her, she’d been married and divorced and had a child. But he’d spotted her years before.

    Sammy Finkelman (3efdba)

  317. Maybe Doctor Evidence doesn’t leak because he only uses the same three agents out of 35,000. No matter whether it’s covering up Hillary Clinton’s home brewed server, poo pooing emails on Weiner’s laptop, or shopping out lies to gullible, addled by brain cancer, Senators?

    papertiger (c8116c)

  318. Wondered when this would surface: FBI’s use of NSA foreign surveillance program needs to be investigated, say whistleblowers

    A controversial NSA surveillance program used to monitor foreigners was also being used by the FBI as ‘backdoor’ to gain warrantless access to American communications, according to numerous former U.S. intelligence and law enforcement officials with knowledge of the program.

    The whistleblowers, who recently disclosed the program’s process to Congressional oversight committees, say concern over the warrantless surveillance mounted when it was disclosed earlier this year that Obama officials had accessed and unmasked communications of members of President Trump’s 2016 campaign, allegedly without clear justification.

    The process, known as ‘reverse targeting,’ occurs when intelligence and law enforcement officials use a foreign person as a legal pretense for their intended target, an American citizen, the officials stated. The program, as it exists, failed to prevent terror attacks and in many cases made incorrect connections between a foreign target and an innocent American, they stated.

    More than one way to collect on the Trump team before seeking a warrant. Worse than any illegality is the apparent abuse of expanded legal authorities and wide-open access to raw intelligence put in place by the Obama team in time for the ’16 election.

    crazy (d99a88)

  319. I have feeling the “insurance policy” text message exchange is not going to pan out to something nefarious. I think we are going to get more context on that exchange, and its going to be some form of exchange about the electoral college map.

    I would be shocked if two “conspirators” in some plot to alter the trajectory of an upcoming election would be so idiotic — especially one who regularly engages in sophisticated “spycraft” — as to trade incriminating text messages on the plot using FBI issued cell phones.

    shipwreckedcrew (56b591)

  320. Well they write talking about burner phones on their texts, after practically every agency has been hacked in one way or another, they arrant that smart. Still there are many more texts to examine and niece we filter out the nsfw ones.

    narciso (d1f714)

  321. Did I forget to mention wiretapping Trump Tower (remember when Trump revealed with a tweet and all the Democrats media [and Patterico] said that was just crazy talk?)

    Same Mueller team.

    papertiger (c8116c)

  322. Pillow talk. They could have been talking about running away together to the South Pacific.

    nk (dbc370)

  323. Maybe the insurance policy talk is nothing but something was important enough about Strzok’s conduct to put him in the HR penalty box instead of returning him to his desk.

    crazy (d99a88)

  324. THey found another witness in the Clinton Foundation embezzling Haiti funds case dead with a knife in his chest.
    http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2017/12/doctor-linked-haiti-mentioned-wikileaks-found-dead-stabbing-chest/

    “The most determined case of suicide we’ve ever seen.” said the New York City Police Dept.

    papertiger (c8116c)

  325. I would be shocked if two “conspirators” in some plot to alter the trajectory of an upcoming election would be so idiotic — especially one who regularly engages in sophisticated “spycraft” — as to trade incriminating text messages on the plot using FBI issued cell phones.

    As a general proposition, yes. But these are folks who probably thought that they would be insulated from any consequences under a Hillary White House… and were already using those phones to engage in an adulterous affair.

    kishnevi (10c258)

  326. Maybe the insurance policy talk is nothing but something was important enough about Strzok’s conduct to put him in the HR penalty box instead of returning him to his desk.

    crazy

    Guilty of owning a penis?

    papertiger (c8116c)

  327. Back in August that wasn’t a firing offense…

    crazy (d99a88)

  328. By the time he introduced himself to her, she’d been married and divorced and had a child. But he’d spotted her years before.

    Sammy Finkelman (3efdba) — 12/14/2017 @ 5:20 pm

    I joined the joke-recycler’s guild.

    Pinandpuller (16b0b5)

  329. “Recent disgusting performances by Trump boosters in congress and on Trump TV…..”

    That’s the ticket! Call it disgusting for people to criticize and refuse to comply.

    harkin (0d876d)

  330. penis own you i thought

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  331. When you click on that link, you can almost hear the yearbooks being altered in the background.

    papertiger (c8116c)

  332. 324. Sammy:

    Now this may not be accurate.

    Regarding Nunes committee, I think you can take that to the bank.

    Maybe he doesn’t leak, but some other people do.

    Mueller doesn’t leak because he doesn’t have political motivations. Other people, as you say…….do leak.

    Baziljet (822e93)

  333. Note no clerks.names are given, the Salem witch trials were more honest, speaking of the detestable dahlia lithwick, does her best Donald zutherland impression.

    narciso (d1f714)

  334. Crimethink?

    nk (dbc370)

  335. Yes, he affirmed the immigration pause in part, and has said many doubleunplusgood things in the past.

    narciso (d1f714)

  336. And all you need to do is search “Kozinski” on this site to see that he has a worse history than Al Franken on the things he is being accused of. http://patterico.com/index.php?s=kozinski&submit=Search Pages and pages of it.

    nk (dbc370)

  337. Yeah, yeah, yeah, but what about Russia, Russia, Russia? Huh? Trump went to Russia, and so did his campaign manager. Well if not actually Russia then Ukraine, same difference.

    Trump pissed on Obama’s legacy, and he stole the election from our First Woman President, the chauvinist rat! The upstart NY billionaire usurper even lost the popular vote! And he has bad hair, and too many golf courses, and he has as big gaudy jet plane, maybe two, and a gaudy helicopter too. He just ain’t got no class, not like the money grubbing cattle belly queen of Whitewater Arkansas. No siree!

    Besides all that, Trump’s unstable, he doesn’t drink or smoke so everyone knows he can’t be trusted with the nuclear codes. He’s anti-religion, he doesn’t kowtow to the high priests global warming and even makes fun of their bogus hockey-doo sticks and phony charts. Even if it snows darn near every time Algore opens his mouth.

    Uep, Trump is unfit to drain the DC swamp and make America Great Again. If he did he’d be reelected in a landslide by grateful citizenry which would prevent Obama from giving America to the Islamic terrorists before the Clintons could sell it to the highest bidder.

    ropelight (f5bdce)

  338. Well of with his head obviously,

    As to Mueller till we rummaged through every phone call, text email he has made since the uranium one matter came to light we want ever know. This is what they did to the huntress and she want even in office at the time.

    narciso (d1f714)

  339. Are you buying a classic car, Rear Admiral Bunzbeenburning? The new Dodges may have Hemi badges all over them, but they aren’t hemis

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  340. The real problem with all this — when the DoJ allows one party’s corrupt politicians to do whatever they want, but holds members of the other party to the letter off the law — is that the law becomes meaningless. It’s a short slide from political persecution to dictatorship, and we’re VERY close to that point now.

    Kevin M (752a26)

  341. You wouldn’t have the scratch to buy a real one, lol.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  342. I don’t know where my baby can be

    They took her from me, they took her from me

    I don’t know where my baby can be

    They took her from me, they took her from me

    I’m ringing ringing ringing for the President

    To find out where my baby went

    I’m ringing ringing ringing for the FBI

    To find out if my baby’s alive

    The KKK Took My Baby Away

    Pinandpuller (16b0b5)

  343. always the last place you look

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  344. Colonel, I thought comrade Ben! was looking at a Dodge Ram truck. I’m no expert on trucks but I don’t think you can get a diesel with a hemi. I have also heard (though I can’t recall who told me so take it as rumor) that the Dodge Hemi trucks are having problems.

    Rev.Hoagie (6bbda7)

  345. Some people have tinkered with converting Chrysler hemis to diesel. But then some people have tinkered with hitching horses to cars. No, hemi diesels are not a production item.

    nk (dbc370)

  346. That misses the point doesn’t it, Lol, so does the agitate over kozinski.

    narciso (d1f714)

  347. Naw, he said SRT Durango, which is damned monster-fast, but it’s not a diesel and it is not a “hemi”, these new motors are not a hemispherical design.

    On another car-related note, I bought the 2013 E350 BlueTec (diesel) we’d leased for a couple of years for my wife and I can’t get over the mileage for a large sedan… 33 mpg around town and 37-38 on the highway. First diesel we’ve owned and an excellent experience so far.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  348. We’ll see more emails and text messages late tomorrow in a Friday afternoon document dump by DOJ and Mueller.

    shipwreckedcrew (56b591)

  349. I owned a 350Z for 5 years… fastest car I’ve ever owned but it was no fun getting speeding tickets. Had never been a problem before and hasn’t been a problem since. No need to go stupid-fast, all you need for fun is an engaging car. My faves are lightweight, superb handling, removable roof and mid-engined, preferably.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  350. Where can you drive at top speeds.

    narciso (d1f714)

  351. I’m the only black on PBS,” Hyzagi quoted Smiley as saying. “They can’t touch me”.

    https://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_5a31be65e4b07ff75b0022e6

    Check your privilege.

    harkin (d82f96)

  352. 361… nowhere but on a track, narciso… true that!

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)


  353. 361.Where can you drive at top speeds.


    I usually do it in the driveway.

    Rev.Hoagie (6bbda7)

  354. They should call it a Demi because it’s throaty and favors young boys.

    Pinandpuller (16b0b5)

  355. The FBI has problems. Congress needs to question Strzok, at the least.

    DRJ (15874d)

  356. I know to each his own but I hate how they turned every Ford Escape and Toyota Highlander etc into a station wagon. Was there actually something wrong with SUV’s? Is it some kind of subliminal Trans advertising campaign? I don’t get it. I guess everyone decided to copy the Nissan Rogue and Murano.

    Pinandpuller (159672)

  357. MANCHESTER – A Congolese immigrant escaped prosecution on six domestic-violence crimes when his lawyer convinced a city prosecutor that he lacked the cultural competency to participate in the American justice system, according to court and public records reviewed by the New Hampshire Union Leader.

    The decision is one of several questionable actions highlighted late last month by Attorney General Gordon MacDonald in a widespread critique of domestic-violence prosecutions in Manchester. MacDonald’s critique led to the abrupt retirement of veteran City Solicitor Tom Clark and has put Clark’s office under heightened scrutiny.

    One questionable decision dealt with the case of Augustin Bahati, 33, who was arrested last August. According to court paperwork, he was accused of striking, pushing, grabbing, kicking and pulling out the hair of a woman who was 27 weeks pregnant at the time.

    His case ended when Manchester prosecutor Andrea Muller – the domestic-violence prosecutor singled out by MacDonald – dropped six misdemeanor charges against Bahati in early March.

    How Bahati avoided prosecution was spelled out in handwritten notes of District Court Judge William Lyons.

    “The parties agree that the expert reports and analysis indicates that the defendant:

    . Not competent

    . Not restorable

    . Not dangerous

    Consequently, the court must dismiss the charges,” Lyons wrote on March 2.

    Source

    Pinandpuller (159672)

  358. Look at that punchbowl – republicans lined up to p#ss in it, then serve it as home made.

    mg (60b0f7)

  359. Sessions needs a heart attack so the American people can get a new AG and put clinton behind bars.

    mg (60b0f7)

  360. Strzok committed treason, should be a death sentence, but will hang out at club fed.

    mg (60b0f7)

  361. Thanks mg — the clear exposition of the hell we are in today.

    Steve Malynn (296daf)

  362. So a corrupt partisan is fired from a political investigation, and promoted into the HR department. What could go wrong?

    A purported “spy-catcher” who blathers on unsecured coms his corrupt affairs and unprofessional conduct, and he is supposed to protect the nation from the Russians? LMAO.

    I listened the other day to Tucker Carlson interview a D talking head, about how Hillary’s removing her official SecState documents was excused so she could write a memoir – wait, wasn’t that what Petreus was convicted of?

    Steve Malynn (296daf)

  363. 367, I thought the boxy pre 2014 or so escape and highlander were modern station wagons. The Highlander became a luxury SUV, but the escape became a compact.

    urbanleftbehind (9240ed)

  364. We still have our ‘01 Highlander. That sucker will never stop running.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  365. I doubt the Highlander is a luxury SUV. Let’s just call it full sized.

    Rev.Hoagie (6bbda7)

  366. I only know from a friend who has one From the first year it got bigger, leather at al. Clearly, it’s Lexus cousin is going to be the lux SUV. Reminds me of the old P.O..N.T.I.A.C. joke.

    urbanleftbehind (9240ed)

  367. Esquire-

    On a personal level, going home at the end of next year would allow Ryan, who turns 48 next month, to keep promises to family; his three children are in or entering their teenage years, and Ryan, whose father died at 55, wants desperately to live at home with them full time before they begin flying the nest.

    Isn’t that just too fcking sweet for words? Of course, young Paul Ryan had Social Security survivor’s benefits to live on when his pappy kicked and, once again, you’re welcome, di*khead. And I’m sure that his own children have excellent health care in his magnificent Georgian Revival home back in Janesville. I tell you, I’m almost as moved as I was when Ryan washed some clean pots and pans at that soup kitchen, or those several times when he dropped by impoverished neighborhoods in order to have his picture taken there.

    Admiral Ben Bunsen Burner (cbfdca)

  368. Throw him in the CHIPper along with all the other Rapture Left Behinds.

    Admiral Ben Bunsen Burner (cbfdca)

  369. As a candidate, Donald Trump repeatedly took advantage of genuine frustrations among voters, over everything from high drug prices to exported jobs to predatory Goldman bankers to non-dischargeable student debt.

    It’s lost among the popular accounts of what happened in 2016, but he mined this territory quite a lot on the trail. This was particularly true in the heat of the primary race, and during his most desperate moments in his scandal-plagued October.

    Then he got elected and surrounded himself with so many Goldman bankers that even that even Lloyd Blankfein was embarrassed, nominated an Eli Lilly executive to run the Health and Human Services department, and put for-profit education creeps in charge of the DOE, who are now working with congressional Republicans to ram through this nonsense.

    https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/features/taibbi-on-new-student-loan-debacle-and-trumps-campaign-con-w513929

    Admiral Ben Bunsen Burner (cbfdca)

  370. ABBB-no word where Ryan deigned to tell the rabble all this happy nonsense. My bet is on his way to The Wife’s “Goldman Sachs “Holiday Party” or on his way back from K Street after getting his marching orders. The man lost a debate to Joe Biden, badly. How that gets him the corner office,don’t know.

    Bugg (adfb92)

  371. I have a 1999 Toyota Land Cruiser. 185,000 miles. The first 12 years I had it, my wife had a company car, and I drove a different car. We put fewer than 8,000 miles a year on the LC. Now I drive it every day.

    Five kids had taken their toll on the interior, but the 5.0 liter Toyota Racing engine in that sucker is unreal. The only significant failure of a mechanical part was the master brake cylinder. Other than that, nothing but regular maintenance. My mechanic, who worked for a Toyota dealership for 20 years says he thinks the motor will easily go to 350,000 miles. It still looks like it did when it rolled off the assembly line.

    The particular model I have, with the particular engine in it, is an oddity. The engine was the prototype that Toyota developed for Indy Car racing when they first entered the series. You know that because the placement of the starter is in a location that is very difficult to get to, and if you were designing the engine to have a starter you would never put the starter where it is. But Toyota racing engines do not have starters — the are cranked by an external device which is then removed. So when Toyota adapted the engine for use in the Land Cruiser, they had to add the starter to the design in a location that would fit under the hood.

    The downside? 5000+ lbs which wears out brakes, and it gets only 11 mpg.

    shipwreckedcrew (56b591)

  372. 1976 Jeep Cherokee 62,000 actual miles, will climb anything. Gas guzzler deluxe. Under 10 mpg. Tan and I had the top painted camo.

    mg (60b0f7)

  373. Only the best people……

    Baziljet (822e93)

  374. thefederalist.com/2017/12/15/trump-admin-to-remove-climate-change-from-list-of-national-security-threats

    narciso (d1f714)

  375. Peterson is not the only one. There’s fat guy without a beard, who has never tried a case, also up for District judge. And you can’t blame the “blue slip” if it’s for the the DC court. Who is picking these guys and why?

    nk (dbc370)

  376. *Petersen*

    nk (dbc370)

  377. wait, wasn’t that what Petreus was convicted of?

    Wasn’t he convicted of unauthorized sharing with his lover/ghostwriter–not simply possessing documents?

    I think access to documents is a fairly normal courtesy given to high level memoirists. The question is, how many rules on sharing did Mme Hillary bend, shatter, and loftily ignore..

    kishnevi (4be44a)

  378. On the plus side, if you’re a Democrat, this is the kind of judge you want if you’re looking to admit a high school yearbook as evidence.

    nk (dbc370)

  379. you know what else isn’t a threat to national security is empanadas

    happyfeet (28a91b)


  380. 394.you know what else isn’t a threat to national security is empanadas


    They are if they’re smuggled in by illegal aliens. And don’t give me the “they replace the food Americans won’t eat” argument.

    Rev.Hoagie (6bbda7)

  381. there’s an empanada-like speciality what they do in Louisiana called meat pies

    i had one with crawfish and it was the best thing ever

    omg it says they ship

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  382. Guava and cheese’ are the best, ymmv

    Speaking of judge chutkin who was assigned to two fusion related cases.

    narciso (d1f714)

  383. What I like about empanadas is that they make a good litmus test for judges.
    — So you want to be a judge?
    — Yes, Senator.
    — Tell me, do you like to spend $3.00 on a piece of fried dough, stuffed with only God knows what, and made by some person of dubious antecedents and even more dubious sanitary habits?
    — Sometimes.
    — And do you actually eat that?
    — Yes, sir, I do.
    — Thank you. Don’t call us, we’ll call you.

    nk (dbc370)

  384. empanadas wrapped in foil out the back of a station wagon are the best

    see also tamales

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  385. That’s why I avoid the ground beef ones.

    https://althouse.blogspot.com/2017/12/a-top-aide-to-texas-attorney-general.html

    Sincerity is not appreciated.

    narciso (d1f714)

  386. Surprising White shift
    brought Moore down.

    http://mattbruenig.com/2017/12/15/what-actually-happened-in-alabama/

    Admiral Ben Bunsen Burner (cbfdca)

  387. I would be shocked if two “conspirators” in some plot to alter the trajectory of an upcoming election would be so idiotic — especially one who regularly engages in sophisticated “spycraft” — as to trade incriminating text messages on the plot using FBI issued cell phones.

    They thought Hillary would win, and that they were therefore immune from scrutiny. If anyone took a good look at what went on in Obama’s administration, they’d find a lot of that.

    Kevin M (752a26)

  388. I think access to documents is a fairly normal courtesy given to high level memoirists. The question is, how many rules on sharing did Mme Hillary bend, shatter, and loftily ignore..

    And why you can call letting her go “prosecutorial discretion” while Trump suggesting leniency towards an aide is “obstruction.”

    I’m having trouble distinguishing between the two concepts. Near as I can tell the only bright line is political party.

    Kevin M (752a26)

  389. Love empanadas shrimp,lime,garlic and rice

    mg (60b0f7)

  390. and jalapeno

    mg (60b0f7)

  391. Just tamales for me, from a cooler by the laundromat. Actually make them, pork with either salsa rojo o salsa verde, as part of my service hours for daughters school.

    urbanleftbehind (9240ed)

  392. Yeah, right. Stuff like this would have no market without the existence of modern medicine –emergency rooms, ICUs, and antibiotics.

    nk (dbc370)

  393. Nothin’ from nothin’, but has Al Franken resigned yet?

    Colonel Haiku (ac2387)

  394. Saw my picture in the paper
    Read the news around my face
    And now some people
    Don’t want to treat me the same
    When the walls come tumblin’ down
    When the walls come crumblin’ crumblin’
    When the walls come tumblin’ tumblin’ dowwwwnnnnnn

    —- Mellencamp

    Lenny (5ea732)

  395. Al Franken is far from the most f***ed thing about Minnesota. https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/justine-damond-killing-prosecutor-says-not-enough-evidence-yet-charge-n829811

    This POS cop shoots and kills an unarmed woman without apparent provocation or apparent justification — just up and shoots her — and the POS prosecutor says that after almost half a year he does not have enough evidence to charge the POS cop. Unbelievable.

    nk (dbc370)

  396. Speaking of F’d up things in Minnesota, hope Gary’s okay!

    Colonel Haiku (ac2387)

  397. @409, 409, Giddy Up 409 nk

    I think that’s what the lime is for.

    Pinandpuller (5d765a)

  398. @413 nk Al Franken is far from the most f***ed thing about Minnesota. https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/justine-damond-killing-prosecutor-says-not-enough-evidence-yet-charge-n829811

    This POS cop shoots and kills an unarmed woman without apparent provocation or apparent justification — just up and shoots her — and the POS prosecutor says that after almost half a year he does not have enough evidence to charge the POS cop. Unbelievable.

    No sh*t. Apart from that, the guy’s been on paid administrative leave for the whole time. He’s been on vacation, in other words. And he doesn’t have to speak to the investigators b/c of 5 Amendment Rights. So the prosecution is flying blind on his story. Now does this all make sense? You wanna get paid? You’re a civil servant and you wanna get paid? You gotta tell your story, bucko. At the very least. And to boot, they ought to have him cleaning up the medians or somesuch, if he thinks he deserves the king’s shilling in the interim. Police unions are the worst.

    Q! (86710c)

  399. 404. Kevin M (752a26) — 12/15/2017 @ 10:23 am

    They thought Hillary would win,

    That was what they were disagreeing about. The reason thsi was discussed in Andrew Mccabe’s office was because Lisa Page worked there. She probably presented her political analysis showing that Donald Trump had n path to 270 when theer was nobody else there.

    I think Peter Strzok was saying he wanted to stay in his job and did not want to take a promotion – that is what “levels” probably refers to – because of the possibility that Donald Trump might win the election. He couldn’t take the risk that Trump would be elected president.

    Staying in his job was insurance, the way somebody takes out life insurance when they are under 40.

    Strzok was comparing the odds of Donald Trump winning the election to the odds of young before age 40.

    He wanted to be where he was – in charge of investigating Trump’s relationship with Russia – in case Trump got elected.

    Sammy Finkelman (02a146)

  400. 413 – nk

    Not only that, but the cop cannot be compelled to be interviewed by investigators.

    Here’s what the Hennepin county attorney who is responsible for any charges said: “I have to prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, the moment he shot the gun he feared for his life, and he used force because he thought he was gonna be killed. But he won’t answer my questions, because he doesn’t have to, OK? We all have Fifth Amendment rights, and I respect that.”

    Say what? Wouldn’t it be the defense attorney’s responsibility to prove he feared for his life? Freudian slip, apparently.

    Lenny (5ea732)

  401. There’s a column today in the Wall Street Journal by Kimberly Strassel that gives some background.

    There are actually two investigations of the FBI investgation of Hillary Clinton and the server, or the principals involved in tghe investibgation, going on.

    The first one was started in November, 2016 by the Office of Special Counsel (no relation to special counsel Mueller) and went into the question of whether FBI Director Comey violated the Hatch Act (she doesn’t say how he might have done this)

    In the process they interviewed two clsoe aides of Comey’s – FBI chief of staff James Rybikci and FBI attorney Trisha Anderson. (was Comey pressuring them to take some position on the election?)

    This investigation was closed in May (possibly because Comey was no longer with the FBI)

    This September, Senator Ron Johnson, chairman of the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, demanded the full unredacted transcripts of thsoe interviews (from the special counsel probably) It turned out the FBI had refsued to let Mueller talk to them unless he agreed to non-disclosure agreement that left the question of any co-operation with Congress up to the FBI. It’s continued t insist on secrecy including the names and actions of key political players.

    gthis week, senator Ron Johnson demanded that the new FBI Director, Christopher Wray authroize the release of teh full transcripts.

    The other investgation started in mid-January and thsi oen turned up the text messages.

    Sammy Finkelman (02a146)

  402. I miss Gary Gulrod.

    mg (60b0f7)

  403. Ach! That Thin Blue Line is a bridge of collusion and even body-cams won’t change cop mentality: just drive it underground .

    Admiral Ben Bunsen Burner (4b3a7c)

  404. #Strzok & Page texts look like a big nothing – no hint of corruption in their jobs. Lots of people (me included) speak crudely in private about politics. If you’re ok w/ Trump’s outbursts, I don’t see getting whipped over this BS.

    … clearly, by question Mueller’s reasoning for firing Strzok, Andy McCarthy is undermining the Mueller investigation … or whatever

    Neo (d1c681)

  405. the thin blue line’s just a function of which sharpie you use Mr. burner

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  406. Lenny @418,

    I had the interesting experience of a continuing legal education seminar in which one of the lecturers was a Minnesota prosecutor. I knew more about the subject, gun laws, than he did, and for a while I had a hard time deciding whether he was dishonest, ignorant or just plain stupid. Finally, I reached the conclusion that it was all four. Dishonest, ignorant, plain, and stupid. 😉

    nk (dbc370)

  407. I owned a 350Z for 5 years… fastest car I’ve ever owned but it was no fun getting speeding tickets. Had never been a problem before and hasn’t been a problem since. No need to go stupid-fast, all you need for fun is an engaging car. My faves are lightweight, superb handling, removable roof and mid-engined, preferably.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 12/14/2017 @ 8:01 pm

    I think this has the ring of stupid, so maybe it’s believable.

    The fastest I’ve been is over 130mph. I have no %$&#ing clue how much faster as the needle was all over the place. As was the car. A ’68 Dodge Charger. 440 Police Pursuit Special. Talk about the fear fear of God.

    Steve57 (0b1dac)

  408. I was lucky I could keep the car centered on the road.

    Steve57 (0b1dac)

  409. MFBIGA

    Colonel Haiku (ac2387)

  410. JEEZUSS CHRIST!!

    No more honest words have ever been uttered.

    Steve57 (0b1dac)

  411. Luckier you didn’t kill somebody, even yourself.

    Driving a slow car fast will always be much more fun than driving a fast car slow. Straight line speed can be thrilling, but taking a sweeping curve at 60 mph, when the sign warns you to do no more than 25 mph is BIG FUN

    Colonel Haiku (ac2387)

  412. htttrong>strong>

    tps://theconservativetreehouse.com/2017/12/15/a-curious-case-of-counterintelligence-bill-priestap/#more-143460

    narciso (d1f714)

  413. nk (dbc370) — 12/15/2017 @ 4:13 pm

    Dishonest, ignorant, plain, and stupid.

    That would make sense if was too ignorant to know that his dishonesty was obvious to anyone who knew anything about the subject and too plain to realize it was a little more complicated and too stupid to realize that other people knew more than he did about the subject matter,

    Sammy Finkelman (b66da2)

  414. 173. SD Harms (84960b) — 12/14/2017 @ 2:52 am

    the big deal you hope no one notices is the collusion (really conspiracy — which btw is a CRIME) in McCabe’s office.

    I think the only reason McCabe’s office is referred to here is that Lisa Page worked there. They were probably alone in the office when Lisa Page talked about the path to 270 Electoral votes, and that there was no way that Donald Trump gets elected. She asked him to consider that analysis. But he felt he still needed to take out insurance against Trump being elected. It was insurance for after the election.

    This probably meant staying in charge of the Trump-Russia investigation. He therefore declined to accept a transfer, or, more probably, promotion, that would have taken him away from it.

    This is consistent with genuinely believing Donald Trump is, or could get into, a criminal conspiracy with Russia.

    The other big deal is requiring purity on the part of DOJ (Session had to recuse) but purity is not required for Mueller and staff.

    Sessions was for the president. Theotehrs were against the president, and recusal is generally done when the bias if for the president. his can make for an uneven playing fireld. And if the president is an expert crook, it doesn’t mean anything.

    Sammy Finkelman (20d02d)

  415. Luckier you didn’t kill somebody, even yourself.

    Colonel Haiku (ac2387) — 12/15/2017 @ 5:35 pm

    Nobody knows this better than myself.

    Did you miss the JEEZU CHRIST comment?

    Steve57 (0b1dac)

  416. I’m still afraid. And I’m back seat qualified in F-14s. I could work the mighty, mighty AWG-9 like a
    Viking. Like there’s a skill that will get you job.

    Steve57 (0b1dac)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.9098 secs.