Smoking Gun: The Trump Victory Insurance Policy - Muh Russia?

originally posted by: Arnie123

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: Justoneman

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: TinfoilTP

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: TinfoilTP
Time to fire all the FBI higher ups, they are obviously political and actioning on it, which is absolutely against their purpose.

If it's so obvious, you would have some proof available, right?

You're not just regurgitating the most recent propaganda, are you?

Read the text provided in this OP.

I did. No complete context is there to come to any real conclusion.

Not sure how you came to one in your mind.

Are you then lying about what it means or just a tool? I hope the second one and I pray you find a cure for that soon. Failing is habitual for the left but they are sure persistent.

It seems the only fail here is people's reading comprehension.

I see that you cannot add anything of substance to the conversation, so you reverted to the ad hom personal attack.

Stop your crying with regards to ad hom attacks, you're being willfully dense and users are simply calling you out for it.

Who's crying? It seems there was no context to go with the info in the OP.

No one has yet to actually call me out and provide the proper context and the member in question only made a personal attack, which is par for the course around here. ATS is not known for having the brightest bulbs in the box.

So it seems it is not I that is being dense. You guys either cant read or don't understand the term context.

a reply to: JoshuaCox

Trump will win in 2020 because people see the corrupt understructure revealing themselves in attacks on Trump. It will ensure Trumps win in 2020 to continue to drain the swamp. Amen!

originally posted by: thepixelpusher
a reply to: JoshuaCox

Trump will win in 2020 because people see the corrupt understructure revealing themselves in attacks on Trump. It will ensure Trumps win in 2020 to continue to drain the swamp. Amen!

You fanboys are always good for a laugh.

At this point, it appears Trump brought his own swamp with him and people such as yourself actually believe he is draining it.

originally posted by: shooterbrody

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: shooterbrody

Do you have evidence to the contrary? No.

The ceo of gps admitted in court that he had ohrs wife working for them
The ceo of gps admitted in court that he met with ohr(which ohr did not disclose to his doj bosses)
From congressional testimony we know that a fisa warrant was denied 2 times then magically approved
We know that the judge that presided over flynns plea deal has recused himself after initially presiding over flynns case

These facts are NOT IN DISPUTE

Correct. So is the fact that Mueller fired the agent who was biased. All of the other facts you outlined are irrelevant to any wrongdoing by the Trump campaign. As I said, you were ready to hang Hillary Clinton because of what you thought emails stolen by the Russians said. Whenever it was pointed out that they were obtained illegally, it didn't matter how they were acquired, all that mattered was what you thought they said that was incriminating. Now all of a sudden the messenger is more important than the message for you lot. You can tell that Trump is desperate because he is trying to discredit the investigation, rather than welcoming it to prove his innocence. The greatest irony is that Trump will never do the one thing that could save him and those nearest to him: resign.

a reply to: DJW001

As I said, you were ready to hang Hillary Clinton because of what you thought emails stolen by the Russians said. Whenever it was pointed out that they were obtained illegally, it didn't matter how they were acquired, all that mattered was what you thought they said that was incriminating.

Post your source for me saying those things or retract this.
I did not say those things.
I said repeatedly she was in hot water for her server and mishandling classified information. Charges imo that will be revisited now that we know who interviewed her from the fbi.

All of the other facts you outlined are irrelevant to any wrongdoing by the Trump campaign.

lol
Yeah sell that to Flynn, the guy that interviewed him also interviewed hillary and her cronies. Flynn got charged with lying to the fbi, hillarys cronies got immunity. No double standard there. I would wager flynn will move to pull his plea in light of this new evidence against the agent. Oh and did you know the judge that presided over his plea deal has now recused himself? With no reason given? If all they have is the fara violation the government does not have a history of prosecuting others for similar violantions. Even if Flynn does not, when this is over and trump is still standing he will pardon flynn.

You can tell that Trump is desperate because he is trying to discredit the investigation, rather than welcoming it to prove his innocence.

In the usa you are innocent until proven guilty. One does not need an investigation to prove innocence.
The results of this investigation with respect to trump have no bearing on guilt or innocence anyway. Impeachment is a political process and not a criminal one. Congress and the Senate will determine impeachment with guilt not mattering. See one William Jefferson Clinton if you need an example.

Birthday

The Birth of the Federal Bureau of Investigation
John F. Fox, Jr., FBI Historian
July 2003

It’s all up with the “black cabinet” of Washington,” read the Washington Evening Star. Congressional hearings were then underway into the practice by which the U.S. Secret Service loaned investigators to other federal agencies, primarily the Justice Department. As a result of these hearings, Rep. Walter Smith (R-IA) declared that “Nothing is more opposed to our race than a belief that a general system of espionage is being conducted by the general government,” and Rep. John Fitzgerald (D-NY) warned against the dangers of a federal secret police.1As a result of these hearings Congress forbade the Secret Service from loaning investigators to other departments. Having lost access to those investigators, Attorney General Bonaparte created a small force of detectives for the Department of Justice (DOJ); this was the predecessor of the Federal Bureau of Investigation. Because Congress had condemned “secret services,” “black cabinets,” spies, and detectives at this time, many Bureau critics have charged that the FBI was created in opposition to Congress’s will and so was born illegitimately.

thereby creating “a system of espionage in this country which is entirely inconsistent with the theory of our government.”

... and so was born illegitimately.

a reply to: shooterbrody

So Trump is innocent until proven guilty, but Clinton is guilty until exonerated? And as for the emails, I haven't the time to go back and see exactly who said what. If you acknowledged that the emails were obtained legally, I' m sorry.

a reply to: loveguy

Nice try, but the FBI is legitimate. It has exceeded its original mandate, which needs to be examined, but only a potential traitor would argue that it is not empowered to undertake investigations that cross state lines.

a reply to: DJW001

So Trump is innocent until proven guilty, but Clinton is guilty until exonerated?

Trump is potus. Impeachment is the only avenue for misdeeds by him. Guilt or innocence do not matter as impeachment is a political process and not a criminal one.
You are comparing apples and oranges.
Clinton, not a potus and subject to criminal charges, was not charged or tried, but is still innocent until proven guilty. Since you asked I will repost what comey had to say about clinton.
www.fbi.gov... -a-personal-e-mail-system

This will be an unusual statement in at least a couple ways. First, I am going to include more detail about our process than I ordinarily would, because I think the American people deserve those details in a case of intense public interest. Second, I have not coordinated or reviewed this statement in any way with the Department of Justice or any other part of the government. They do not know what I am about to say.

We now know this to be a lie as Strzok got into hot water. People did know what he was going to say.
www.cnn.com...

Electronic records show Peter Strzok, who led the investigation of Hillary Clinton's private email server as the No. 2 official in the counterintelligence division, changed Comey's earlier draft language describing Clinton's actions as "grossly negligent" to "extremely careless," the sources said. The drafting process was a team effort, CNN is told, with a handful of people reviewing the language as edits were made, according to another US official familiar with the matter.

back to comeys statement:

From the group of 30,000 e-mails returned to the State Department, 110 e-mails in 52 e-mail chains have been determined by the owning agency to contain classified information at the time they were sent or received. Eight of those chains contained information that was Top Secret at the time they were sent; 36 chains contained Secret information at the time; and eight contained Confidential information, which is the lowest level of classification. Separate from those, about 2,000 additional e-mails were “up-classified” to make them Confidential; the information in those had not been classified at the time the e-mails were sent.

crimes which ordinary joes go to jail for

Although we did not find clear evidence that Secretary Clinton or her colleagues intended to violate laws governing the handling of classified information, there is evidence that they were extremely careless in their handling of very sensitive, highly classified information.

with classified info intent does not matter
crimes ordinary joes go to jail for

None of these e-mails should have been on any kind of unclassified system, but their presence is especially concerning because all of these e-mails were housed on unclassified personal servers not even supported by full-time security staff, like those found at Departments and Agencies of the U.S. Government—or even with a commercial service like Gmail.

see classified info on an unclassified server

and finally

Although there is evidence of potential violations of the statutes regarding the handling of classified information, our judgment is that no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case. Prosecutors necessarily weigh a number of factors before bringing charges. There are obvious considerations, like the strength of the evidence, especially regarding intent. Responsible decisions also consider the context of a person’s actions, and how similar situations have been handled in the past.

So comey said there was evidence of a crime, but he chose not to recommend prosecution.
He even mentions factors such as HOW SIMILAR ACTIONS HAVE BEEN HANDLED IN THE PAST.

Flynn is probably choking on that last sentence, you know because no matter the number of lies discovered in the hillary case NO ONE was charged with lying to the fbi.
Mills lied
Huma lied

Remember who is intimately involved in both cases? Strzok was.

a reply to: DJW001

which needs to be examined

Autopsy?

a reply to: shooterbrody

I said repeatedly she was in hot water for her server and mishandling classified information. Charges imo that will be revisited now that we know who interviewed her from the fbi.

Who interviewed her has no bearing on the actual evidence they reviewed in the case.

Not sure why you think the person doing an interview, after all the evidence had been sorted through, matters one bit.

Yeah sell that to Flynn, the guy that interviewed him also interviewed hillary and her cronies. Flynn got charged with lying to the fbi, hillarys cronies got immunity.

That's a false equivalency.

Flynn plead guilty to that charge in order to drop more serious charges, which no one on Hillary's team have been accused of committing, and in exchange for his cooperation in the investigation.

No double standard there.

Correct. There is no double standard.

You have to have to comparable situations in order to create a double standard and there is no comparison here.

I would wager flynn will move to pull his plea in light of this new evidence against the agent.

And face even more serious charges?

That would be a dumb move on his part.

Even if Flynn does not, when this is over and trump is still standing he will pardon flynn.

I thought Trump was supposed to be different than the typical politician.

If he does what you say, it proves he is becoming part of the swamp himself, and not draining it.

a reply to: introvert

Who interviewed her has no bearing on the actual evidence they reviewed in the case.

Keep telling yourself that.
In light of the texts released Strzok should have no more been involved with the hillary investigation than with the trump investigation. That bias works both ways. He was fired for that bias now, and would have been had an IG been around during the last administration. A hillary cheerleader should not have been the one to interview her. No wonder there were no notes or recordings made of that interview.
And with that twit and others working on comeys statement ( a lie in comeys fbi statement now revealed) it is no wonder they refused to recommend charges be brought. These daft people really are hanging themselves.
So yes who interviewed hillary really does matter as the same protocols were not used in the flynn interview.
That is a double standard.
That is the kind of technicality that gets defendants off.

That's a false equivalency. Flynn plead guilty to that charge in order to drop more serious charges, which no one on Hillary's team have been accused of committing, and in exchange for his cooperation in the investigation.

It is only a false equivalency if we know what the "more serious charges" were. If it is fara violations, then no it is not a false equivalency as those are RARELY prosecuted. As the judge in the case has recused himself (suspected to have signed the FISA warrant with the dossier as proof, a warrant twice before denied) I would wager we will never know what the "more serious charges" were. We do know he was not offered immunity to cooperate as were numerous hillary staffers.
We do know that Mills and Huma lied, and were not charged. That is another double standard.

That would be a dumb move on his part.

So either you did not see the hearing yesterday or you are not familiar with "fruit of the poisonous tree".
One of the congressman brought it up.

fruit of the poisonous tree n. in criminal law, the doctrine that evidence discovered due to information found through illegal search or other unconstitutional means (such as a forced confession), may not be introduced by a prosecutor. The theory is that the tree (original illegal evidence) is poisoned and thus taints what grows from it. For example, as part of a coerced admission made without giving a prime suspect the so-called "Miranda warnings" (statement of rights, including the right to remain silent), the suspect tells the police the location of stolen property. Since the admission cannot be introduced as evidence in trial, neither can the stolen property. (See: Miranda warning)

The tree in this case being Strzok.
In fact it is being kicked around that this is why Mueller was so quick to get Flynn to plea to the lying to the fbi charge before this was released by the doj. It would have been much harder to get flynn to cooperate if his attorney was aware of Strzok.
You think Mueller wants Strzok on the stand for the prosecution representing the fbi after his bias was revealed? Just the details alone of the 2 fbi agents affair and putting all that on the witness stand and possibly his betrayed wife to obtain the extent of the bias is enough to embarrass and disgrace the fbi.

With all that corruption going on Trump will look like a hero pardoning poor career military and public servant flynn, especially when all he really did was forget to sign a few papers.

a reply to: shooterbrody

Keep telling yourself that.

It's true. The evidence is not reliant upon who did the interview.

That's basic logic.

In light of the texts released Strzok should have no more been involved with the hillary investigation than with the trump investigation. That bias works both ways. He was fired for that bias now, and would have been had an IG been around during the last administration. A hillary cheerleader should not have been the one to interview her. No wonder there were no notes or recordings made of that interview.

That is your opinion, albeit illogical. If we took that approach, we would not have a DoJ. Everyone has an opinion and we would not have one person that could do the jobs if their jobs were dependent upon their personal opinions.

We do know he was not offered immunity to cooperate as were numerous hillary staffers. We do know that Mills and Huma lied, and were not charged. That is another double standard.

Again, it would only be a double standard if the situations were similar, but they are not.

The tree in this case being Strzok.

That's the narrative I've read. It sounds good on the surface, but it does not encompass the entire investigation. It also relies on the idea that evidence or leads cannot be found elsewhere.

With all that corruption going on Trump will look like a hero pardoning poor career military and public servant flynn, especially when all he really did was forget to sign a few papers.

So what was once considered to be "swampy" is now heroic, huh?

Jesus you guys are brainwashed.

a reply to: introvert

no sources
no legal opinions
just your opinion
typical

Oh come on!
wee all know this has been going on for a long time.
its only now that we Can see it clearly.

if the FBI is doing THIS!
just think what the CIA and others do!
assasinations! and framing for Rape and kiddy fiddling.

have you forgoten what J edgar hoover,
had done on his death?
his secretary destroid a LOT of documents.
So sensitive that they would destroy many people.

now why would they not just prosecute them??
So they can Black mail them!

12.14.2017

Another piece of the puzzle to cover/protect "crooked Hillary" was verified today...

Newly released documents obtained by Fox News reveal that then-FBI Director James Comey’s draft statement on the Hillary Clinton email probe was edited numerous times before his public announcement, in ways that seemed to water down the bureau’s findings considerably.

Full Article at: www.foxnews.com...

a reply to: carewemust

Man, if what was presented was a watered down version, what did the original look like?

originally posted by: JoshuaCox
a reply to: Dfairlite

I’m not the one pretending it doesn’t exist and it’s Fake News .. lol

WTH, you are one of the BIGGEST pretenders we see on ATS. So, NO ..... you do believe in totally fake news.......

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: Justoneman

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: TinfoilTP

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: TinfoilTP
Time to fire all the FBI higher ups, they are obviously political and actioning on it, which is absolutely against their purpose.

If it's so obvious, you would have some proof available, right?

You're not just regurgitating the most recent propaganda, are you?

Yep , your comprehension has been exposed numerous times on the political front. Like Phage you have a niche but it isn't a niche in political expertise because you are so over the top leftist. I keep saying be neutral and the whole thing makes more sense. You can see the left-right BS they are using to divide us. Playing us like fiddles in a huge orchestra.

Read the text provided in this OP.

I did. No complete context is there to come to any real conclusion.

Not sure how you came to one in your mind.

Are you then lying about what it means or just a tool? I hope the second one and I pray you find a cure for that soon. Failing is habitual for the left but they are sure persistent.

It seems the only fail here is people's reading comprehension.

I see that you cannot add anything of substance to the conversation, so you reverted to the ad hom personal attack.

You have no right to think you were comprehending anything based on those posts. Either we have FBI making 'insurance' for Hilldog or not but you don't understand it on purpose to be partisan. BE NEUTRAL and you will see what is happening. Be partisan and you leftist at least lose all sense of logic, all sense of it.

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: introvert

no sources
no legal opinions
just your opinion
typical

What's become typical is people such as yourself that don't seem to understand the basics of logic and reason.