FBI Raids Clinton Foundation Whistle-Blower - Seizes Evidence Damning to Clintons-DOJ-FBI.

a reply to: ErrorErrorError

I have yet to see one piece of news from Theconservativetreehouse.com that was true.

And you never will.

a reply to: carewemust

Oh Site two....

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: CosmicAwakening

This is complete bullschitt

You should add this disclaimer to all of your posts, for the sake of the n00bies.

originally posted by: Boadicea
a reply to: Propagandalf

Interesting that the law firm specializes in government intelligence and defense contractors, eh?

Thanks again!

I wasn't aware of that. That, and the court order permitting the raid signed on Nov. 15 by federal magistrate Stephanie A. Gallagher, lends more credence to the story. This might be good.

a reply to: Propagandalf

A lot of what that firm works on relates to trade and taxes.

His experience includes international audits and investigations, technology exports and sanctions compliance, and complex commercial litigation, arbitration and negotiations. His practice has focused on advising and representing clients in the aerospace, defense, mining, energy and financial industries.

No offense to Bo, but that's not a firm that would head my list if I was going to blow the whistle on something like the OP suggests. That's like using a tax attorney to handle your divorce. Yea, he's an attorney and understands law, but it's not his area of specialty and I'd rather have somebody who does nothing but what I need him to do.

That, and the court order permitting the raid signed on Nov. 15 by federal magistrate Stephanie A. Gallagher

That would be the court order that the Daily Caller says they have a copy of but aren't showing? I'll believe that when I see it.

a reply to: Propagandalf

Definitely getting curiouser and curiouser...

I'm presuming for now that Cain lawyered up before turning anything over... Tho I still have no idea what this evidence would consist of.

And I'm figuring Cain would have obtained the relevant info wherever he was employed around the time the deal was approved -- so 2010 to 2013 or thereabouts?

a reply to: Boadicea

And I'm figuring Cain would have obtained the relevant info wherever he was employed around the time the deal was approved -- so 2010 to 2013 or thereabouts?

If that's the timeframe, his CV says he was in Japan from 2009 to 2012 and then Pearl Harbor from 2012 to 2015.

a reply to: Shamrock6

No offense to Bo...

And none taken -- thank you!

... but that's not a firm that would head my list if I was going to blow the whistle on something like the OP suggests. 

I wondered about that too. I was thinking an attorney specializing in whistleblower cases would be more appropriate. But maybe Cain had a standing arrangement already with this attorney? Maybe this attorney is already representing Cain's current or former employer? Or maybe Cain just screwed up...

I sure don't know what to think.

originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: Propagandalf

A lot of what that firm works on relates to trade and taxes.

His experience includes international audits and investigations, technology exports and sanctions compliance, and complex commercial litigation, arbitration and negotiations. His practice has focused on advising and representing clients in the aerospace, defense, mining, energy and financial industries.

No offense to Bo, but that's not a firm that would head my list if I was going to blow the whistle on something like the OP suggests. That's like using a tax attorney to handle your divorce. Yea, he's an attorney and understands law, but it's not his area of specialty and I'd rather have somebody who does nothing but what I need him to do.

That, and the court order permitting the raid signed on Nov. 15 by federal magistrate Stephanie A. Gallagher

That would be the court order that the Daily Caller says they have a copy of but aren't showing? I'll believe that when I see it.

The Whistleblower didn't work for the FBI, he worked in technical fields that trade internationally. That's why he was blowing the whistle on the Uranium one deal. So it makes sense that his legal reps would be a Law firm that represents defense and government contractors on trade deals. They would recognize improper actions.

originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: Propagandalf

A lot of what that firm works on relates to trade and taxes.

His experience includes international audits and investigations, technology exports and sanctions compliance, and complex commercial litigation, arbitration and negotiations. His practice has focused on advising and representing clients in the aerospace, defense, mining, energy and financial industries.

No offense to Bo, but that's not a firm that would head my list if I was going to blow the whistle on something like the OP suggests. That's like using a tax attorney to handle your divorce. Yea, he's an attorney and understands law, but it's not his area of specialty and I'd rather have somebody who does nothing but what I need him to do.

That, and the court order permitting the raid signed on Nov. 15 by federal magistrate Stephanie A. Gallagher

That would be the court order that the Daily Caller says they have a copy of but aren't showing? I'll believe that when I see it.

Very fair. Good point.

And like you said, I'd have to see it to believe it.

a reply to: Shamrock6

Japan and Hawaii, huh? Well bummer... That doesn't help me at all! Someone smarter than me will have to figure this out...

a reply to: Dragoon01

The Whistleblower didn't work for the FBI, he worked in technical fields that trade internationally.

Interesting... Do you know where he worked then? Or now? Or can you point me in the right direction?

a reply to: Dragoon01

Cain came across the potentially explosive information while working for an FBI contractor, Socarras told TheDCNF.

The documents he supposedly has relate to criminal activity on the part of individuals and corporate entities not being investigated, not the Uranium One deal itself. Beyond that, he works in IT security, not a "technical field that trades internationally."

He's not blowing the whistle on the Uranium One deal. He's blowing the whistle on supposed criminal activity undertaken by parties involved in the deal not being investigated. It's two different things, and that's why it doesn't make sense to me that he would get a tax and trade lawyer to represent him when he's alleging that criminal activity wasn't investigated.

a reply to: carewemust

Hmmmm, is it possible that the FBI has reason to believe that this guy fabricated evidence? I guess we will wait and see.

That damn evil deep state keeps getting in Trump's way.

originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: Dragoon01

Cain came across the potentially explosive information while working for an FBI contractor, Socarras told TheDCNF.

The documents he supposedly has relate to criminal activity on the part of individuals and corporate entities not being investigated, not the Uranium One deal itself. Beyond that, he works in IT security, not a "technical field that trades internationally."

He's not blowing the whistle on the Uranium One deal. He's blowing the whistle on supposed criminal activity undertaken by parties involved in the deal not being investigated. It's two different things, and that's why it doesn't make sense to me that he would get a tax and trade lawyer to represent him when he's alleging that criminal activity wasn't investigated.

He's also a human rights lawyer, according to his bio.

originally posted by: BlackJackal
a reply to: carewemust

Hmmmm, is it possible that the FBI has reason to believe that this guy fabricated evidence? I guess we will wait and see.

That damn evil deep state keeps getting in Trump's way.

You would applaud the FBI raiding a whistleblower on a hunch.

a reply to: Boadicea

He's worked for (starting in 2000 and working up to present) DSA Inc, Anvicom, NetCon Solutions, Cain and Associates, EMNDS, US Dept. of Navy, Pearl Harbor Naval Shipyard, MARFORCYBER, ICS Nett, and ASM Research.

Every one of which is a government contractor. All of them except ICS Nett are defense contractors. ICS Nett is the only one that I found any link to the FBI with. They were allowed to bid on an FBI contract in 2010 but I can't see anything about them being awarded the contract (the article about the contract award names other companies, not ICS Nett); it looks like they were finally awarded an FBI ITSSS (IT security and support) contract in 2013 and 2018.

a reply to: Propagandalf

I saw that, yea. The bit about him being an expert on African law stuck out to me as well. Seems an odd thing to mention but who knows. The human rights angle is an interesting one at least, and would make far more sense to me than trying to shoehorn "well this guy works for a company that trades internationally (even though we know exactly who he's worked for and what they do) so that's why he wants an international trade and tax lawyer" or whatever was said.

It’s such a circus and theatre of absurdity. I vacillate between wanting to laugh and cry.
a reply to: Propagandalf

a reply to: xuenchen

They are denying it in other threads. You guys refuse to acknowledge it never mind talk about it.