quote It’s the talk of the f---ing White House. /quote

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: odzeandennz

Yeah. Okay.
Conservative rhetoric. Pure as the driven snow.

Odzeandenndz isn't a conservative.
About as a 'middle of the road' poster as you can find here.
Usually everyone on both sides takes issue with his posts.
No offense to o&e....

a reply to: Tempter


I saw this as well, then turned around and read something similar on MSN. They're getting desperate.

The president reportedly spent the weekend watching television and complaining about the special counsel Robert Mueller's Russia probe, according to the Post.

Proof, "the post" ? None? Didn't think so. Another "anonymous source" :roll eye:

Ridiculous to see the slander continue.

Trump doesn't give his left a%%-hair about the Mueller "probe" and at least he doesn't watch ridiculous echo-chamber CNN on television.

CNN=Clinton news network, where Donna Brazzile fed Shillary questions before a debate, giving her an advantage (that she didn't exploit clearly, since she is a horrible debater/speaker). Shillary is the kind of speaker that puts half the room to sleep, and enrages the other half to vote against her.

Worst candidate I've ever seen. Yet none of these "entertainment news" sources ever do any real investigation into the Clintons. Means they need to be under investigation as well. As to the matter of British/Russian conspiracy to meddle in our election, against Trump. Because not only did MSM help her push the narrative, but they're responsible for continuing the rumors despite Trump being cleared of the conspiracy.

Looks to me like the far-alt-left is abusing their FCC broadcasting privileges. CNN? MSN as well? They don't have any anonymous source. Their source is the author of that article who wanted to include a dig against Trump. They pulled that BS right out of their rear end, as usual.

a reply to: theantediluvian


I don't know. It's happen SO MANY TIMES it is hard to keep count.

Look at Lois Lerner and her IRS cronie? Who unlawfully targeted the tea party.

I'm getting sick and tired of hearing that "computer glitches" are standing in the way of ACCOUNTABILITY and criminal liability.

If computers in government are THIS UNRELIABLE, then time to force OUR EMPLOYEES to go back to pen & paper, the old fashioned way. Until such a time as they can LEARN to use a computer properly, and not #### it up every chance they get conveniently skirting any monitoring, record retention and accountability.

Ridiculous this keeps happening. There must be personal criminal liability for those who fail to submit to public monitoring and accountability. Especially the liberal lap-dog Lois Lerner AKA skeletor AKA yet another bitter clinger.

a reply to: Tempter

Lets get it all out. Have them freak out and then our government should fix it.

Restructuring the FBI and reforming it as a new agency would allow them to keep past investigations as the new agency is no longer connected to the old FBI.

They need to partially shut down and get fixed.

a reply to: butcherguy

I love the guy

a reply to: The GUT

Since a 302 is only a summary of notes taken during an FBI interview I don't see a problem.
( And yes I just looked it up) He didn't alter the notes from the interview. He adjusted the summary.
What info do you imagine he removed to change a narrative and why wouldn't others call him out if he altered the notes to make a difference in their content?

You guys just don't think a conspiracy through do you?

a reply to: Sillyolme

"Alter" and "adjust" are the same thing.
EDIT TO ADD:
Why delete the records of the changes in the system's logs? Nothing to see here in your eyes?

a reply to: charlyv

He's already been booked by Geico.

originally posted by: Tempter
Like it or not folks, we live in an age of worlwide, instant news. So while this source is Twitter, please consider the surrounding conversations.

The quote comes from Mike Cernovich. Get it out of your system now. Good? Ready to proceed?

"

twitter.com...


It’s the talk of the f-cking White House.

- McCabe
- 302s
- The IG report

Lol at any political reporter questioning this. It literally means they have no actual WH sources.

Mike Cernovich

🇺🇸 added,

Now, I dont know about you ATS, but I find that to be a statement with above-average confidence. He must have a source because to claim that is a pretty strong statement.

Now, why is his confidence important? On to the next Tweet.

twitter.com...

Huge scoop. Like my other big stories (Susan Rice, security clearances, Conyers) will take media a long time to confirm. You know how Peter Strzok's system didn't back up. You know why? McCabe altered his 302 of the Flynn interview, and deleted all history of revisions.

What? Are you kidding me? If this was true do you understand the implications? I suggest you pause here and go and read the surrounding conversations around the tweets posted above. That's some dirty talk.

One last quote from Cernovich...

mobile.twitter.com...

The IG knows McCabe changed Peter Strzok 302 / notes with General Flynn.

Yet issuing a report to this effect would call thousands of FBI investigations into question.

It's full on freak-out mode, as no one know how to spin this.

Anyone want to take a stab at how far reaching the implications would be? I'll be honest that I'm a little out of my league on this so I would appreciate feedback. I don't understand the story as I'd like and as well as some others on ATS. Grambler? Silly? Could you both sound off on this? The rest of us will meet in the middle, deal?

Mike Cernovich.....the Pissagate salesman, male supremacist..

a reply to: Sillyolme


Our founding fathers would be ashamed of what we've become.

Realistically, the people needed to stand up to the government mid 1850's to really have any impact on where we are today.

a reply to: smurfy


Male supremacist, funny

He supports and stands up for men's rights, and he's a men's supremacist? So I presume feminists are woman's supremacist?

I appreciate the extreme hyperbole here And your usual conflating of common terms with the words "supremacist"

for instance, just the other day you attempted to erroneously and fallaciously conflate "white nationalist" (a Caucasian who loves America) with "white supremacist" (the "white power" racist types)

Nice try. But we're wise to those dirty tricks.

a reply to: tadaman

Where does it say that?

Andrew McCabe Altered Peter Strzok’s 302 Notes on General Flynn interview – Then Destroyed Evidencea reply to: Sillyolme

a reply to: Sillyolme

Mike Cernovich 

✔@Cernovich

Huge scoop. Like my other big stories (Susan Rice, security clearances, Conyers) will take media a long time to confirm.

You know how Peter Strzok's system didn't back up.

You know why?

McCabe altered his 302 of the Flynn interview, and deleted all history of revisions.

8:21 PM - Feb 18, 2018




Mike Cernovich 🇺🇸
✔
@Cernovich
Replying to @Cernovich
The FBI cannot provide a *clean* history of revisions for the 302 interview with General Flynn.

That's why Judge Emmett Sullivan, who is very tough on unethical prosecutors, had ordered the Special Counsel to disclose exculpatory evidence, which would include these revisions.

Its literally the subject of the thread.

So what does that mean?

If this 302 thing blows up, and McCabe is proven to have committed federal fraud, will it be covered up for the sake of not throwing the entire system under the bus? That isn't the justice I had in mind.

It cannot be covered up. If it is, then we gain nothing.

It seems likely that current events in the Flynn case are directly related to this OP.

Byron York: An unusual turn in the Michael Flynn case?

First, there is some mystery surrounding the removal of Judge Rudolph Contreras from the case. Just days after accepting Flynn's guilty plea, Contreras was taken off the case by the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. No reason was given.

Of potentially more interest is Contreras' replacement, Judge Emmet Sullivan. ...
On Dec. 12, after just a few days on the Flynn case, Sullivan, acting on his own, ordered the office of special counsel Robert Mueller "to produce to [Flynn] in a timely manner — including during plea negotiations — any evidence in its possession that is favorable to defendant and material either to defendant's guilt or punishment."

Sullivan also ordered Mueller "to produce all discoverable evidence in a readily usable form." And he declared that "if the government has identified any information which is favorable to the defendant but which the government believes not to be material, the government shall submit such information to the Court for in camera review." In other words, Sullivan declared that he, not Mueller, would be the judge of what evidence should be produced.

It's rare in sentencing after a guilty plea for a judge to do this. Sullivan is known for being very hard on prosecutor misconduct. And as we have heard, Flynn was pretty much forced into a plea deal, because he ran out of money to defend himself, and the FBI started making threats against his son.

a reply to: BlueAjah

Unconscionable.

Bankrupt you, then push you over the edge with threats to your family.

And people wonder why i hold our criminal justice system in complete contempt.

originally posted by: Sillyolme
You guys just don't think a conspiracy through do you?

If he did nothing wrong, why did he step down?

Why is he under a DOJ investigation along with several
internal investigations?

Double post

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: loam

When did Comey say Flynn didn't lie to the FBI?

March of last year.

Comey Told Congress FBI Agents Didn't Think Flynn Lied

Comey told lawmakers that the FBI agents who interviewed Flynn did not believe that Flynn had lied to them, or that any inaccuracies in his answers were intentional.

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
So what does that mean?

If this 302 thing blows up, and McCabe is proven to have committed federal fraud, will it be covered up for the sake of not throwing the entire system under the bus? That isn't the justice I had in mind.

It cannot be covered up. If it is, then we gain nothing.

Have you ever heard of Patrick Knowlton, BFFT? He was a witness in the Vince Foster investigation. He happened to stop in Fort Marcy Park about an hour before Vince Foster's body was found there, and went to the FBI to report what he saw.

Patrick Knowlton claims that the FBI changed his witness statements on their good old form 302s.

His statements on the FBI's conduct were ordered to be attached to the Starr Investigation report that was given to Congress:

Although the news was censored by major media, the supervising judges of the Starr investigation ordered that the stunning accusations of a witness in the Vincent Foster case -- Patrick Knowlton -- be attached to independent prosecutor Kenneth Starr's report on the case. This, despite the strong objections of Starr. Following are excepts from Knowlton's motion to the court (prepared by attorney John Clarke) that was ordered attached to the Starr report:

FACTUAL BACKGROUND

Upon learning that Mr. Foster's body was found in Fort Marcy Park, Patrick Knowlton reported to authorities what he had seen in the park approximately 70 minutes before the discovery of Mr. Foster's body.

FBI Agent Lawrence Monroe interviewed Patrick Knowlton in April and May of 1994. Agent Monroe falsified Mr. Knowlton's account of the events he reported he had witnessed in Fort Marcy Park. At the time of these interviews, Agent Monroe was detailed to the office of regulatory Independent Counsel Robert W. Fiske, Jr.

Link

And that's not all the FBI did to bury Knowlton's story.

I don't believe that the FBI will ever be held accountable for their thuggish, corrupt, criminal methods of operation.

We gained nothing with Patrick Knowlton's revelations. In that case, we had a very credible witness with no political motivation to lie -- he was just an ordinary citizen doing what he thought was his duty in reporting what he saw -- but Congress decided he was not credible and did nothing. Even Kenneth Starr wanted Knowlton's story buried.

It's going to take more than just talking about the problems in the FBI to force change. The FBI and Congress know we will do nothing to force them to put an end to it. They'll rub our noses in it and continue covering up whatever they want, framing whoever they want, and controlling manufactured investigations to keep us distracted, divided, and feeling helpless & hopeless.

It's bleak.