Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
and then

IG Report: Consequential or a Whitewash?

229 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

Setton
3 hours ago, F3SS said:

No I'm saying that while I'll be disappointed and might not buy it I'll still accept it as final. I just won't be saying how all these Democrats went down the way you guys act like half the Trump administration is doing hard time.

So if it doesn't conclude what you want it too, you'll assume it's all down to conspiracy, but you'll just accept that? 

Not sure if that's any better to be honest... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
hacktorp

Sounds like the IG report is bad news for the Obama administration and for the FBI...egregious abuse and fraud connected with FISA court.

Expect the Dems to turn up the noise volume on impeachment to 11...they're screwed and they know it.

Edited by hacktorp
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
hacktorp

As I mentioned previously, now Durham (and Barr) can pick up the ball and run with it.  Durham appears more than ready to do so:

ELXZAbSUcAEFacu.jpg

 

  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Farmer77
3 hours ago, hacktorp said:

As I mentioned previously, now Durham (and Barr) can pick up the ball and run with it.  Durham appears more than ready to do so:

ELXZAbSUcAEFacu.jpg

 

A corrupt AG like Barr is the absolute worse case scenario for Constitutional America. 

  • Thanks 3
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ChrLzs

This is getting hilarious to watch..  It's like one of the worse "Carry On .." films.

https://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/watch/inside-ag-barr-s-frantic-public-relations-effort-around-the-ig-report-74791493700

I'm sure our PM is really happy to be dragged into this pile of excrement - I love how the DoJ is now fighting its own people and 'rejecting' their own report by lying about its content..

Edited by ChrLzs
Criminal misuse of apostrophes...
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
hacktorp
2 hours ago, Farmer77 said:

A corrupt AG like Barr is the absolute worse case scenario for Constitutional America. 

Huh?  Even (the Obama-appointed) Horowitz identified some 51 FISA-related violations and 9 false statements by the FBI.

Seems to me, a "corrupt AG" would simply ignore these crimes.

You know...like Loretta Lynch or Eric Holder would.

Our constitutional republic is preserved when the rule of law is upheld...and the guilty face punishment.  Sorry, but it's going to be ugly for the Dems and their cohorts.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
hacktorp
8 minutes ago, ChrLzs said:

This is getting hilarious to watch..  It's like one of the worse "Carry On .." films.

https://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/watch/inside-ag-barr-s-frantic-public-relations-effort-around-the-ig-report-74791493700

I'm sure our PM is really happy to be dragged into this pile of excrement - I love how the DoJ is now fighting it's own people and 'rejecting' their own report by lying about it's content..

Lol...when your PM saw which way the wind was blowing, he was only too happy to assist Barr.

And that's exactly what he did.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RavenHawk
17 hours ago, Tatetopa said:

Guilty or not, your man is a lightening rod for distension.  Isn't that why you elected him, to shake things up?  

Only to the corrupt.  Like a light to darkness.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
and then
17 hours ago, Tatetopa said:

Guilty or not, your man is a lightening rod for distension.

Seems you are okay with the Federal government powers being used to take away the vote of 63 million citizens because YOUR party lost an election.  Yeah, I realize that you won't admit this and it doesn't bother me.  You cannot cite another president who has EVER had the kind of negative, relentless coverage that this one has and if you think ALL of that is due to his infantile attacks then I think you're a fool.  Since I'm pretty sure you AREN'T a fool, the only supposition left is you are disingenuous.

I started this thread to put people on the record about what they found acceptable about this IG report because I had a strong hunch it would be like the soft sell the FBI did on HRC.  It turns out I was only partially correct.  Horowitz DID do the digging and he DID cite the instances where things were done "shoddily".  At a minimum, he got the offenses on record.  His conclusions were challenged immediately by both Barr and Durham, however.

The stage is set now for those cheering for the swamp to rally behind the IG report while disputing any indictments against former Obama officials as "political revenge".  The schism will only grow.  Fortunately, I'm reasonably confident that Durham is trustworthy and he won't bring indictments he cannot successfully prosecute.  I'll make this prediction now:

Any indictments will also come with a request for a change of venue for trial.  If the court isn't outside DC there is no way anyone will be convicted.  THAT is how bad the corruption has become.  For those who are celebrating the IG report... the Fat Lady hasn't even begun to warm up yet ;) 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RavenHawk
3 hours ago, Farmer77 said:

A corrupt AG like Barr is the absolute worse case scenario for Constitutional America. 

It's amazing that just a few months ago, the Left praised Barr.  But now that he is going where he shouldn't (uncovering real corruption), the Left are now scared $-hitless.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
and then
10 hours ago, Tiggs said:

A "process crime" is a crime committed against the process of the investigation itself -- such as obstruction, witness tampering, or perjury. 

Everything else isn't. Murder is still murder, after all, regardless of how it's discovered.

 


 

So, which convictions were related to collusion or conspiracy to tamper with the election?

ETA:  WHICH pleas or convictions would have occurred had this investigation never taken place?  They were caught out for illegalities that would never have surfaced without this sham investigation AND they were pressured by the inquisitors to roll over on Trump and only Cohen attempted to.  It failed.  I didn't know you were a lawyer, Tiggs.  Why the parsing?

Edited by and then

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
and then
32 minutes ago, ChrLzs said:

This is getting hilarious to watch..  It's like one of the worse "Carry On .." films.

https://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/watch/inside-ag-barr-s-frantic-public-relations-effort-around-the-ig-report-74791493700

I'm sure our PM is really happy to be dragged into this pile of excrement - I love how the DoJ is now fighting its own people and 'rejecting' their own report by lying about its content..

The report isn't "DoJ's"  The report is from an Inspector General with oversight and is more limited than a criminal investigation is.  You seem to be setting up an argument for denying any yet to be produced evidence from Durham.  Good luck with that, Chuck ;) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RavenHawk
10 hours ago, Farmer77 said:

This thread is nothing more than the cheering on authoritarian tactics. 

Don't like the results of an investigation? Attack the investigator and start another. 

 

Excuse me? .... Excuse me!! .... EXCUSE ME!!!!!

Isn't that what the Left has been doing to Trump?  Show me the Man and I'll find a crime.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
and then

One America News:

https://www.oann.com/oans-chanel-rion-gives-debriefing-on-ukraine-trip/

Investigative reporting on the background in Ukraine scandal.  I don't claim it is accurate but for a news agency to bring such info public, they probably have a growing body of witnesses.  IF TRUE, this would explain a rather odd (IMO) statement by Lindsey Graham yesterday about the Senate's approach to an upcoming impeachment trial.  He seems to have done a quick 180 on how this trial will be handled.  Why?

https://legalinsurrection.com/2019/11/graham-wants-schiff-to-testify-if-senate-has-impeachment-trial/

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2019/12/lindsey_graham_does_not_want_schiff_or_other_congressmen_to_testify_at_senate_impeachment_trial.html

For those who won't bother to look at the links, OAN has witnesses who are saying the Ukraine scandal includes politicians on BOTH sides benefitting from the aid.  Including John McCain and Lindsey Graham.  That news broke between the first Graham pronouncement about calling Schiff and the second where he wants to basically call no witnesses and just dismiss the case in Trump's favor.  THAT track will benefit the Democrats exclusively because they can cry foul and at the same time not be subjected to sworn deposition of facts in the case.  WHY would Graham change his mind so abruptly?

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
and then

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/bill-barr-michael-horowitz-russia-investigation-watchdog-probe

“The inspector general’s report now makes clear that the FBI launched an intrusive investigation of a U.S. presidential campaign on the thinnest of suspicions that, in my view, were insufficient to justify the steps taken,”

“It is also clear that, from its inception, the evidence produced by the investigation was consistently exculpatory,” he continued. “Nevertheless, the investigation and surveillance was pushed forward for the duration of the campaign and deep into President Trump’s administration.”

The Left will try to sell this as a win but it seems clear that there's another shoe waiting to drop on this narrative.  Meanwhile, the Impeachment Train is full steam and not making any stops.  I hope the rest of the Senate shouts Graham down and stops him from refusing to call witnesses and get answers.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Tiggs
1 hour ago, and then said:

So, which convictions were related to collusion or conspiracy to tamper with the election?

Just Cohen's, since they declined to charge Don Jr.
 

1 hour ago, and then said:

ETA:  WHICH pleas or convictions would have occurred had this investigation never taken place?  

IMO? Cohen, Manafort & Flynn.
 

1 hour ago, and then said:

 I didn't know you were a lawyer, Tiggs.  Why the parsing?

There's already enough misinformation floating around, don't you think?

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ChrLzs
1 hour ago, and then said:

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/bill-barr-michael-horowitz-russia-investigation-watchdog-probe

“The inspector general’s report now makes clear that the FBI launched an intrusive investigation of a U.S. presidential campaign on the thinnest of suspicions that, in my view, were insufficient to justify the steps taken,”

It is also clear that, from its inception, the evidence produced by the investigation was consistently exculpatory,” he continued. “Nevertheless, the investigation and surveillance was pushed forward for the duration of the campaign and deep into President Trump’s administration.”

The Left will try to sell this as a win but it seems clear that there's another shoe waiting to drop on this narrative.  Meanwhile, the Impeachment Train is full steam and not making any stops.  I hope the rest of the Senate shouts Graham down and stops him from refusing to call witnesses and get answers.

 

"In my view"?  WTH - is that a new legal 'argument'?  And how exactly is it "clear"?  Is it "clear" to anyone without their #$%^& up Trump's #%% ?  This sort of weasel-wording is just mealy mouthed bulldung.  No decent lawyer would use such handwaving, UNLESS they didn't actually have anything to refute.

Seriously, that sort of empty drivel is worthless.

In My View, that is ..... so now it's LEGAL and INDISPUTABLE!!!!!!  That's all I need to say, apparently.

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Tatetopa
3 hours ago, and then said:

Seems you are okay with the Federal government powers being used to take away the vote of 63 million citizens because YOUR party lost an election.  Yeah, I realize that you won't admit this and it doesn't bother me.  You cannot cite another president who has EVER had the kind of negative, relentless coverage that this one has and if you think ALL of that is due to his infantile attacks then I think you're a fool.  Since I'm pretty sure you AREN'T a fool, the only supposition left is you are disingenuous.

I started this thread to put people on the record about what they found acceptable about this IG report because I had a strong hunch it would be like the soft sell the FBI did on HRC.  It turns out I was only partially correct.  Horowitz DID do the digging and he DID cite the instances where things were done "shoddily".  At a minimum, he got the offenses on record.  His conclusions were challenged immediately by both Barr and Durham, however.

The stage is set now for those cheering for the swamp to rally behind the IG report while disputing any indictments against former Obama officials as "political revenge".  The schism will only grow.  Fortunately, I'm reasonably confident that Durham is trustworthy and he won't bring indictments he cannot successfully prosecute.  I'll make this prediction now:

Any indictments will also come with a request for a change of venue for trial.  If the court isn't outside DC there is no way anyone will be convicted.  THAT is how bad the corruption has become.  For those who are celebrating the IG report... the Fat Lady hasn't even begun to warm up yet

Seems you are OK with the Federal Government powers being used to take away the vote of 66 million voters because it is the electoral college that decides who is president.  So don't get all testy about taking away 63 million votes.  That is not how it works as you should know.  And yes there is a reason the electoral college is still there.

But just to set the record straight, my candidate lost by about 60 million votes.  I didn't think a Libertarian could win but I could not vote for either of the major party candidates. because whether or not they broke any laws, both are short-cutting power-hungry and unethical.  I don't hate Trump because Hillary lost.  That and keeping us out of war so far are the two things I think are his best achievements.

Man, I hope Durham is honest and does a good job.  I do not think Horowitz was doing a criminal investigation.  He did an honest job within the limitations he had.   A real prosecutor and AG would clean the foulness out of both sides.

So you must be cheering the swamp.  It didn't get drained.  You just got your bull gator in the top spot now.  The swamp is healthy as ever.

Honestly you are right, some will see this as political; revenge. but maybe a few are just sick of swamps in general and don't want to change one party of crooks for the other.

So let the warrants fall,  and don't stop until the swamp is really drained.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
third_eye

At least the GOP lawyer is environmentally friendly conscious and preparing for future impeachment with reusable bags... 

Quote

 

[00.00:29]

~

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Tatetopa
3 hours ago, RavenHawk said:

It's amazing that just a few months ago, the Left praised Barr.  But now that he is going where he shouldn't (uncovering real corruption), the Left are now scared $-hitless.

You only got one thing wrong in that statement, the Left didn't praise Barr.

 

3 hours ago, RavenHawk said:

Only to the corrupt.  Like a light to darkness.

You wanted a non-Washington candidate, a businessman who could get things done.   You didn't want him to follow established rules and laws.  You wanted him to run it like a business.  He is doing that.  He is running it like his business.  He is gonna shake things up, and innocent will suffer as well as the guilty.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Tatetopa
Just now, third_eye said:

At least the GOP lawyer is environmentally friendly conscious and preparing for future impeachment with reusable bags..

He might get the green vote,  Maybe he wants to date AOC and is trying to impress her.

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
third_eye
Just now, Tatetopa said:

He might get the green vote,  Maybe he wants to date AOC and is trying to impress her.

I wouldn't mind trying to impress her, truth be told, but I will end up breaking her heart and she'll end up clawing my eyes out.. 

:lol:

~

  • Haha 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
bee
7 hours ago, and then said:

One America News:

https://www.oann.com/oans-chanel-rion-gives-debriefing-on-ukraine-trip/

Investigative reporting on the background in Ukraine scandal.  I don't claim it is accurate but for a news agency to bring such info public, they probably have a growing body of witnesses.  IF TRUE, this would explain a rather odd (IMO) statement by Lindsey Graham yesterday about the Senate's approach to an upcoming impeachment trial.  He seems to have done a quick 180 on how this trial will be handled.  Why?

https://legalinsurrection.com/2019/11/graham-wants-schiff-to-testify-if-senate-has-impeachment-trial/

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2019/12/lindsey_graham_does_not_want_schiff_or_other_congressmen_to_testify_at_senate_impeachment_trial.html

For those who won't bother to look at the links, OAN has witnesses who are saying the Ukraine scandal includes politicians on BOTH sides benefitting from the aid.  Including John McCain and Lindsey Graham.  That news broke between the first Graham pronouncement about calling Schiff and the second where he wants to basically call no witnesses and just dismiss the case in Trump's favor.  THAT track will benefit the Democrats exclusively because they can cry foul and at the same time not be subjected to sworn deposition of facts in the case.  WHY would Graham change his mind so abruptly?

 


 

Let's see if I've got this right....

unless the identity of the whistleblower is made public, Graham is saying there is no case and it will be 
dismissed without calling any witnesses.... and he says he would do that for the good of the country to
stop it dragging on ... but he is stating that ......... "Adam Schiff is doing a lot of damage to the country
and he needs to stop..."

I suppose that could seem like back tracking but I can also see how he wants it all to be dispensed with ASAP...

In a way he's warning Schiff that it's all over unless they bring the whistleblower forward and if they do then
he and others will be called to testify as witnesses...

but hasn't Schiff already been caught out saying that he's spoken to the ''''whistleblower'''' then said he
didn't know who it was..... so basically Graham has indicated that the Impeachment Process is to all
intents and purposes dead and I expect he wants Sciff to whither on the vine rather than be publically
destroyed...

Schiff is pretty much despised as far as I can tell... so that will be disappointing to many that he won't be
publically humiliated...  but perhaps Graham is honestly trying to draw a line under it for the good of the
country....?

dunno

???

  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Kismit

Hasn’t the whistleblower’s information been verified? Including verification by Sondland who payed 1 million dollars into Donald Trumps 2016 election bid? That is 1 million dollars worth of not being a never Trumper. Why do we need to know who the whistleblower is? How does that change the facts?

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
bee

 

Looks like Durham's side of things is moving into criminal investigations...

so this has the potential to hold some high profile individuals to account.......?


Graham reacts to IG's report on FBI bias: This is a sad day

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.