It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Andrew McCabe, a Target of Trump’s F.B.I. Scorn, Is Fired Over Candor Questions

page: 10
91
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 17 2018 @ 01:05 AM
link   

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: burgerbuddy

Yeah, I like her better than Hannity. Nicer legs.


Not to mention I trust her more. I have caught Hannity going extreme a few times, which is why I always try to independently verify what he says. Ingraham seems a little closer to truth.

TheRedneck




Yeah a few probs with hannity in that respect but Laura is straight and smart. Martha also.

She's on now.









posted on Mar, 17 2018 @ 01:07 AM
link   

originally posted by: JinMI
a reply to: Pyle

This has more to do with positioning than leverage.

By taking the pension, he starts way behind and can't afford to delay and wait (theoretically).


But that hinges on the fact that everyone forgets his wife is a well off doctor with political aspirations.



posted on Mar, 17 2018 @ 01:07 AM
link   

originally posted by: Pyle

originally posted by: burgerbuddy

originally posted by: Pyle

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: Pyle

Hahaha, you just reiterated the exact same statement I rebutted, and even quoted the rebuttal in your post. I can see you either won't read my post or can't figure it out... either way, nice talking to you.

I do suggest you keep an eye on the next wave of targets... I'm thinking Comey, Lynch, and possibly Mueller. You might find what happens enlightening.

TheRedneck


I think you missed the point. Them taking his pension means he has no reason to flip and work with them. They took their best bargaining chip and threw it in the trash in some crazy display of power to scare lower level FBI officials.

Also he isnt hurting for cash as his wife is doing pretty well as a doctor, if I am not mistaken, so there is another failure of your crazy ideas that its to bankrupt him into submission.




She might still have some of the 750K hillary gave her.






Maybe but I dont know Virginia election finance laws. So they may or may not be able to use those funds if any are left.



Oh yeah she can keep her war chest.

That's the problem. lol.

Payoff!!





posted on Mar, 17 2018 @ 01:13 AM
link   

originally posted by: burgerbuddy

originally posted by: Pyle

originally posted by: burgerbuddy

originally posted by: Pyle

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: Pyle

Hahaha, you just reiterated the exact same statement I rebutted, and even quoted the rebuttal in your post. I can see you either won't read my post or can't figure it out... either way, nice talking to you.

I do suggest you keep an eye on the next wave of targets... I'm thinking Comey, Lynch, and possibly Mueller. You might find what happens enlightening.

TheRedneck


I think you missed the point. Them taking his pension means he has no reason to flip and work with them. They took their best bargaining chip and threw it in the trash in some crazy display of power to scare lower level FBI officials.

Also he isnt hurting for cash as his wife is doing pretty well as a doctor, if I am not mistaken, so there is another failure of your crazy ideas that its to bankrupt him into submission.




She might still have some of the 750K hillary gave her.






Maybe but I dont know Virginia election finance laws. So they may or may not be able to use those funds if any are left.



Oh yeah she can keep her war chest.

That's the problem. lol.

Payoff!!




You keep claiming that and yet have never show how the Virginia Democrats headed by the Virginia Governor donating to a Virginia State Senate candidate from the same party is a bribe from Clinton. Nor have you shown that she broke Virginia State Campaign Finance laws and is using that money.... Maybe you should source your claims?
edit on 17-3-2018 by Pyle because: Fixed an issue



posted on Mar, 17 2018 @ 01:24 AM
link   
a reply to: Pyle

Let me try to explain this another way... option A and option B.

Option A:
    Sessions fires McCabe over allegations of criminal charges. The standard for removing a person's pension are high; it cannot be done over an allegation. Even if Sessions were to file an indictment today, it would likely be months before the case went to trial. In the meantime, McCabe has his retirement money, so he has more money to hire lawyers. A lawyer can extend a case for years easily just by challenging and making requests to the court. It costs money, but so what? McCabe has an extra $2 mil to spend. After a few years, the case has cooled, political realities might have changed, and McCabe has a real chance of getting off even if he is guilty. He has no incentive other than lawyers' fees to make a deal, and we're talking about outing people who can be easily connected to higher ups like Hillary Clinton. People who implicate anyone with dirt on her tend to have accidents on a regular basis... fatal accidents. I don't think McCabe wants to have a fatal accident.
Option B:
    Sessions fires McCabe over a recommendation from the OPR. That quallifies to both fire McCabe and to remove his pension, and does not require a trial. Now McCabe does not have that extra $2 mil to pay lawyers. Sessions then proceeds with indictments. McCabe certainly will have enough money to defend himself, but not to drag the case out over years. Therefore, if he is offered a plea bargain to turn state's evidence against Lynch, Comey, etc., he has a choice: go to jail for a very long time, essentially the rest of his life, or turn state's evidence.
The incentive is to avoid prosecution. People turn state's evidence all the time in exchange for lighter sentences, sometimes a suspended sentence, when they have no money at all depending on the outcome of the case.

Maybe you just can't wrap your head around the fact that McCabe's actions were illegal. He is looking at two punishments: losing his retirement, and spending the rest of his productive life behind bars. The latter is greater incentive to cooperate than the former, especially when one has already lost the former.

I don't know how much clearer I can make it...

TheRedneck



posted on Mar, 17 2018 @ 01:39 AM
link   

originally posted by: Pyle

originally posted by: burgerbuddy

originally posted by: Pyle

originally posted by: burgerbuddy

originally posted by: Pyle

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: Pyle

Hahaha, you just reiterated the exact same statement I rebutted, and even quoted the rebuttal in your post. I can see you either won't read my post or can't figure it out... either way, nice talking to you.

I do suggest you keep an eye on the next wave of targets... I'm thinking Comey, Lynch, and possibly Mueller. You might find what happens enlightening.

TheRedneck


I think you missed the point. Them taking his pension means he has no reason to flip and work with them. They took their best bargaining chip and threw it in the trash in some crazy display of power to scare lower level FBI officials.

Also he isnt hurting for cash as his wife is doing pretty well as a doctor, if I am not mistaken, so there is another failure of your crazy ideas that its to bankrupt him into submission.




She might still have some of the 750K hillary gave her.






Maybe but I dont know Virginia election finance laws. So they may or may not be able to use those funds if any are left.



Oh yeah she can keep her war chest.

That's the problem. lol.

Payoff!!




You keep claiming that and yet have never show how the Virginia Democrats headed by the Virginia Governor donating to a Virginia State Senate candidate from the same party is a bribe from Clinton. Nor have you shown that she broke Virginia State Campaign Finance laws and is using that money.... Maybe you should source your claims?


No bribe?!

You #tin me?

Everyone knows how much she got.

And the election money laws where she failed.

Don't deny ignorance.




posted on Mar, 17 2018 @ 01:41 AM
link   

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: Pyle

Let me try to explain this another way... option A and option B.

Option A:
    Sessions fires McCabe over allegations of criminal charges. The standard for removing a person's pension are high; it cannot be done over an allegation. Even if Sessions were to file an indictment today, it would likely be months before the case went to trial. In the meantime, McCabe has his retirement money, so he has more money to hire lawyers. A lawyer can extend a case for years easily just by challenging and making requests to the court. It costs money, but so what? McCabe has an extra $2 mil to spend. After a few years, the case has cooled, political realities might have changed, and McCabe has a real chance of getting off even if he is guilty. He has no incentive other than lawyers' fees to make a deal, and we're talking about outing people who can be easily connected to higher ups like Hillary Clinton. People who implicate anyone with dirt on her tend to have accidents on a regular basis... fatal accidents. I don't think McCabe wants to have a fatal accident.
Option B:
    Sessions fires McCabe over a recommendation from the OPR. That quallifies to both fire McCabe and to remove his pension, and does not require a trial. Now McCabe does not have that extra $2 mil to pay lawyers. Sessions then proceeds with indictments. McCabe certainly will have enough money to defend himself, but not to drag the case out over years. Therefore, if he is offered a plea bargain to turn state's evidence against Lynch, Comey, etc., he has a choice: go to jail for a very long time, essentially the rest of his life, or turn state's evidence.
The incentive is to avoid prosecution. People turn state's evidence all the time in exchange for lighter sentences, sometimes a suspended sentence, when they have no money at all depending on the outcome of the case.

Maybe you just can't wrap your head around the fact that McCabe's actions were illegal. He is looking at two punishments: losing his retirement, and spending the rest of his productive life behind bars. The latter is greater incentive to cooperate than the former, especially when one has already lost the former.

I don't know how much clearer I can make it...

TheRedneck



A) As seen in B they dont need to prove criminality to remove the pension. So the rest is just BS to dig yourself out of the hole you dug.

B)People seem to forget his wife is a well off doctor with political aspirations that suddenly has a huge great platform to fight Trump administration and gain political points from her husband fighting the firing. So this option leading to charges falls flat as hell because without the pension on the line they have no reason not to fight back and drag it out bringing a wrongful termination suit.



posted on Mar, 17 2018 @ 01:44 AM
link   

originally posted by: burgerbuddy

originally posted by: Pyle

originally posted by: burgerbuddy

originally posted by: Pyle

originally posted by: burgerbuddy

originally posted by: Pyle

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: Pyle

Hahaha, you just reiterated the exact same statement I rebutted, and even quoted the rebuttal in your post. I can see you either won't read my post or can't figure it out... either way, nice talking to you.

I do suggest you keep an eye on the next wave of targets... I'm thinking Comey, Lynch, and possibly Mueller. You might find what happens enlightening.

TheRedneck


I think you missed the point. Them taking his pension means he has no reason to flip and work with them. They took their best bargaining chip and threw it in the trash in some crazy display of power to scare lower level FBI officials.

Also he isnt hurting for cash as his wife is doing pretty well as a doctor, if I am not mistaken, so there is another failure of your crazy ideas that its to bankrupt him into submission.




She might still have some of the 750K hillary gave her.






Maybe but I dont know Virginia election finance laws. So they may or may not be able to use those funds if any are left.



Oh yeah she can keep her war chest.

That's the problem. lol.

Payoff!!




You keep claiming that and yet have never show how the Virginia Democrats headed by the Virginia Governor donating to a Virginia State Senate candidate from the same party is a bribe from Clinton. Nor have you shown that she broke Virginia State Campaign Finance laws and is using that money.... Maybe you should source your claims?


No bribe?!

You #tin me?

Everyone knows how much she got.

And the election money laws where she failed.

Don't deny ignorance.



www.vpap.org...

Which donation is the bribe?



posted on Mar, 17 2018 @ 01:45 AM
link   

originally posted by: Pyle

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: Pyle

Let me try to explain this another way... option A and option B.

Option A:
    Sessions fires McCabe over allegations of criminal charges. The standard for removing a person's pension are high; it cannot be done over an allegation. Even if Sessions were to file an indictment today, it would likely be months before the case went to trial. In the meantime, McCabe has his retirement money, so he has more money to hire lawyers. A lawyer can extend a case for years easily just by challenging and making requests to the court. It costs money, but so what? McCabe has an extra $2 mil to spend. After a few years, the case has cooled, political realities might have changed, and McCabe has a real chance of getting off even if he is guilty. He has no incentive other than lawyers' fees to make a deal, and we're talking about outing people who can be easily connected to higher ups like Hillary Clinton. People who implicate anyone with dirt on her tend to have accidents on a regular basis... fatal accidents. I don't think McCabe wants to have a fatal accident.
Option B:
    Sessions fires McCabe over a recommendation from the OPR. That quallifies to both fire McCabe and to remove his pension, and does not require a trial. Now McCabe does not have that extra $2 mil to pay lawyers. Sessions then proceeds with indictments. McCabe certainly will have enough money to defend himself, but not to drag the case out over years. Therefore, if he is offered a plea bargain to turn state's evidence against Lynch, Comey, etc., he has a choice: go to jail for a very long time, essentially the rest of his life, or turn state's evidence.
The incentive is to avoid prosecution. People turn state's evidence all the time in exchange for lighter sentences, sometimes a suspended sentence, when they have no money at all depending on the outcome of the case.

Maybe you just can't wrap your head around the fact that McCabe's actions were illegal. He is looking at two punishments: losing his retirement, and spending the rest of his productive life behind bars. The latter is greater incentive to cooperate than the former, especially when one has already lost the former.

I don't know how much clearer I can make it...

TheRedneck



A) As seen in B they dont need to prove criminality to remove the pension. So the rest is just BS to dig yourself out of the hole you dug.

B)People seem to forget his wife is a well off doctor with political aspirations that suddenly has a huge great platform to fight Trump administration and gain political points from her husband fighting the firing. So this option leading to charges falls flat as hell because without the pension on the line they have no reason not to fight back and drag it out bringinga wrongful termination suit.


He's still disgraced and going to jail, # her.

OK? Need a cookie?

Still going with that BS?

Wrongful termination? The guy is s #in lawyer, even he won't try that BS.




edit on 3 17 2018 by burgerbuddy because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 17 2018 @ 01:51 AM
link   

originally posted by: Pyle

originally posted by: burgerbuddy

originally posted by: Pyle

originally posted by: burgerbuddy

originally posted by: Pyle

originally posted by: burgerbuddy

originally posted by: Pyle

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: Pyle

Hahaha, you just reiterated the exact same statement I rebutted, and even quoted the rebuttal in your post. I can see you either won't read my post or can't figure it out... either way, nice talking to you.

I do suggest you keep an eye on the next wave of targets... I'm thinking Comey, Lynch, and possibly Mueller. You might find what happens enlightening.

TheRedneck


I think you missed the point. Them taking his pension means he has no reason to flip and work with them. They took their best bargaining chip and threw it in the trash in some crazy display of power to scare lower level FBI officials.

Also he isnt hurting for cash as his wife is doing pretty well as a doctor, if I am not mistaken, so there is another failure of your crazy ideas that its to bankrupt him into submission.




She might still have some of the 750K hillary gave her.






Maybe but I dont know Virginia election finance laws. So they may or may not be able to use those funds if any are left.



Oh yeah she can keep her war chest.

That's the problem. lol.

Payoff!!




You keep claiming that and yet have never show how the Virginia Democrats headed by the Virginia Governor donating to a Virginia State Senate candidate from the same party is a bribe from Clinton. Nor have you shown that she broke Virginia State Campaign Finance laws and is using that money.... Maybe you should source your claims?


No bribe?!

You #tin me?

Everyone knows how much she got.

And the election money laws where she failed.

Don't deny ignorance.



www.vpap.org...

Which donation is the bribe?


Who cares?

she gets to keep whatever is left over.

At the time he was investigating hills emails when she got the money and he didn't declare it.

Dirty dog.






posted on Mar, 17 2018 @ 01:56 AM
link   

originally posted by: burgerbuddy

originally posted by: Pyle

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: Pyle

Let me try to explain this another way... option A and option B.

Option A:
    Sessions fires McCabe over allegations of criminal charges. The standard for removing a person's pension are high; it cannot be done over an allegation. Even if Sessions were to file an indictment today, it would likely be months before the case went to trial. In the meantime, McCabe has his retirement money, so he has more money to hire lawyers. A lawyer can extend a case for years easily just by challenging and making requests to the court. It costs money, but so what? McCabe has an extra $2 mil to spend. After a few years, the case has cooled, political realities might have changed, and McCabe has a real chance of getting off even if he is guilty. He has no incentive other than lawyers' fees to make a deal, and we're talking about outing people who can be easily connected to higher ups like Hillary Clinton. People who implicate anyone with dirt on her tend to have accidents on a regular basis... fatal accidents. I don't think McCabe wants to have a fatal accident.
Option B:
    Sessions fires McCabe over a recommendation from the OPR. That quallifies to both fire McCabe and to remove his pension, and does not require a trial. Now McCabe does not have that extra $2 mil to pay lawyers. Sessions then proceeds with indictments. McCabe certainly will have enough money to defend himself, but not to drag the case out over years. Therefore, if he is offered a plea bargain to turn state's evidence against Lynch, Comey, etc., he has a choice: go to jail for a very long time, essentially the rest of his life, or turn state's evidence.
The incentive is to avoid prosecution. People turn state's evidence all the time in exchange for lighter sentences, sometimes a suspended sentence, when they have no money at all depending on the outcome of the case.

Maybe you just can't wrap your head around the fact that McCabe's actions were illegal. He is looking at two punishments: losing his retirement, and spending the rest of his productive life behind bars. The latter is greater incentive to cooperate than the former, especially when one has already lost the former.

I don't know how much clearer I can make it...

TheRedneck



A) As seen in B they dont need to prove criminality to remove the pension. So the rest is just BS to dig yourself out of the hole you dug.

B)People seem to forget his wife is a well off doctor with political aspirations that suddenly has a huge great platform to fight Trump administration and gain political points from her husband fighting the firing. So this option leading to charges falls flat as hell because without the pension on the line they have no reason not to fight back and drag it out bringinga wrongful termination suit.


He's still disgraced and going to jail, # her.

OK? Need a cookie?

Still going with that BS?

Wrongful termination? The guy is s #in lawyer, even he won't try that BS.





Why wouldn't he? If the OIG and OPR recommended criminal charges he would have been fired for that and on his way to criminal court. Instead they recommended "Lack of Candor" which administrative not criminal and leaves it open for him to file civil suit to get his pension back.



posted on Mar, 17 2018 @ 01:56 AM
link   

originally posted by: burgerbuddy

originally posted by: Pyle

originally posted by: burgerbuddy

originally posted by: Pyle

originally posted by: burgerbuddy

originally posted by: Pyle

originally posted by: burgerbuddy

originally posted by: Pyle

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: Pyle

Hahaha, you just reiterated the exact same statement I rebutted, and even quoted the rebuttal in your post. I can see you either won't read my post or can't figure it out... either way, nice talking to you.

I do suggest you keep an eye on the next wave of targets... I'm thinking Comey, Lynch, and possibly Mueller. You might find what happens enlightening.

TheRedneck


I think you missed the point. Them taking his pension means he has no reason to flip and work with them. They took their best bargaining chip and threw it in the trash in some crazy display of power to scare lower level FBI officials.

Also he isnt hurting for cash as his wife is doing pretty well as a doctor, if I am not mistaken, so there is another failure of your crazy ideas that its to bankrupt him into submission.




She might still have some of the 750K hillary gave her.






Maybe but I dont know Virginia election finance laws. So they may or may not be able to use those funds if any are left.



Oh yeah she can keep her war chest.

That's the problem. lol.

Payoff!!




You keep claiming that and yet have never show how the Virginia Democrats headed by the Virginia Governor donating to a Virginia State Senate candidate from the same party is a bribe from Clinton. Nor have you shown that she broke Virginia State Campaign Finance laws and is using that money.... Maybe you should source your claims?


No bribe?!

You #tin me?

Everyone knows how much she got.

And the election money laws where she failed.

Don't deny ignorance.



www.vpap.org...

Which donation is the bribe?


Who cares?

she gets to keep whatever is left over.

At the time he was investigating hills emails when she got the money and he didn't declare it.

Dirty dog.





So you dont know and just continue to repeat the lie in face of evidence to the contrary?



posted on Mar, 17 2018 @ 02:16 AM
link   
Don't worry... his wife can pay for his upkeep from the bribery money funneled to her by Democrats.

This guy should have been arrested.. not fired.

Had to laugh at his essay ...I mean statement... on his firing. Basically blamed others for his actions ... which confirmed to me he is a Democrat through and through.

Rosenstein must go next.
edit on 17/3/2018 by UKTruth because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 17 2018 @ 02:19 AM
link   

originally posted by: UKTruth
Don't worry... his wife can pay for his upkeep from the bribery money funneled to her by Democrats.

This guy should have been arrested.. not fired.

Rosenstein must go next.


www.vpap.org...

Can you point to the money donated to the campaign that they then kept?



posted on Mar, 17 2018 @ 02:21 AM
link   
a reply to: Pyle

Can you?



posted on Mar, 17 2018 @ 02:22 AM
link   
a reply to: Pyle


As seen in B they dont need to prove criminality to remove the pension.

YES THEY DO!

You cannot just make an indictment against someone and take their pension. They can fire McCabe for any reason they want; he serves at the pleasure of the DoJ. But they cannot take his pension without a conviction. If they were to fire him over an indictment they made, denying him his pension, McCabe could file a wrongful termination suit and likely win before the criminal trial ever went to court. He was fired on the recommendation of the OPR, which is a non-partisan version of Internal Affairs for the FBI. Not because Trump wanted to, not because Sessions decided he had acted improperly, but because OPR said he should be dismissed immediately. The only way he can win a wrongful termination suit now is to show that he was somehow singled out by his own Internal Affairs department without just cause.

That is a damn steep legal obstacle.


People seem to forget his wife is a well off doctor with political aspirations that suddenly has a huge great platform to fight Trump administration and gain political points from her husband fighting the firing.

You are ignoring the fact that the firing was recommended by the OPR. Trump didn't fire him. Sessions followed the advice of the OPR. No one in the Trump administration made the recommendation. You might as well attack the Bush administration, or maybe the Idaho legislature, or hey, why not the NRA? They seem to be a favorite bad guy lately.

The link to Trump exists only in your mind. Nowhere else.

You are also missing the fact that his wife has STATE political aspirations. One state. Virginia. The Trump administration is Federal. That's a political suicide mission.

TheRedneck



posted on Mar, 17 2018 @ 02:27 AM
link   

originally posted by: UKTruth
a reply to: Pyle

Can you?


Nope that is why I asked you. You seem to already have the awnser based on your last post.



posted on Mar, 17 2018 @ 02:27 AM
link   
.
edit on 17-3-2018 by Pyle because: Double Post



posted on Mar, 17 2018 @ 02:29 AM
link   
a reply to: Pyle


If the OIG and OPR recommended criminal charges...

You left the tracks right there.

The OIG investigates and reports on their investigation. They do not recommend charges of any kind. The OPR considers their report and recommends disciplinary actions... not criminal charges. The DoJ decides, based on the investigations and recommendations, whether or not to pursue criminal charges.

Jeff Sessions will make the decision on criminal charges. OPR made the recommendation that he be fired, because that is the extent of their jurisdiction.

TheRedneck



posted on Mar, 17 2018 @ 02:35 AM
link   
a reply to: TheRedneck


If the OIG and OPR had information to refer criminal charges why didnt they fire him for that instead they fire him over for an administrative action? An administrative action he can fight in civil court. Doesnt seem to fir the narrative you are pushing.


Notice I said Trump Administration and you went on a rant about Trump. The distinction I guess is lost on you.


Yes she HAD state aspirations and now she just got a nice ladder to the national stage.



new topics

top topics



 
91
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join