Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Sunday, December 01, 2019

Newly released emails show that the FBI lawyer who doctored Trump-Russia related documents bragged to his colleagues that he had just "destroyed the Republic."

More

Alternate links: Google News | Twitter

Kevin Clinesmith, who has been referred to the DOJ for prosecution over FISA application documents that he altered, wrote to another FBI employee: "As I have initiated the destruction of the republic ... . Would you be so kind as to have a coffee with me this afternoon?"

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

But wait it gets better!

#1 | Posted by HeliumRat at 2019-12-01 12:39 PM | Reply

@#1

From the cited article...

...Kevin Clinesmith, who has been referred to the DOJ for prosecution over FISA application documents that he altered...

He did something bad, was caught, and now appears to be on the road to be held accountable (by Pres Trump's DoJ, fwiw) for his bad actions.

Isn't that they way justice is supposed to work?


#2 | Posted by LampLighter at 2019-12-01 07:49 PM | Reply

Dear Trumpers:

Those of us who despise your corrupt cult leader are not disappointed when people who violate the law are prosecuted. That applies equally to those who violate the law and also agree with us that Trump is a -------. Don't project your lack of ethics onto us.

#3 | Posted by anton at 2019-12-02 02:52 PM | Reply

Ain't those dems great?

#4 | Posted by Sniper at 2019-12-02 02:56 PM | Reply

Isn't that they way justice is supposed to work? - lamplighter

Your lack of awareness is noted.

This poisoned all evidence collected, and possibly, to a rational person, all evidence collect by Mueller.

#5 | Posted by AndreaMackris at 2019-12-02 04:00 PM | Reply

"This poisoned all evidence collected"

Nonsense, as the IG will point out.

Once again, the defense boils down to "You had no right to discover my wrongs!"

#6 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-12-02 04:15 PM | Reply

Once again, the defense boils down to "You had no right to discover my wrongs!"

#6 | POSTED BY DANFORTH

You sound like a badge-sniffer. So, should we just abolish FISC?

#7 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-02 09:12 PM | Reply

"So, should we just abolish FISC?"

No, but pretending a "t" wasn't crossed, so the entire investigation is moot, is idiotic. The report is about to say the violation wasn't material enough to render the findings meaningless, but that's what Republican hyper-partisans will claim regardless.

#8 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-12-02 09:18 PM | Reply

The report is about to say the violation wasn't material enough to render the findings meaningless, but that's what Republican hyper-partisans will claim regardless.

#8 | POSTED BY DANFORTH

That's likely. Having said that, are you claiming to have actually seen the report?

I ask because what has been leaked thus far seems...desperate. Regardless, 6 days from now should provide some clarity.

#9 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-02 09:24 PM | Reply

"Having said that, are you claiming to have actually seen the report? "

No; but how about a bet as to how accurate the reporting has been?

#10 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-12-02 09:26 PM | Reply

"That's likely."

Yeah...at about 100% likelihood.

#11 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-12-02 09:27 PM | Reply

No, but pretending a "t" wasn't crossed, so the entire investigation is moot, is idiotic.

I wasn't making that claim.

Are you suggesting that dotting the "i's" and "t's" is insignificant when applying for a FISA warrant to surveil a US citizen in a counter-intelligence investigation (considerably different from a criminal investigation)?

No big deal? No harm, no foul? "If you've got nothing to hide why should you care?"

#12 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-02 09:27 PM | Reply

Italics off

Damn!

#13 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-02 09:28 PM | Reply

"That's likely."

Yeah...at about 100% likelihood.

#11 | POSTED BY DANFORTH

We'll have some clarity in 6 days.

#14 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-02 09:28 PM | Reply

"Having said that, are you claiming to have actually seen the report? "
---
No; but how about a bet as to how accurate the reporting has been?

#10 | POSTED BY DANFORTH

The reporting has been across-the-board, depending on the source.

#15 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-02 09:30 PM | Reply

"The reporting has been across-the-board"

This fact: That the alteration didn't materially invalidate the justifications for the investigation.

#16 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-12-02 09:34 PM | Reply

"Are you suggesting that dotting the "i's" and "t's" is insignificant when applying for a FISA warrant to surveil a US citizen in a counter-intelligence investigation"

Not at all; I'm saying there are non-material errors, and material errors. I also believe non-material errors, even if they don't invalidate the reasons for investigation, should still be investigated and prosecuted.

#17 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-12-02 09:38 PM | Reply

This fact: That the alteration didn't materially invalidate the justifications for the investigation.

#16 | POSTED BY DANFORTH

Oh, OK. You are speaking toward a very narrow leak - the email that was doctored by Strzok's direct-report-and you seem to be suggesting that this means, regardless of what's actually in the report, that everything was on the up-and-up no matter what.

#18 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-02 09:41 PM | Reply

I also believe non-material errors, even if they don't invalidate the reasons for investigation, should still be investigated and prosecuted.

#17 | POSTED BY DANFORTH

OK. I'll extend a courtesy that you rarely return - I'll take you at your word on this.

#19 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-02 09:43 PM | Reply

"You are speaking toward a very narrow leak - the email that was doctored by Strzok's direct-report-and you seem to be suggesting that this means, regardless of what's actually in the report, that everything was on the up-and-up no matter what."

Strock's direct report?

#20 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2019-12-02 09:47 PM | Reply

"Regardless, 6 days from now should provide some clarity."

Horowitz Report didn't bring the clarity you have been seeking far and wide?

Why am I not surprised...

#21 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-12-02 09:48 PM | Reply

"Are you suggesting that dotting the "i's" and "t's" is insignificant when applying for a FISA warrant to surveil a US citizen in a counter-intelligence investigation (considerably different from a criminal investigation)?"

It's insignificant to what said investgation revealed.

Stop pretending you disagree.

#22 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-12-02 09:50 PM | Reply

#20 Gal,

I read he was a lawyer who reported to Strzok

I've been extremely busy the past several days so I do apologize if I got that detail wrong.

#23 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-02 09:52 PM | Reply

#21. Horowitz report won't be released until 6 days from now.

#24 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-02 09:53 PM | Reply

"I read he was a lawyer who reported to Strzok"

That was the original reporting, but it looks like it has since been corrected:

Correction: An earlier version of this story stated erroneously that the FBI employee suspected of altering a document worked beneath former Deputy Assistant Director Peter Strzok. The employee was a low-level lawyer in the Office of General Counsel and did not report to the deputy assistant director.

www.washingtonpost.com

#25 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2019-12-02 09:57 PM | Reply

The notion has already been dismissed, though:
IG Report: FBI Did Not Spy on Trump Campaign
drudge.com

#26 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-12-02 09:57 PM | Reply

I think that is the likely outcome. I will wait until it's actually released and I have time to read key parts of it and have time to dissect Horowitz s testimony first.

I find it funny how your collective minds appear to be made up prior to its release.

#27 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-02 10:02 PM | Reply

I think it's funny how your mind still won't be made up even after the report is released.

Heck, you can't even suggest anything Trump has done which warrants impeachment.

And that's funny!

#28 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-12-02 10:05 PM | Reply

Barr probably didn't like what Huber was discovering--or likely wasn't discovering--either, which is why he had to bring in Durham:

Barr disputes inspector general's finding about FBI's Russia investigation

Attorney General William P. Barr has privately said he doesn't think the inspector general can conclude yet that the FBI had enough information in July 2016 to justify launching a probe of Trump campaign members.

www.washingtonpost.com

#29 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2019-12-02 10:16 PM | Reply

Heck, you can't even suggest anything Trump has done which warrants impeachment.

And that's funny!

#28 | POSTED BY SNOOFY

Obstruction as laid out in Volume II of the Mueller report and leaning on the newly elected leader of Ukraine to investigate a political rival for partisan purposes are both impeachable, and I've said so.

So, keep laughing.

What I'm seeing here comes off as desperation. Selective leaking to try and set a narrative and potentially soften the blow of the IG report.

It's strange because I don't think it's going to be a bombshell at all - so why all of this selective leaking to incredibly friendly news outlets?

#30 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-03 07:23 AM | Reply

"Obstruction as laid out in Volume II of the Mueller report and leaning on the newly elected leader of Ukraine to investigate a political rival for partisan purposes are both impeachable, and I've said so."

Any President could be impeached for anything; it's a political process.
I said, things for which Trump deserves to be impeached.

You want Trump to be convicted for obstruction and influence peddling?
I doubt it.

#31 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-12-03 12:55 PM | Reply

The dems decided to hang Trump for exposing corruption. The problem is that it's Trump. Yeah. feed that media.

#32 | Posted by HeliumRat at 2019-12-03 05:21 PM | Reply

The dems decided to hang Trump for exposing corruption. The problem is that it's Trump. Yeah. feed that media.

#32 | POSTED BY RussiaRat

More propaganda from a Putin sock puppet.

#33 | Posted by aborted_monson at 2019-12-03 09:44 PM | Reply

Danforth is funny. This is an admission of treason.

Seth Rich died for you.

#34 | Posted by HeliumRat at 2019-12-03 10:39 PM | Reply

Comments are closed for this entry.

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2019 World Readable

Drudge Retort