BREAKING! Robert Mueller Requests Postponement of Gen. Michael Flynn’s Sentencing

[Faun]

Oh, and that’s a lie too. Even Nunes’ memo says other evidence was offered to obtain the warrant. It wasn’t just from the dossier.

There wasn't enough without it.

How do you know? Source missing & link missing.

Both Nunes and Trey Gowdy have said that.

So? Democrats have said that's not true.

If they have said that, they sure haven't produced any evidence that it isn't true.

Republicans voted to not release the Democrat rebuttal memo at this time.

 

[Faun]

His FISA warrant had run out and there was insufficient evidence to reauthorize it except for the contents of that Russian dossier as testified under oath by McCabe. The dossier connected Page to the Trump campaign and administration.

Oh, and that’s a lie too. Even Nunes’ memo says other evidence was offered to obtain the warrant. It wasn’t just from the dossier.

There wasn't enough without it.

Which McCabe quite clearly said in his testimony.

Sure, clear as mud....

Doubt cast upon Nunes memo's bombshell claim about Andrew McCabe's testimony on Trump dossier

In response to the Republican memo, which outlines surveillance violations by the U.S. government, Democrats have created their own report that reportedly rebuts the GOP memo, claiming that the document mischaracterized what McCabe said about the significance of the dossier.

Rather, the Democratic memo, which has yet to be released, asserts that McCabe used the information contained in the dossier as part of a broader trove of material used for a FISA application to spy on former Trump campaign foreign policy adviser, Carter Page, sources told the New York Times. As both the Times' sources and the Democrats have said, that evidence also included details about Page's contacts with a Russian intelligence operative in 2013.

The contacts prompted the investigation and surveillance of Page, other sources told the Times.

A sources familiar with McCabe’s testimony to the intelligence panel in December 2017 echoed the Times reporting, telling the Daily Beast that McCabe's testimony in the GOP memo is “100% not" not a true representation.​

Doesn't it give you any pause for thought that they never seem to have an 'on the record' source for anything?

Go sell stupid elsewhere.

Democrats are seeking to have their rebuttals made public. That's going to required Republican approval in the House. IF they get that approval, then Democrats have to hope Trump will approve to release their rebuttal to the public.

So what we have in the meantime is Nunes paraphrasing McCabe's testimony and Democrats contending Nunes' paraphrasing is not accurate to the point McCabe was making.

Releasing the transcript of McCabe's testimony, which both sides say they are interested in doing, will hopefully clear that up.

 

[Uncensored2008]

[
No. Not like that at all. You really don't see the difference between disclosing work with a foreign govt and not? Page still doesn't acknowledge that he is acting as a foreign agent. That's why he's been under surveillance for years.

Podesta did NOT disclose anything. The Gateway Pundit published a series on his deep ties to Putin and he was forced finally to register. Podesta is a democrat, that is to say utterly and completely corrupt.

Remember, this was Chief of Staff, the top guy. Now we know that the dossier his close allies in the Kremlin cooked up was used by the Obama administration as justification to spy on the opposition campaign.

 

[Uncensored2008]

[
Republicans voted to not release the Democrat rebuttal memo at this time.

When have you Stalinsits ever waited for anything to be released? I'm sure it's already leaked by Pelosi or Schumer.

 

[Faun]

Oh, and that’s a lie too. Even Nunes’ memo says other evidence was offered to obtain the warrant. It wasn’t just from the dossier.

There wasn't enough without it.

How do you know? Source missing & link missing.

Even the Democrats are not disputing that McCabe testified to that. You can read the memo for yourself of course.
Spy Warrant Granted Based On Dossier And News Stories Planted By Fusion GPS

^^^ That's a lie. Democrats are actually contesting the way McCabe's testimony was portrayed in Nunes' memo and are seeking to have the transcript released; as you can see from my post #1066.

The Democrats are wanting their own memo released, but I haven't found any evidence that they want the transcript of McCabe's testimony released. Nunes, on the other hand, is quoted that he is open to releasing the whole transcript.
Devin Nunes open to releasing transcript of Andrew McCabe testimony about FISA application

"but I haven't found any evidence that they want the transcript of McCabe's testimony released."

Analysis | 4 crucial questions about the Nunes memo

What did McCabe actually say about the Steele dossier?

This might be the most consequential dispute involving the memo. Its authors — staff for House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes (R-Calif.) — wrote this: “Furthermore, [FBI] Deputy Director [Andrew] McCabe testified before the Committee in December 2017 that no surveillance warrant would have been sought from the FISC without the Steele dossier information.”

Here’s the thing, though: Whatever McCabe said was behind closed doors in a private hearing of the House Intelligence Committee. What’s more, the memo for some reason doesn’t give his direct quote. So we’re left to rely upon the authors’ paraphrasing of what McCabe said. (Which is a little weird, if I’m honest!)

Democrats quickly cried foul. A Democrat on the intelligence committee, Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-Calif.), said the memo “seriously mischaracterizes the testimony of Deputy Director Andrew McCabe and the FISA application.” Others quickly called for a transcript of the McCabe hearing and/or that specific section of it.

It would seem difficult for Republicans to resist that pressure. There really doesn’t seem to be any reason to paraphrase what McCabe said but not be able to quote him. If the quote comes out and it turns out the paraphrase was misleading, the entire memo will be undermined. If the paraphrase is accurate, it bolsters the GOP’s argument.​

... There are currently Democrats and Republicans seeking to bring McCabe's actual testimony to the public.

 

[Faun]

Republicans voted to not release the Democrat rebuttal memo at this time.

When have you Stalinsits ever waited for anything to be released? I'm sure it's already leaked by Pelosi or Schumer.

You're becoming increasingly incoherent. Sounds like it's time for you to buzz the asylum's attending nurse to come change your drool cup.

 

[Foxfyre]

There wasn't enough without it.

How do you know? Source missing & link missing.

Even the Democrats are not disputing that McCabe testified to that. You can read the memo for yourself of course.
Spy Warrant Granted Based On Dossier And News Stories Planted By Fusion GPS

^^^ That's a lie. Democrats are actually contesting the way McCabe's testimony was portrayed in Nunes' memo and are seeking to have the transcript released; as you can see from my post #1066.

The Democrats are wanting their own memo released, but I haven't found any evidence that they want the transcript of McCabe's testimony released. Nunes, on the other hand, is quoted that he is open to releasing the whole transcript.
Devin Nunes open to releasing transcript of Andrew McCabe testimony about FISA application

again... for the umpteenth time.... CHRIST WREY said there were material omissions making the hack Nunes' pretend memo false.

why do you keep lying?

I didn't say anything about Christopher Wrey. Why are you lying by saying that I did?

Of course nobody on the seventh floor of the White House or those who could be culpable in the State Department wanted the memo released. It was about them. It is understandable that they didn't want to become the issue even though they were.

And I doubt a single news organization anywhere in the world would turn down Christopher Wrey if he wanted to go on the record as to what the inaccuracies were.

 

[hadit]

Both Nunes and Trey Gowdy have said that.

Gowdy has also said that the memo did nothing to establish Mueller's investigation into the Russian probe was derailed. Clearly the memo was cherry picked, and its intent can only be determined to be one thing, to obstruct the Mueller investigation and to discredit the FBI and the Justice Dept.

The data points are true, that's not controversial. Instead of complaining about cherry picking, let's deal with those points and if other points come out, we'll deal with them, but let's not throw up a smoke screen because we don't like what's come out.

The truth is becoming obvious. These agencies have been weoponized, and that's a real problem.

They have not been weaponized. You're falling for talking points. The FBI had intell to warrant extending a FISA warrant on Page, who by the way, had nothing to do with the Trump campaign at that point and was already under surveillance for activities also having nothing to do with the Trump campaign -- and you yahoos are actually trying to peacemeal together a sordid tale of how the DNC tried to spy on the Trump campaign.

Only conservatives are dumb enough to fall for such a stunt.

You sound like you actually believe that. I recall the shrieks of "where there's smoke there's fire" when the Trump/Russia mantra started. There's a lot of smoke here, and it's not blowing from the Trump camp.

LOL

Let me know when you can actually offer proof in lieu of catch phrases.

You seem to believe the smoke screen that these agencies have not been weoponized. Just like the IRS, they are being revealed as having been.

 

[hadit]

His FISA warrant had run out and there was insufficient evidence to reauthorize it except for the contents of that Russian dossier as testified under oath by McCabe. The dossier connected Page to the Trump campaign and administration.

Oh, and that’s a lie too. Even Nunes’ memo says other evidence was offered to obtain the warrant. It wasn’t just from the dossier.

There wasn't enough without it.

Which McCabe quite clearly said in his testimony.

Sure, clear as mud....

Doubt cast upon Nunes memo's bombshell claim about Andrew McCabe's testimony on Trump dossier

In response to the Republican memo, which outlines surveillance violations by the U.S. government, Democrats have created their own report that reportedly rebuts the GOP memo, claiming that the document mischaracterized what McCabe said about the significance of the dossier.

Rather, the Democratic memo, which has yet to be released, asserts that McCabe used the information contained in the dossier as part of a broader trove of material used for a FISA application to spy on former Trump campaign foreign policy adviser, Carter Page, sources told the New York Times. As both the Times' sources and the Democrats have said, that evidence also included details about Page's contacts with a Russian intelligence operative in 2013.

The contacts prompted the investigation and surveillance of Page, other sources told the Times.

A sources familiar with McCabe’s testimony to the intelligence panel in December 2017 echoed the Times reporting, telling the Daily Beast that McCabe's testimony in the GOP memo is “100% not" not a true representation.​

Doesn't it give you any pause for thought that they never seem to have an 'on the record' source for anything?

This is an important point. Just as with their insistence on believing a doctor who did not examine Trump over the one who did, on the record, under oath testimony is to be trusted less than a group of upset politicians.

 

[hadit]

His FISA warrant had run out and there was insufficient evidence to reauthorize it except for the contents of that Russian dossier as testified under oath by McCabe. The dossier connected Page to the Trump campaign and administration.

Oh, and that’s a lie too. Even Nunes’ memo says other evidence was offered to obtain the warrant. It wasn’t just from the dossier.

There wasn't enough without it.

Not true according to Democrats. And again, Page was under surveillance for years. All they needed to show was progress was being made on the target to get the warrant renewed.

But they used the dossier. Obviously, they thought they needed it but didn't want to give all the information about it.

So what if they used the dossier? They used it in conjunction with other evidence as well.

As has been pointed out, they needed it.

 

[hadit]

There wasn't enough without it.

How do you know? Source missing & link missing.

Both Nunes and Trey Gowdy have said that.

So? Democrats have said that's not true.

Democrats in this situation are not believable. I believe more will come out that will solidify that belief.

What????

Conservatives don't believe Democrats in this situation?? Why, that's almost as shocking as Liberals don't believe Republicans.

Now you're starting to understand. All we can really look at is what has been documented, and the democrats haven't done that yet.

 

[hadit]

There wasn't enough without it.

How do you know? Source missing & link missing.

Both Nunes and Trey Gowdy have said that.

So? Democrats have said that's not true.

Democrats in this situation are not believable. I believe more will come out that will solidify that belief.

only to trump hacks.

than for playing

Don't tell me you're so far down the rabbit how you believe them.

 

[hadit]

Oh, and that’s a lie too. Even Nunes’ memo says other evidence was offered to obtain the warrant. It wasn’t just from the dossier.

There wasn't enough without it.

Which McCabe quite clearly said in his testimony.

Sure, clear as mud....

Doubt cast upon Nunes memo's bombshell claim about Andrew McCabe's testimony on Trump dossier

In response to the Republican memo, which outlines surveillance violations by the U.S. government, Democrats have created their own report that reportedly rebuts the GOP memo, claiming that the document mischaracterized what McCabe said about the significance of the dossier.

Rather, the Democratic memo, which has yet to be released, asserts that McCabe used the information contained in the dossier as part of a broader trove of material used for a FISA application to spy on former Trump campaign foreign policy adviser, Carter Page, sources told the New York Times. As both the Times' sources and the Democrats have said, that evidence also included details about Page's contacts with a Russian intelligence operative in 2013.

The contacts prompted the investigation and surveillance of Page, other sources told the Times.

A sources familiar with McCabe’s testimony to the intelligence panel in December 2017 echoed the Times reporting, telling the Daily Beast that McCabe's testimony in the GOP memo is “100% not" not a true representation.​

Doesn't it give you any pause for thought that they never seem to have an 'on the record' source for anything?

Go sell stupid elsewhere.

Democrats are seeking to have their rebuttals made public. That's going to required Republican approval in the House. IF they get that approval, then Democrats have to hope Trump will approve to release their rebuttal to the public.

So what we have in the meantime is Nunes paraphrasing McCabe's testimony and Democrats contending Nunes' paraphrasing is not accurate to the point McCabe was making.

Releasing the transcript of McCabe's testimony, which both sides say they are interested in doing, will hopefully clear that up.

Here's an easy prediction. If McCabe's testimony backs up Nunes, all of a sudden the insistence that it be released won't count any more.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Brutalist

Mike's a loser just like you.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

According to you, it was an “illegal warrant.”

Meanwhile, you can’t say what “illegal warrant” that was.

Sure we can, the FISA warrant on carter page was only approved through fraud. The WHOOOOLE case against manafort and his scumbag buddy gets tossed, as does the guilty plea they got from Flynn. Your buddy mueller screwed the pooch.

Please read the following link:

623. Pleas—Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11 | USAM | Department of Justice

Yeah? So? Look up VACATING GUILTY PLEAS. Amazingly enough, when prosecutors break the law, their intended targets have these things called RIGHTS, and when those RIGHTS are violated all pleas generated by that illegal activity on the part of the prosecutors is THROWN out.

Odd that wingers always seem to use the tools they blame Democrats, liberal and progressives of doing.

Explain why Flynn knowingly plead guilty.

Explain why Mueller, a life long Republican and a man who served our nation with honor, would risk his reputation - what does he benefit from such an act?

The BIG LIE: "Fake News"; "Believe me!"

He pled guilty because he is guilty. However, that doesn't matter a hill of beans if the leverage that mueller and co. used against him was illegally obtained. Based on the fact that flynns sentencing has been postponed I would hazard a guess that it was. Thus mueller knows his case is shit and rather than have to reverse everything, which will now make him look like a complete fool, he's entering into damage control mode.

What evidence against Flynn was illegally obtained?

 

[Hutch Starskey]

It's also very easy to tell when a poster has no idea what they are talking about.

Tell us some more about how Flynn was set up but plead guilty.

The reality is that the lies in flynn’s Statements for his security clearance alone would have subjected him to prosecution.

The trumptards are pathetic.

You're the one who's pathetic...You're comparing process crimes to actual corruption, conspiracy, and abuse of power throughout the slimy Obama administration....you people are a joke

"Process Crimes" such as Misprision of a felony and obstruction of justice are felonies. That said, lets consider some material on the issue at hand:

The four people charged so far in Russia investigation

they don't like talking about the fact that Donald's boys are already pleading guilty.

And you don't like to talk about the fact that none of the crimes pled to, or charged have anything to do with trump. In fact, quite the opposite. Most of manoforts crimes were committed when he was working with podesta.

Do they need to? A crime is a crime. Certainly a blowjob had nothing to do with a land deal.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

If the DoJ or the FBI wanted to eavesdrop on Trump, why didn’t they simply get a warrant to do so?

Probably because there was no criminality as strzok admitted. The FBI agents who were investigating hillary's email fiasco knew there was much more criminal activity with her than with trump. A blind person could see that.

You make no sense. Your claim is that the FBI falsified evidence to illegally obtain a warrant to spy on Page, who was no longer part of the Trump campaign; but your excuse for why they didn’t just get a wiretap on Trump, is because they didn’t have evidence of criminality. If any of your idiotic notions added up, if the FBI wanted to spy on Trump, they wouldn’t be falsifying evidence on ex-campaign associates — they would have falsified evidence on Trump and spied on him.

And the memo shows that they did or have you not been paying attention?

They would have wiretapped Trump, not ex-associates, if that were their intentions. Common sense eludes you.

No, it eludes you silly boy. Get the wire tap for trumps associates then listen in to everything they talk with trump about. You're not too swift are you....

Or simply don't hire sketchy people who have a history of having FISA surveillance. It's amazing to me that none of you acknowledge that Trump hired a really damaged character and then sent him to Russia on their behalf during the campaign as if no one was watching.

Get real.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

A very well stated point. To which I would only add a thought on the highlighted portion.

He has not yet been charged, no doubt because he is a very useful idiot. Not only to the FBI but the Russians as well. That means as long as the Russians keep him in play and we can continue to glean insights into those Russian plays, Page remains an asset.

The only real question that should be asked is why Trump chose to employ such a tarnished character. No doubt it was because Page and his contacts gave them access where they needed it. Not unlike Manafort or Papadrunkoulos.

His FISA warrant had run out and there was insufficient evidence to reauthorize it except for the contents of that Russian dossier as testified under oath by McCabe. The dossier connected Page to the Trump campaign and administration.

Oh, and that’s a lie too. Even Nunes’ memo says other evidence was offered to obtain the warrant. It wasn’t just from the dossier.

There wasn't enough without it.

How do you know? Source missing & link missing.

Both Nunes and Trey Gowdy have said that.

Great!
If that tells you anything, it should tell you that maybe there is more to the dossier than you believe.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

they don't like talking about the fact that Donald's boys are already pleading guilty.

And you don't like to talk about the fact that none of the crimes pled to, or charged have anything to do with trump. In fact, quite the opposite. Most of manoforts crimes were committed when he was working with podesta.

you have no idea what information they turned over in exchange for their pleas. you won't until they testify.

er... manafort was money laundering. and trump played money laundering for fun and profit. manafort was also lobbying for the putin supported Ukraine government.... which is why the only thing Donald ask to be changed in the GOP platform was US policy toward Ukraine.

that's ok by you?

Agreed. However the fact that mueller decided to postpone flynns sentencing bodes ill for your side.

that is normal, WW...l .they postpone sentencing all the time. it's more likely they aren't going to let Flynn be sentenced until after he testifies against everyone he rolled on.

SOP

They also dismissed coerced and illegally obtained confessions all the time.,

Explain why Flynn's plea,(not merely a confession), was either coerced or otherwise illegally obtained.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

The part I highlighted is not true. No warrant was issued to spy on the Trump campaign. And thus, your narrative crumbles.

Dream on. Nobody will convince me or any reasonable person that the Obama State Dept. or the FBI would have gone to such extremes to commit fraud to spy on Carter Page if he was not with the Trump campaign. Thus spying on Carter by default would include access to the Trump campaign.

Dream on. Nobody will convince me or any reasonable person that the Obama State Dept. or the FBI would have gone to such extremes to commit fraud to spy on Carter Page if he was not with the Trump campaign. Thus spying on Carter by default would include access to the Trump campaign.

Even if he had been under surveillance since 2013?

You need to ask yourself why Trump hired such a damaged character to begin with. No doubt even a third rate vetting process would have labelled him problematic at best.

You know what would be helpful? If you, Fawn and others would identify the foreign intelligence services you work for, North Korea, Libya, Iran, etc.


So now we are in a "what did the FISA court know, and when did they know it" situation.

{
The court that approved surveillance of a former campaign adviser to President Trump was aware that some of the information underpinning the warrant request was paid for by a political entity, although the application did not specifically name the Democratic National Committee or the Hillary Clinton presidential campaign, according to two U.S. officials familiar with the matter.

A now-declassified Republican memo alleged that the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court was duped into approving the wiretap request by a politicized FBI and Justice Department. The memo was written by House Intelligence Committee Republicans and alleged a “troubling breakdown of legal processes” flowing from the government’s wiretapping of former Trump aide Carter Page.}

Did The FISA Court Know Warrant Request Was Based On Information Paid For By The Clinton Team?

So the FISA judge issued a warrant based on dirt the Clinton campaign paid Russia to create?

The level of corruption here is astounding.

This kind of corruption may be common in Tehran or whatever shit hole you come from, but for Americans this is outrageous.

Watergate was a game of tiddlywinks in comparison with this.

OMG. There was no need to "dupe" anyone as Page already had a years long history of being a foreign agent.

No he didn't. He had years long history of doing business with Russians, He has never been charged with anything. And because FISA warrants are for 90 days and have to be reauthorized in order for the government to legally spy on somebody or something, and because previous FISA warrants had turned up absolutely nothing on Page, they had not even slight probable cause to continue spying on him.

Carter Page's FISA warrant had run out, and according to what is reported of FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe's testimony--and that WILL BE ON THE RECORD though parts of it may still be classified--the previous warrants had not uncovered anything suspicious on Page and they did not have anything to justify reauthorization for a new FISA warrant. Except for what they knew was a mostly phony Russian dossier and what they knew was a flawed Yahoo news story that recited that dossier.

There is no way in hell that they would have so corrupted themselves to get that warrant had Carter Page not been named as a Trump advisor. Thus a warrant that they knew wouldn't yield anything re Page gave them by default a license to spy on the campaign.

Here is the Chicago Tribune news report before the scandal of the Russian dossier, commissioned and paid for by the DNC and the Clinton campaign, broke. It is a very different narrative via James Comey, former FBI director's testimony, as Comey made no mention of the Russian dossier it was later determined they used to obtain the last FISA warrant.

FBI obtained FISA warrant to monitor former Trump adviser Carter Page

No he didn't.

Liar.

Page had a FISA warrant going back to 2013. Like I said, years before he worked for Trump. No one needed to be lied to to be convinced that he was sketchy and that surveillance was warranted.

Do you understand that if you have a FISA warrant on you as an American citizen, you are either acting as a foreign agent or are an asset of a foreign intelligence service?

My god man.