Horowitz Testified: Comey NOT 'Vindicated' - DON'T KNOW If There Was Political Bias'

[B. Kidd]

Without FISA warrants how was it that the FBI could spy on all four, Carter Page, Flynn, Popadopulous, and Manafort?

Flynn was talking to someone with a legit FISA warrant so we caught his conversation There never was any surveillance on him specifically. I don’t think anyone spied on Papadopolous. Manafort could have been subject to a regular warrant because he had a pre-existing FBI investigation due to his many, many financial crimes.

You think no one spied on Papadopolous?
Really?
You didn't watch the IG testimony today. Did you?
So STFU!

I have a job so I didn’t have time to sit for 8 hours of testimony. Did Horowitz say Papadopolous was spied on? If so how?

A Bureau asset was wearing a wire.

Oh, that’s it? You don’t need a FISA warrant to record someone talking to you.

You're dead to me for now until you watch the whole hearing (with thanks to Mr. Wonderful on Shark Tank, for that saying)!

 

[Nostra]

The FBI went to the WH specifically to nail Flynn.
It was a perjury trap from the onset because Flynn was one of the (4) guys under FBI surveillance, Carter Page, Flynn, Manafort, and Popadopolus.
1. The Carter Page FISA application was a crime, period.
2. Popadopulous' FISA warrant?! Didn't hear about it, except that and Austrailian, Mr. Downer, said that he heard bar talk, that was setup by the CIA and Mifsud.
3. General Flynn's FISA application wasn't discussed that I heard?! I still say he was setup by the FBI who knew exactly what he said to Kisliak.
4. Manafort I could understand spying on, his connections had connections had connections

That’s not what a perjury trap is. Sometimes the FBI will ask questions to people that they already know the answer to. If there’s a lie, it provides them more information than if they reveal that they know the information to begin with. A perjury trap is different. That’s where an individual is testifying on one matter but asked questions about an unrelated matter to incriminate themselves.

No argument from me about Carter Page’s warrant being fraudulent. That’s clear as day to me.

Papadopolous, Flynn and Manafort never had FISA warrants established on them.

Without FISA warrants how was it that the FBI could spy on all four, Carter Page, Flynn, Popadopulous, and Manafort?

Flynn was talking to someone with a legit FISA warrant so we caught his conversation There never was any surveillance on him specifically. I don’t think anyone spied on Papadopolous. Manafort could have been subject to a regular warrant because he had a pre-existing FBI investigation due to his many, many financial crimes.

The FISA warrant was illegal, douchebag. Before the meeting, these 2 douchebags had listened to recordings of his phone call with the Russian ambassador.

The FISA warrant was on the Russian ambassador you idiot. That wasn’t an illegal warrant.

You really are dumb.

 

[colfax_m]

Flynn was talking to someone with a legit FISA warrant so we caught his conversation There never was any surveillance on him specifically. I don’t think anyone spied on Papadopolous. Manafort could have been subject to a regular warrant because he had a pre-existing FBI investigation due to his many, many financial crimes.

You think no one spied on Papadopolous?
Really?
You didn't watch the IG testimony today. Did you?
So STFU!

I have a job so I didn’t have time to sit for 8 hours of testimony. Did Horowitz say Papadopolous was spied on? If so how?

A Bureau asset was wearing a wire.

Oh, that’s it? You don’t need a FISA warrant to record someone talking to you.

You're dead to me for now until you watch the whole hearing (with thanks to Mr. Wonderful on Shark Tank, for that saying)!

Apparently you didn’t look at the back and forth because it was a discussion about who had a FISA warrant.

 

[Nostra]

The FBI went to the WH specifically to nail Flynn.
It was a perjury trap from the onset because Flynn was one of the (4) guys under FBI surveillance, Carter Page, Flynn, Manafort, and Popadopolus.
1. The Carter Page FISA application was a crime, period.
2. Popadopulous' FISA warrant?! Didn't hear about it, except that and Austrailian, Mr. Downer, said that he heard bar talk, that was setup by the CIA and Mifsud.
3. General Flynn's FISA application wasn't discussed that I heard?! I still say he was setup by the FBI who knew exactly what he said to Kisliak.
4. Manafort I could understand spying on, his connections had connections had connections

James Comey

✔@Comey
Crooked Comey:

"So it was all lies. No treason. No spying on the campaign. No tapping Trumps wires. It was just good people trying to protect America."https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/james-comey-the-truth-is-finally-out-the-fbi-fulfilled-its-mission/2019/12/09/614df00c-1aad-11ea-8d58-5ac3600967a1_story.html …


Opinion | James Comey: The truth is finally out. The FBI fulfilled its mission.
Now those who attacked the FBI for two years should admit they were wrong.

washingtonpost.com

In fact, the IG report did not find there was “no spying.”




HOROWITZ ADMITS FBI ENGAGED IN “ILLEGAL SURVEILLANCE” OF TRUMP CAMPAIGN

‘It’s illegal surveillance. It’s not court-authorized surveillance’

IG Horowitz: FISA Surveillance W/o Legal Foundation Is “Illegal Surveillance”


IG Horowitz: FISA Surveillance W/o Legal Foundation Is “Illegal Surveillance”

The FBI's "break in" of the Trump campaign was 1000x worse than the Nixon "plumbers" breaking into the DNC headquarters.
The FBI's illegal surveillance and coup plots of Trump are now the biggest scandal in US history.

Oh absolutely! Intelligence Agencies have tremendous power and must be totally trustworthy. The FBI has completely violated that trust by becoming an attack wing of the Democratic Party.

It is gonna take years to get that trust back, if ever.
I don't believe the current FBI head is up to the task.
He appears to be a keep-your-head-low and this-too-will-soon-blow-over bureaucratic pencil neck.
Just my opinion.

Good lord. Some hacks lie on one warrant and you guys act like the world is coming to an end.

Get some perspective.

You really are dumb

 

[kyzr]

Read up on it muppet.
I'm not your personal researcher. (Even tho' I suspect you already know and are playing dumb like a typical ).

It wasn’t a setup. We both know it. He lied. He lied on his own volition. He knew he shouldn’t do it but he did it anyway because that’s what Trump would have wanted.

When are y’all going to realize that Trump eats peoples souls.

Worse yet, you eat a bag O' anti-American Democrat dicks!

No one made a Flynn lie. Why did he do it?

My understanding was that Flynn said he didn't recall to the question "did you discuss sanctions with Kisliak?", and that's what the nailed him on.
Why did the FBI ask questions of Flynn if they had him under surveillance? A trap.

It’s my understanding Flynn said he didn’t talk about sanctions, which incidentally if we are to believe anyone in the Trump administration is what he was telling everyone else.

It’s really hard to believe he just forgot they talked about sanctions. When you read the indictment, Flynn sought guidance from someone in the Trump admin leadership about what to say about sanctions, he had the call where he discussed sanctions, and then after hanging up, reported directly back to the Trump admin leadership about the call. This all happened like 6 weeks before his sit down with the FBI which isn’t that long of a time.

The FBI asks questions they know the answer to all the time. If the person starts lying about it, then it’s evidence that they are trying to hide something. It’s a bad sign if you’re in law enforcement. They do it all the time for all kinds of cases. Big and small. I don’t like the idea that anyone gets special treatment and I don’t think Flynn should either.

Just taking a look at the forest and not the trees. Flynn was a good general. He was on the tough side, but that's what generals are. I'm not privy to his lobbying business for Turkey, or other stuff, like his sitdown dinner with Putin. But as far as I know Flynn should still be employed by Trump. I'm worried that Flynn was a good "non-swamp" guy, and the swamp took him off the table. I hope Trump pardons him at least. He lost his life savings, that's punishment enough.

 

[Zorro!]

None of the senat6ors went to bat for General Flynn.
Flynn was setup and then his family was squeezed to lie about Trump.
There are so many FBI crimes to prosecute that if Horowitz missed them I hope Durham fixes them.

No one went to bat for Flynn because Flynn lied. No one made him lie. He knew what he was doing. He lied to the FBI and supposedly he lied to Pence which is why Trump fires him in the first place.

The FBI went to the WH specifically to nail Flynn.
It was a perjury trap from the onset because Flynn was one of the (4) guys under FBI surveillance, Carter Page, Flynn, Manafort, and Popadopolus.
1. The Carter Page FISA application was a crime, period.
2. Popadopulous' FISA warrant?! Didn't hear about it, except that and Austrailian, Mr. Downer, said that he heard bar talk, that was setup by the CIA and Mifsud.
3. General Flynn's FISA application wasn't discussed that I heard?! I still say he was setup by the FBI who knew exactly what he said to Kisliak.
4. Manafort I could understand spying on, his connections had connections had connections

The Deep State HAD to take out Flynn:

The first thing to understand about American Foreign Policy Establishment is that they are ALL interventionist Utopians who believe that by our interfering with the internal affairs of other nations that we can bring about an end of history utopia. Whether it's Clinton, Bush, Obama, McCain or Romney, you get the same meddling Utopians and they are a serious threat to the world.

This is hard to explain to people who don’t understand the depth of American narcissism.

Consider this conversation that Andrew McCarthy relayed:

“General Petraeus created ISIS in order to destabilize China,” a senior Chinese military official informed me over dinner in 2015. The individual in question appears, incidentally, as one of China’s masterminds of so-called unrestricted warfare in Michael Pillsbury’s now-celebrated book The Hundred Year Marathon.​

“That’s ridiculous,” I replied.​

“It is not ridiculous in the least,” the Chinese soldier continued in the benevolent tone in which one instructs low-aptitude recruits. “There are ISIS leaders whom we have identified and tracked who were trained by Petraeus during the ‘Surge,’” the counter-insurgency campaign that David Petraeus conducted in 2008-2009 to contain a Sunni rebellion against the majority Shiite government that the United States had helped bring to power in 2007.​

I tried to explain: “This was a comedy of errors. The neoconservatives in the Bush administration believed in majority rule as a matter of dogma, so the US held elections in 2007 and the Shiite minority won. Then the Sunnis who used to run Iraq under Saddam Hussein resisted with guerrilla war and terrorist attacks. Petraeus was just a careerist looking for another star, and he told the Bush administration that he could fix the Sunni problem by paying off the Sunni tribal leaders. He handed out hundreds of millions of dollars to the Sunnis and gave them weapons and training through the ‘Sons of Iraq’ and the ‘Sunni Awakening.’ When Obama took US forces out of Iraq, a lot of the same Sunnis who took money from Petraeus faced the same Shiite state, and became non-state actors, that is ISIS. And the CIA’s support for Sunni jihadist opponents of the Assad government in Syria made matters worse, as the Defense Intelligence Agency warned in a notorious 2012 report.”​

My Chinese interlocutor was not impressed. “You’re trying to tell me that the people who run the world’s great superpower are complete idiots who don’t think about the consequences of their actions? I don’t believe you.”​

Majority rule in Iraq meant permanent war:

“The stark facts on the ground still sat there, oozing pus and bile. With Saddam gone, any voting would install a Shiite majority. The Sunni wouldn’t run Iraq again. That, at the bottom, caused the insurgency. Absent the genocide of Sunni Arabs, it would keep it going.”​

The Petraeus surge was one of the most destructive things any military leader ever undertook, but it stands as a symbol of the Establishment’s collective reputation. The Republican Establishment had hailed Petraeus as the savior of George W Bush’s failed Iraq policy, and they are sticking to their story. When Bush took office in January 2001, the United States was the world’s sole hyperpower. Russia had defaulted on its foreign debt in July 1998, and China was a small dark cloud in the geopolitical sky. US government debt was a manageable 55% of GDP, compared with more than 100% of GDP today. America had more than 17 million manufacturing workers, vs only 12 million today. It still dominated high-tech manufacturing, including computer chips and telecommunications equipment. Fast-forward to 2019: China is challenging American pre-eminence in a range of civilian and military technologies, while Russia has returned to the world stage as a major power, notably in the Middle East.

Donald Trump was obnoxious enough to declare that the emperor had no clothes. Breaking with the iron discipline of the Republican Establishment, he told voters that the United States had wasted $7 trillion, thousands of dead, and millions of lives disrupted in the disastrous nation-building campaigns in Iraq and Afghanistan.

The only other Republican candidate to repudiate the “Bush Freedom Agenda” was Senator Ted Cruz of Texas. That is why the 2016 Republican primary became a two-man race between Trump and Cruz. The whole of the American Establishment had signed on to a utopian crusade to impose the liberal world order on the Muslim world. After nine years of frustration in Iraq, it saw in the so-called “Arab Spring” demonstrations of 2011 a second chance to bring its agenda to fruition. The result of this was the near-collapse of Egypt and an eight-year civil war in Syria that killed half a million people and displaced 10 million refugees.

BACK TO MICHAEL FLYNN:

That is what makes the case of Lieutenant-General Michael Flynn so central to the mutiny against Trump. As chief of the Defense Intelligence Agency in 2012, Flynn had warned that American support for Sunni jihadists in Syria had the unintended effect of supporting the new caliphate movement, that is, ISIS. Among all the heads and former heads of the 17 agencies that make up the US intelligence community, Flynn was the only one who had objected to the disastrous covert intervention in Syria and foreseen its baleful consequences. Obama fired him, but Donald Trump hired him as a top campaign aide and then appointed him national security adviser.

Evidence is before the courts showing that the FBI set Flynn up in a White House interview, in order to claim that the distinguished general had lied to federal investigators about his contacts with Russians. Flynn’s lawyers have now produced evidence that the charges against him stemmed from an FBI forgery – FBI officials altered the interview report to put his remarks in an incriminating light. Flynn’s lawyer Sidney Powell claims that the CIA sandbagged him to stop an audit of its operations – the first audit since its founding.

Whatever one thinks of Donald Trump, the possibility should be horrifying that the world’s oldest continuous democratic constitution might be subverted by a cabal of spies with the support of the Fake News media.

You make not like Trump's style or methods, but this is what Fighting Back Against The Swamp looks like.

https://www.asiatimes.com/2019/11/article/not-a-bad-spy-novel-but-a-national-nightmare/

If your description of what happened to Flynn is true, then why won't Trump pardon him? I'm not seeing any major crime Flynn is guilty of.
It would be the ultimate FU, especially if he puts Flynn back in as DNI now that Bolton left. Then Flynn could get back to auditing the CIA...

I don't know if Flynn has any desire to remain in these guy's gun sights. At most Trump will be in power 5 more years and he has no apparent political heirs. I can't think of anyone who can step into Trump's shoes and continue the fight. Cruz to some extent, but when Trump was crushing him, Cruz unraveled a bit, whereas Trump stays on very effective offense even when blind-sided, like with the Billy Bush tape. I know of no one else who could have survived that. The more Trump is attacked, the more he is energized, on some level he almost seems to thrive on it. That is very unusual.

That's something for Flynn to consider. He entered his guilty plea to get him and his family out of the gun sights - I think what he is working for is the Judge vacating his guilty plea. If not, then perhaps a Trump pardon will be in order. Flynn may think that a Court vacating rather than a pardon is a more complete vindication.

If Trump is unable to clean out the Deep State, they may still be in power after Trump leaves. Flynn has to think about that.

 

[TroglocratsRdumb]

the Press is trying to ignore the IG report

 

[colfax_m]

It wasn’t a setup. We both know it. He lied. He lied on his own volition. He knew he shouldn’t do it but he did it anyway because that’s what Trump would have wanted.

When are y’all going to realize that Trump eats peoples souls.

Worse yet, you eat a bag O' anti-American Democrat dicks!

No one made a Flynn lie. Why did he do it?

My understanding was that Flynn said he didn't recall to the question "did you discuss sanctions with Kisliak?", and that's what the nailed him on.
Why did the FBI ask questions of Flynn if they had him under surveillance? A trap.

It’s my understanding Flynn said he didn’t talk about sanctions, which incidentally if we are to believe anyone in the Trump administration is what he was telling everyone else.

It’s really hard to believe he just forgot they talked about sanctions. When you read the indictment, Flynn sought guidance from someone in the Trump admin leadership about what to say about sanctions, he had the call where he discussed sanctions, and then after hanging up, reported directly back to the Trump admin leadership about the call. This all happened like 6 weeks before his sit down with the FBI which isn’t that long of a time.

The FBI asks questions they know the answer to all the time. If the person starts lying about it, then it’s evidence that they are trying to hide something. It’s a bad sign if you’re in law enforcement. They do it all the time for all kinds of cases. Big and small. I don’t like the idea that anyone gets special treatment and I don’t think Flynn should either.

Just taking a look at the forest and not the trees. Flynn was a good general. He was on the tough side, but that's what generals are. I'm not privy to his lobbying business for Turkey, or other stuff, like his sitdown dinner with Putin. But as far as I know Flynn should still be employed by Trump. I'm worried that Flynn was a good "non-swamp" guy, and the swamp took him off the table. I hope Trump pardons him at least. He lost his life savings, that's punishment enough.

The swamp didn’t do anything to him.

Think about the context of that moment. Trump had been saying for months that they had no contact with any Russians. He said it over and over. Trump knew it wasn’t true but he said it anyway. So when the FBI comes around asking about Flynn’s contacts with Russians, Flynn maintained the boss’s lie. No one made him do it other than his foolish devotion to Trump.

You want to blame someone, blame Trump for demanding his supporters participate in his alternate reality.

 

[Thunk]

Horowitz testified today that he had no testimonial evidence (admission) of political bias.

He also testified that he could not rule out political bias.

The spin has been so thick that there was no political bias...It needs to be corrected by the horowitz testimony itself.

I missed it today but they played it on laura ingrahams show.

 

[Lewdog]

He found none... but can't rule the possibility out? Yeah... you must have never had a Philosophy & Logic course. He was under oath, no way he makes a definitive statement there was no possible bias. Why? Because he could only make his decision based on the evidence he was given and uncovered. He's not going to take the chance that 2 years from now someone uncovers new evidence that could be seen as biased and he gets called back to Capitol Hill to be reamed and threatened with lying to Congress charges.

 

[Jitss617]

No wonder cnn and MSNBC didn’t cover it lol

 

[Jackson]

I thought he said, there didn't appear at the beginning that there was bias but later on it was apparent.

 

[Jitss617]

I thought he said, there didn't appear at the beginning that there was bias but later on it was apparent.

He said bias 3 mins in talking about Chris steel

 

[task0778]

“As to the opening [of the probe], which is in a different place than the FISA issues that you have identified and I talked about earlier, I think it is two different situations. On the FISA side, we found, as you noted, a lack of documentary and testimonial evidence about intentionality, but we noted the lack of satisfactory explanations, and in fact, leave open the possibility, for the reasons you indicated, it is unclear what the motivations were. On the one hand, gross incompetence, negligence; on the other hand intentionality, and we’re in between—we weren’t in a position with the evidence we had, to make that conclusion, but we are not ruling it out,” Horowitz replied.

Lee then asked: “The lack of evidence here is not evidence that there is no bias.” Horowitz replied: “I am solely basing it—correct—on the actual evidence that we have.”

When he was asked by Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas), Horowitz said that fraudulent evidence was used in the FISA warrants.

“So the men and women at home need to know what’s happening,” Cruz said. “A lawyer at the FBI creates fraudulent evidence, alters an email, that is in turn used for the basis of a sworn statement to the court that the court relies on. Am I stating that accurately? “

“That’s correct,” Horowitz answered. “That is what occurred.”


As Horowitz stated, either the FBI exhibited "gross incompetence and negligence", or what they did was intentional. Meaning they did it on purpose for political purposes. I ain't buying the first one.

 

[Lewdog]

I thought he said, there didn't appear at the beginning that there was bias but later on it was apparent.

Then you thought wrong and need to second guess what media sources you consume. At no point has he ever said that.

 

[depotoo]

None of the senat6ors went to bat for General Flynn.
Flynn was setup and then his family was squeezed to lie about Trump.
There are so many FBI crimes to prosecute that if Horowitz missed them I hope Durham fixes them.

No one went to bat for Flynn because Flynn lied. No one made him lie. He knew what he was doing. He lied to the FBI and supposedly he lied to Pence which is why Trump fires him in the first place.

Oh, so wrong. The other agents said they didn’t think Flynn had lied.
Wait–The FBI Agents Who Interviewed Michael Flynn Didn't Think He Lied To Them?
Do remember, with the Horowitz report we have now found out that they already knew there was nothing with the Russia crap before they even interviewed Flynn.

 

[colfax_m]

None of the senat6ors went to bat for General Flynn.
Flynn was setup and then his family was squeezed to lie about Trump.
There are so many FBI crimes to prosecute that if Horowitz missed them I hope Durham fixes them.

No one went to bat for Flynn because Flynn lied. No one made him lie. He knew what he was doing. He lied to the FBI and supposedly he lied to Pence which is why Trump fires him in the first place.

Oh, so wrong. The other agents said they didn’t think Flynn had lied.
Wait–The FBI Agents Who Interviewed Michael Flynn Didn't Think He Lied To Them?
Do remember, with the Horowitz report we have now found out that they already knew there was nothing with the Russia crap before they even interviewed Flynn.

You're misinterpreting what they said. The agent didn't say that he didn't lie, he said he gave no visual indications that he was lying. There's a difference.

 

[basquebromance]

asking us to wait till the next election to remove Trump from office is like asking to resolve a dispute based on who wins at Monopoly, when the very crime you've been accused of is cheating at Monopoly

 

[Butch_Coolidge]

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[iceberg]