Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Wednesday, December 11, 2019

William P. Barr's Tuesday interview with NBC News was certainly the most dishonest, frightful and deplorable given by an attorney general in modern times. He attacked the just-released inspector general report and excoriated the FBI for a "travesty" in investigating Russian manipulation of our 2016 election. His false -- deliberately false -- assertions were jaw-dropping:

More

Comments

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

* Barr claimed, "From day one, it generated exculpatory information and nothing that substantiated any kind of collusion." False. Special counsel Robert S. Mueller III found substantial evidence of interaction but did not pursue the noncriminal charge of "collusion." He could not prove criminal conspiracy. Since then, at the Roger Stone trial, evidence has arisen confirming a line of communication from WikiLeaks to Stone to the campaign.

* Barr impugned inspector general Michael Horowitz: "All he said was, people gave me an explanation and I didn't find anything to contradict it ... he hasn't decided the issue of improper motive," Barr said. "I think we have to wait until the full investigation is done." False. In his report, Horowitz wrote, "We also sought to determine whether there was evidence that political bias or other improper considerations affected decision-making in Crossfire Hurricane, including the decision to open the investigation." He found no "documentary or testimonial evidence" of bias in those decisions.

* Barr declared, "I think there were gross abuses ... and inexplicable behavior that is intolerable in the FBI." False. The nonpartisan inspector general found fault with certain actions (specifically the application to conduct surveillance on Carter Page) but obliterated conspiracy theories that the FBI was biased, that it spied on Donald Trump's campaign, etc. ("All of the witnesses we interviewed told the OIG that the FBI did not try to recruit members of the Trump campaign as [Confidential Human Sources], did not send CHSs to collect information in Trump campaign headquarters or Trump campaign spaces, and did not ask CHSs to join the Trump campaign or otherwise attend campaign related events as part of the investigation. Using the methodology described above, we found no information indicating otherwise.")

* Barr claimed the entire Russia investigation was "based on a completely bogus narrative that was largely fanned and hyped by an irresponsible press." False. Our intelligence agencies concluded without equivocation that Russia intervened in our election. Mueller's report documented more than 100 contacts between Russians and campaign officials.

Barr is bald-faced lying and impugning the integrity of this nation's chief law enforcement agency for doing their rightful job even though possible criminal mistakes were committed IF it can be proven beyond reasonable doubt in a court of law, not just by his opinion. The FBI had copious evidence that Russia was up to something in the spring and early summer of 2016. Russians under surveillance kept having contacts with people within the orbit of the Trump campaign. This is why investigations are started. While there may be an idea of what might be found, normally the initial goal is to find out if there truly is something worth investigating that MAY BE a crime. Then you gather information either confirming your suspicions and continuing on, or belaying them and you roll up shop and head back home.

This is what the FBI did and it has resulted in 6 ex Trump campaign officials either having pleaded or having been found guilty of felonies, and dozens of Russian cyber intelligence operatives indicted in absentia through an incredibly detailed charging document, even noting the physical location and exact times their crimes were committed. There is nothing 'bogus' about this narrative.

#1 | Posted by tonyroma at 2019-12-11 06:45 AM | Reply

Barr is shaping his scorched earth campaign against the agency he oversees with the completely backward perspective that the FBI's investigation was motivated to politically harm Donald Trump's campaign when we know the truth: The existence of the FBI's investigation was NEVER PUBLICLY ACKNOWLEDGED prior to the election!

The only people who've ever cried that the investigation was political are the people who found that their own 150+ publicly-lied-about contacts with Russian operatives brought them into the crosshairs along with Russians who were the original target. Russia coordinated and conducted a counter intelligence operation against the United States. It's the FBI's job to investigate and try to thwart counterespionage by a foreign government.

Barr is trying to say that because the investigation could not bring a case involving the Trump campaign to indictment, therefore the investigation was unwarranted and biased. Say what? Is the only predicate for starting investigations now that they HAVE TO end in indictments? How the hell does anyone know before they investigate?

And even though mistakes were made, how can anyone conclude without trial that they were made with the intent to harm Trump? Can't people make mistakes that aren't based on bias other than normal human fallibility? The errors committed were egregious, but their existence only allowed for further surveillance that may not have been permitted without them. The inclusions DID NOT lead to false evidence even if they did compromise a suspect's rights to privacy. This does not poison the rest of the evidence and wrongdoing found within the investigation unrelated to surveillance on Carter Page nor make the investigation's multi-faceted narrative 'bogus'.

Barr has a conclusion: The FBI had no right to investigate the nexus of Trump's campaign and the Russian interference in the 2016 election. From there he takes facts and builds them into a conspiracy of wrongdoing, completely ignoring that Trump himself utilized the work product of a Russian crime as the foundational message of his winning campaign and who's son had an undisclosed meeting with Russians in his own office that offered 'dirt' on his political rival, even if nothing solid came from that meeting alone. How can a narrative be 'bogus' when it's based on undisputed facts tying your campaign to the criminals and their actions?

Barr is flat out lying and his lies stand to undermine the people's faith in the federal justice system in service of giving cover to a man who's publicly lied over 14,000 documented and annotated times since January 2017. And he's only going to get worse from here on out.

#2 | Posted by tonyroma at 2019-12-11 07:14 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

Trump-Barr/Prison 2020

#3 | Posted by aborted_monson at 2019-12-11 07:46 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

And even though mistakes were made, how can anyone conclude without trial that they were made with the intent to harm Trump? Can't people make mistakes that aren't based on bias other than normal human fallibility? The errors committed were egregious, but their existence only allowed for further surveillance that may not have been permitted without them. The inclusions DID NOT lead to false evidence even if they did compromise a suspect's rights to privacy. This does not poison the rest of the evidence and wrongdoing found within the investigation unrelated to surveillance on Carter Page nor make the investigation's multi-faceted narrative 'bogus'.

The FBI:

Lie about exculpatory evidence.
Lie about Steele's credibility.
Lie about contacting Steele's subsource and verifying his claims.
Repeatedly use Steele dossier as pretext for FISA warrants knowing the subsource said it was false.

Tony Roma:

Is this normal human fallability?

#4 | Posted by Ben_Berkkake at 2019-12-11 07:56 AM | Reply

And he's (Barr) only going to get worse from here on out

#2 | Posted by tonyroma at 2019-12-11 07:14 AM | Reply

Barr will be the one drafting the legal rationale for Trump's declaration of State of Siege and assumption of emergency powers.

#5 | Posted by Zed at 2019-12-11 07:57 AM | Reply

#4 | Posted by Ben_Berkkake at 2019-12-11 07:56 AM | Reply | Flag:

So let me guess? It all means Trump is innocent and has integrity and we should all just leave him alone?

#6 | Posted by Zed at 2019-12-11 07:59 AM | Reply

#4 | Posted by Ben_Berkkake a

Sorry, I didn't quite get your answer?

#7 | Posted by Zed at 2019-12-11 08:03 AM | Reply

#4

As I said, nothing you note has been proven in court beyond a reasonable doubt, just like allegations against Trump. Prove them first, allow those who made these potential criminal mistakes to testify under oath as to how and why they did those things. Then pass definitive judgment.

As has been reported ad nauseum, nothing in the Steele dossier has been conclusively proven wholly false while much of it has been confirmed since it's release. The report was always seen and presented as a raw intelligence document not a polished, substantiated certainty. It's allegations were presented as a troubling sequence of things to confirm with deeper investigation, not to believed as gospel truth without further corroboration. Steele was most upset that the FBI would not take resources to follow up on his leads, something he did not have the resources or bandwidth to accomplish by himself. Look up the universally understand definition of 'raw intelligence'. There is a reason the first word is raw: it means undone, not fully cooked.

Page was not the entrance nor fulcrum that the FBI investigation was laid on. Elevating him as an example of errors doesn't eliminate all the other factual crimes and behaviors of Trump-related officials and Russians. Will you agree to that?

#8 | Posted by tonyroma at 2019-12-11 08:10 AM | Reply

"...not to be believed as gospel truth....

#9 | Posted by tonyroma at 2019-12-11 08:11 AM | Reply

and all this when parables like "the snake" and "the scorpion and the frog" abound.

our anger should be directed toward the media...congress, our collective ennui concerning our own governance

Barr's bonafides were firmly established and duly recorded during the Reagan administration and the follow up to Iran-contra

"forget your history etc."

#10 | Posted by 1947steamer at 2019-12-11 08:14 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

CONSERVATIVE ATTORNEY GROUP SLAMS TRUMP'S AG: 'BILL BARR HAS GROSSLY MISCHARACTERIZED AND SUBVERTED' IG FINDINGS (Caps editor's)

A group of attorneys from the conservative group Checks & Balances have slammed Attorney General William Barr after he responded critically to the findings of Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz's report on the FBI investigation into President Donald Trump's 2016 presidential campaign.

"Bill Barr has grossly mischaracterized and subverted the findings of the IG investigation report addressing the FBI investigation into Russian interference in our 2016 election," said Donald Ayer, a former deputy attorney general, former deputy solicitor general and former U.S. attorney, in his statement.

"The report's headline findings are that the investigation was properly initiated based on a sound factual basis, and that the allegations of 'witch hunt' and bias on the part of those overseeing it are without foundation," Ayer added. Trump and his supporters have routinely described the investigations into his 2016 campaign as a "witch hunt."

The attorney referred to Trump as Barr's "client," arguing that the president and the attorney general disregarded the independent inspector general's findings because the "outcome he reaches is not the one desired" by the president.

"The attorney general has returned to his playbook of distortion and obfuscation in a transparent effort to undermine the IG's meticulous, fact-based conclusions," former associate deputy attorney general Jonathan Rose, who also served as a special assistant to President Richard Nixon, said.

Carrie Cordero, a former counsel to the assistant attorney general for national security, pointed out that the report demonstrated that there was no "evidence of political bias or systematic abuse of surveillance authorities on the part of the FBI." The president and some of his supporters have continued to push such claims, despite the inspector general's findings.

"There was no evidence, testimonial or documentary, that political bias improperly motivated the FBI's decision to continue a counterintelligence investigation focused on Russian attempts to subvert the American political process and, most importantly, that there was sufficient probable cause from the outset to undertake that investigation," asserted Stuart Gerson, a former assistant and acting attorney general.

I don't want to hear anything about this being just a "Dem" thing. It's not by any stretch.
"We should not accept as normal or acceptable a political leader who routinely seeks to damage the credibility of the leadership and institutions dedicated to keeping Americans safe," Cordero said.
Yep.

#11 | Posted by tonyroma at 2019-12-11 08:26 AM | Reply

Is it just me or does Ben Berkkake make others want to vomit too? Just go kiss Trump's ass you fool, he'll probably let you if you request the honor in writing. Go ahead, write a letter and request the honor, you know you want to....

#12 | Posted by danni at 2019-12-11 08:34 AM | Reply | Funny: 1

Iran-Contra
In late 1992, Independent Counsel Lawrence Walsh, who had been chosen to investigate the Iran"Contra affair, found documents in the possession of Reagan's former defense secretary, Caspar Weinberger, which Walsh said was "evidence of a conspiracy among the highest-ranking Reagan Administration officials to lie to Congress and the American public." Weinberger was set to stand trial on felony charges on January 5, 1993. His "indictment said Mr. Weinberger's notes contradicted Mr. Bush's assertions that he had only a fragmentary knowledge of the arms secretly sold to Iran in 1985 and 1986 in exchange for American hostages in Lebanon." According to Walsh, then-president Bush might have been called as a witness.

On December 24, 1992, during his final month in office, Bush, on the advice of Barr, pardoned Weinberger, along with five other administration officials who had been found guilty on charges relating to the Iran"Contra affair. Barr was consulted extensively regarding the pardons, and especially advocated for pardoning Weinberger.

Walsh complained about the move insinuating that Bush on Barr's advice had used the pardons to avoid testifying and stating that: "The Iran-contra cover-up, which has continued for more than six years, has now been completed.

Because of this and Barr's unwillingness to appoint an independent counsel to look into a second scandal known as Iraqgate, New York Times writer William Safire began to refer to Barr as "Coverup-General Barr." Barr, however, responded that he believed Bush had made the right decision regarding that and he felt people in the case had been treated unfairly. Barr said Walsh was a "head-hunter" who "had completely lost perspective."

#13 | Posted by 1947steamer at 2019-12-11 08:39 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Is it just me or does Ben Berkkake make others want to vomit too?

#12 | Posted by danni at 2019-12-11 08:34 AM | Reply

BEN and some others are waiting for Trump to declare the Unitary State. They'll deny they want a dictatorship until Trump is comfortable calling himself a dictator (or whatever cute title he chooses) and then they'll all come fully out of the closet.

#14 | Posted by Zed at 2019-12-11 08:52 AM | Reply

I'd like to discuss this far-right, Deep State mythology as a rationale for Trump's dictatorship. If our governmental institutions are scum-to include the intelligence services, the FBI, the Courts, and now much of Congress-then why wouldn't Donald Trump be justified to rule by edict? Or with the rump Senate rubber-stamping his pronouncements just like the good old days of Imperial Rome?

#15 | Posted by Zed at 2019-12-11 08:57 AM | Reply

As has been reported ad nauseum, nothing in the Steele dossier has been conclusively proven wholly false while much of it has been confirmed since it's release.

Directly from the IG exec summary on Crossfire Hurricane.

"8. Omitted the fact that Steele's Primary Sub-source, who the FBI found credible, had made statements in January 2017 raising significant questions about the reliability of allegations included in the FISA applications, including, for example, that he/she did not recall any discussion with Person 1 concerning Wikileaks and there was "nothing bad" about t he communications between the Kremlin and t he Trump team, and that he/she did not report to Steele in July 2016 that Page had met with Sechin;"

also

"Among the most serious of the 10 additional errors we found in the renewal applications was the FBI's failure to advise OJ or the court of the inconsistences, described in detail in Chapter Six, between Steele and his Primary Sub-source on t he reporting relied upon in the FISA applications. Although the Primary Sub-source's account of these communications, if true, was not consistent with and, in fact, contradicted the allegations of a "well-developed conspiracy" in Reports 95 and 102 attributed to Person 1 the FBI did not share this information with 01."

Page was not the entrance nor fulcrum that the FBI investigation was laid on.

It's obvious they really wanted Papadopoulos and/or Page. They couldn't get Papadopoulos, so there was no limit to the lying to make sure they got Page...and it was on the back of a report written by a notorious BSer, commissioned by democrats.

"The FISA request form drew almost entirely from Steele's reporting in describing the factual basis to establish probable cause to believe that Page was an agent of a foreign power, including the secret meeting between Carter Page and Divyekin alleged in Steele's Report 94 and the role of Page as an intermediary between Russia and the Trump campaign's then manager, Paul Manafort, in the "well-developed conspiracy" alleged in Steele's Report 95."

Elevating him as an example of errors doesn't eliminate all the other factual crimes and behaviors of Trump-related officials and Russians. Will you agree to that?

So abuse of FISA courts, lies and omissions should be standard operating procedure now? You're ok with all of this as long as the FBI gets their man? Where's the accountability?

I'll tell you what, a couple years from now when you find out Trump had embeds on Warren, Biden and Sanders, because the report has made clear he has plenty of supporters in the FBI, I don't want to hear a peep from the partisans about it.

#16 | Posted by Ben_Berkkake at 2019-12-11 08:59 AM | Reply

Is it just me or does Ben Berkkake make others want to vomit too?

You're allergic to the truth.

#17 | Posted by Ben_Berkkake at 2019-12-11 09:01 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

I'll tell you what, a couple years from now when you find out Trump had embeds on Warren, Biden and Sanders,

#16 | Posted by Ben_Berkkake at 2019-12-11 08:59 AM |

Stop being stupid. If Trump has his way there'll be no independent investigative source existing to tell on him.

#18 | Posted by Zed at 2019-12-11 09:04 AM | Reply

You're allergic to the truth.

#17 | Posted by Ben_Berkkake at 20

You're the one sneezing, BEN.

#19 | Posted by Zed at 2019-12-11 09:05 AM | Reply

Oh, and Danni, I'll go ahead and pretend you weren't nodding your head in agreement with me twelve years ago when I was blasting these same letter agencies for their misdeeds and lip service to rule of law.

#20 | Posted by Ben_Berkkake at 2019-12-11 09:09 AM | Reply

Berkakke is lighting it up today.

Nice work!

Bill Barr is the problem? The more I read of the IG report the worse the Obama-lead FBI/DOJ look. I'm off work today and I have C-Span cued up on every TV in the house as I will be doing housework all day.

This IG testimony will hopefully be illuminating.

#21 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-11 09:51 AM | Reply

So abuse of FISA courts, lies and omissions should be standard operating procedure now? You're ok with all of this as long as the FBI gets their man? Where's the accountability?

As I said, nothing you note has been proven in court beyond a reasonable doubt, just like allegations against Trump.

Prove them first, allow those who made these potential criminal mistakes to testify under oath as to how and why they did those things. Then pass definitive judgment.

Do you see me being "okay" with the things you noted? Isn't a court trial the DEFINITION of ACCOUNTABILITY?

You're acting as a schitt throwing monkey, wasting people's time. You can't even have the decency to take YES for an answer. Of course Jeff thinks you're slaying it.

#22 | Posted by tonyroma at 2019-12-11 10:45 AM | Reply

"I'll tell you what, a couple years from now when you find out Trump had embeds on Warren, Biden and Sanders, because the report has made clear he has plenty of supporters in the FBI, I don't want to hear a peep from the partisans about it."

So now you are pretending that you aren't partisan. Now that is funny!

#23 | Posted by danni at 2019-12-11 11:13 AM | Reply

Trump 2020!
APINEC!
"Abuse of power is not even a crime!"

What a great pumpers sticker

#24 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-12-11 11:15 AM | Reply

Bill Barr is the problem? The more I read of the IG report the worse the Obama-lead FBI/DOJ look. I'm off work today and I have C-Span cued up on every TV in the house as I will be doing housework all day.

This IG testimony will hopefully be illuminating.

#21 | Posted by JeffJ

Wow you mean you see something wrong with dems but nothing wrong with flagrant republican crimes? What a shocker for a proven objective nonpartisan like you.

#25 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-12-11 11:16 AM | Reply

"Wow you mean you see something wrong with dems but nothing wrong with flagrant republican crimes? What a shocker for a proven objective nonpartisan like you."

17 lies: Unacceptable!

17,000 lies: That get's my vote!

#26 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-12-11 11:20 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Here's the entire Horowitz opening statement being given as I type. He very thoroughly goes through how the mistakes possibly enabled Page to be surveilled in the first place, and he's clear that as time passed the information being gleaned from the surveillance further weakened any need for Page to be surveilled based on the initial investigatory assumptions. Horowitz sees this as an institutional problem, not one based on any participants intentional bias or willingness to "create" a knowing extralegal foundation to surveil Page.

#27 | Posted by tonyroma at 2019-12-11 11:21 AM | Reply

Barr's bonafides were firmly established and duly recorded during the Reagan administration and the follow up to Iran-contra

"forget your history etc."

#10 | Posted by 1947steamer

And of course the follow up - exactly where my mind went reading the title before clicking. Cover up King. Saved Ronnie Raygun and Elder Bush from criminal charges in all honesty. When Barr was brought into this administration the writing was on the wall.

#28 | Posted by GalaxiePete at 2019-12-11 12:28 PM | Reply

As I said, nothing you note has been proven in court beyond a reasonable doubt, just like allegations against Trump.

Prove them first, allow those who made these potential criminal mistakes to testify under oath as to how and why they did those things. Then pass definitive judgment.

Tony's default position is that he believes Steele and his phony document, but the jury is still out on Steele's literal sources disputing the details in his phony document. This is perfectly reasonable.

#29 | Posted by Ben_Berkkake at 2019-12-11 12:35 PM | Reply

Here's what's so stupid:

THIS ENTIRE THING IS REPUBLICANS TRYING TO ARGUE THAT THE COPS SHOULDNT HAVE EVER LOOKED INTO A CRIME.

#30 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-12-11 01:10 PM | Reply

THIS ENTIRE THING IS REPUBLICANS TRYING TO ARGUE THAT THE COPS SHOULDNT HAVE EVER LOOKED INTO A CRIME.

1. Unless they could prove with certainty that it was a crime BEFORE they investigated it;

2. Everyone involved in the investigation can never have thought or spoken a negative word about the criminal suspect or the investigation is
predicated on that personal bias, not a real concern with solving the crime.

#31 | Posted by tonyroma at 2019-12-11 01:17 PM | Reply

THE COPS SHOULDNT HAVE EVER LOOKED INTO A CRIME.

The cops shouldn't be lying to get a warrant.

#32 | Posted by Ben_Berkkake at 2019-12-11 01:18 PM | Reply

The cops shouldn't be lying to get a warrant.

#32 | Posted by Ben_Berkkake

A warrant to look into what?

#33 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-12-11 01:27 PM | Reply

The cops shouldn't be lying to get a warrant.

You're damn right! But that warrant had nothing to do with the criminals who were LEGALLY CAUGHT! It doesn't make their prosecutions tainted nor biased because one person was improperly surveilled yet charged with NOTHING!

The system worked because the FBI found nothing and walked away. No one would have known publicly but for the right bringing up the transgressions in public. Page's privacy was kept wholly under wrap.

To me these are the good things in a bad recipe, but they belong in a cake no one ever tried to serve into the criminal court system.

#34 | Posted by tonyroma at 2019-12-11 01:30 PM | Reply

I hope you had some lotion on hand for this one, roma.

#35 | Posted by Ottodog at 2019-12-11 01:33 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

"The cops shouldn't be lying to get a warrant."

You guys keep angling towards some kind of Fruit Of The Poisonous Tree exoneration of Trump, without using those words, because you're not lawyers.
Except RightOCenter, who is being disingenuous, since he knows what the Exclusionary Rule is, and also knows that it won't apply here, because:

The tainted evidence is admissible if:
it was discovered in part as a result of an independent, untainted source; or
it would inevitably have been discovered despite the tainted source; or
the chain of causation between the illegal action and the tainted evidence is too attenuated; or
the search warrant was not found to be valid based on probable cause, but was executed by government agents in good faith (called the good-faith exception).
en.wikipedia.org

#36 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-12-11 01:41 PM | Reply

Some of you forget Trump corp was negotiating with Russia to construct Trump tower Moscow throughout the campaign while denying communications despite 5 eyes partners picked up the data stream.

#37 | Posted by Scotty at 2019-12-11 02:13 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

Notice the Bill Barr wouldn't commit to a release date for his second (actually the third) report to be released, the one being done by US Attorney Durham. I suspect that we won't see it until at least the week of the Democratic convention next year. And if not then, if it's a complete whitewash, I'm thinking around September or October, in order to get the maximum effect, you know...

OCU

#38 | Posted by OCUser at 2019-12-11 05:48 PM | Reply

The tainted evidence is admissible if:

I appreciate the recognition that the evidence is tainted, and none of it meets the threshold to make it tainted and admissible.

#39 | Posted by Ben_Berkkake at 2019-12-12 07:21 AM | Reply

You guys keep angling towards some kind of Fruit Of The Poisonous Tree exoneration of Trump, without using those words, because you're not lawyers.

It's called the rule of law. It's the ---- you guys say you are into when a Democrat is your president.

#40 | Posted by Ben_Berkkake at 2019-12-12 07:24 AM | Reply

It's called the rule of law.
#40 | Posted by Ben_Berkkake

LOL GFY Trumper

#41 | Posted by jpw at 2019-12-12 11:15 AM | Reply

LOL GFY Trumper

#41 | POSTED BY JPW

The IG report really has you unsettled.

#42 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-12 11:30 AM | Reply

Democrats and their allies are terrified of the Durham investigation after the IG report was released.

It's funny to watch them desperately try to preemptively discredit Barr and Durham.

Tip: It's not going to work and you all will only further beclown yourselves.

#43 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-12 11:33 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Democrats and their allies are terrified of the Durham investigation after the IG report was released.

#43 | Posted by JeffJ at

Durham has already signaled what his report will say, JEFF. This is the sort of behavior you often say disturbs you.

#44 | Posted by Zed at 2019-12-12 11:36 AM | Reply

#36

You are on the right track, but the problem Horowitz found wasn't the evidence gleaned from the FISA warrant but the methods used to obtain it. The exclusionary rule and its FOTPT progeny deal with the use of the evidence, not the method it was obtained.

By withholding/changing/misrepresenting evidence in the process of obtaining a warrant, that in and of itself is not only a Fourth Amendment violation but a crime in its own right.

#45 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2019-12-12 11:38 AM | Reply

preemptively discredit Barr and Durham.

#43 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-12 11:33 AM | Reply |

I'd like to say I don't get you, JEFF. But I do.

I'll remind you that it's Barr and Durham currently engaging in discredit.

You've decided they're justified. Before they issue their own "reports". Quelle surprise.

#46 | Posted by Zed at 2019-12-12 11:38 AM | Reply

The IG report really has you unsettled.

#42 | Posted by JeffJ

Nonsense.

What has me unsettled is Trumpers acting as if they care about the rule of law.

What has me unsettled is people who act as if they're accurately assessing reality while supporting an AG who is weaponizing the DOJ to go after political enemies while touting an executive branch that's far more powerful and independent than our Constitution allows for.

#47 | Posted by jpw at 2019-12-12 11:38 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"while touting an executive branch that's far more powerful and independent than our Constitution allows for."

Jeff hated an overly-powerful executive branch, until he loved an overly-powerful executive branch.

#48 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-12-12 11:40 AM | Reply

Just like he was going to let the chips fall where they may...until they did and he latched on to what negative findings there were so as to retroactively change his argument to match the negative findings as if we don't remember the months of posting that occurred prior to the release of the report.

#49 | Posted by jpw at 2019-12-12 11:43 AM | Reply

What has me unsettled is Trumpers acting as if they care about the rule of law.

Of course it does ... because the law is siding against you.

#50 | Posted by AndreaMackris at 2019-12-12 11:43 AM | Reply

It's funny to watch them desperately try to preemptively discredit Barr and Durham

Barr is an easy target for the Dems given his prior history with Iran/Contra but they loved Durham for his work with the FBI/BPD mob and CIA interrogation tapes investigations. Given how poorly the Horowitz testimony and report went for them over the past couple of days they are going to have to work overtime to find ways to impugn Durham prior to the all too predictable strategic leaks when his report is done.

#51 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2019-12-12 11:43 AM | Reply

What has me unsettled is people who act as if they're accurately assessing reality while supporting an AG who is weaponizing the DOJ to go after political enemies while touting an executive branch that's far more powerful and independent than our Constitution allows for.

I guess we all forgot how unsettled you were when Holder did the exact same thing.

#52 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2019-12-12 11:45 AM | Reply

Jeff hated an overly-powerful executive branch, until he loved an overly-powerful executive branch.

#48 | Posted by Danforth at 2019

This is a strong component of Trumpism, isn't it? Monarchism? Big Daddyism? Kingfishism?

#53 | Posted by Zed at 2019-12-12 11:46 AM | Reply

Of course it does ... because the law is siding against you.

#50 | Posted by AndreaMackris

No, it's not schitheap.

But your shtick the past several days has been to go full dotard and simply state the opposite of reality like your idol Trump.

#54 | Posted by jpw at 2019-12-12 11:55 AM | Reply

I guess we all forgot how unsettled you were when Holder did the exact same thing.

#52 | Posted by Rightocenter

Whatabout whatabout whatabout.

If all you have is this feeble garbage just stay lurking.

#55 | Posted by jpw at 2019-12-12 11:56 AM | Reply

BTW roc, how did holder go after political enemies with a weaponized DOJ?

Just so it's clear what you're whatabouting about.

#56 | Posted by jpw at 2019-12-12 11:57 AM | Reply

"I guess we all forgot how unsettled you were when Holder did the exact same thing."

Well, since you're still unsettled by it, years later, it begs the question:

What date did your stance change from being unsettled by it when Holder did it, to believing it's somehow acceptable when Barr does it? Please be specific.

#57 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-12-12 12:10 PM | Reply

#56

LOL, you were claiming that you were unsettled about a weaponized DOJ and I pointed out that Holder did the same thing and it didn't bother you in the slightest.

For Attorney General Eric Holder, Justice is for Democrats only

And before you reflexively STS, many of the findings in this article were subsequently admitted by the DOJ in various settlements, including the IRS settlement as well as Court rulings taking the Holder DOJ to task for its actions.

#58 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2019-12-12 12:13 PM | Reply

BTW roc, how did holder go after political enemies with a weaponized DOJ?

Just so it's clear what you're whatabouting about.

#56 | POSTED BY JPW

Weaponized DOJ?

That is truly laughable.

Do you want to see evidence of a weaponized DOJ: Read the Horowitz report, and more importantly, watch/listen to his testimony.

I was 100% convinced the Obama administration weaponized the IRS to target conservative 503 groups. This was due to confirmation bias. I was wrong and it was a hard lesson, so I took the medicine.

What Horowitz uncovered has been extensively reported on by conservative sources for the last 2 years.

Any time it has been brought up you condescendingly and angrily scoffed at it as RW conspiracy nonsense.

Well, now it has been vindicated. I know it's something your over-sized ego makes very difficult for you but you need to take the medicine.

#59 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-12 12:13 PM | Reply

#57

Your assigning positions to others game is as tattered as your Donkey Suit, I think that a weaponized DOJ under Barr is just as bad, if not worse since he is smarter, than it was under Holder.

#60 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2019-12-12 12:15 PM | Reply

LOL, you were claiming that you were unsettled about a weaponized DOJ and I pointed out that Holder did the same thing and it didn't bother you in the slightest.

Followed by:

Your assigning positions to others game

I don't recall ever discussing the Holder issue. Hell, I don't even recall the issues you're claiming are on par with Barr's conduct.

Which, BTW, is the topic of this thread.

So either address the topic at hand or STFU.

#61 | Posted by jpw at 2019-12-12 12:22 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"Your assigning positions..."

You're still upset about Holder, but this is your first condemnation of Barr.

It's not my fault your hypocrisy was exposed.

#62 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-12-12 12:22 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Do you want to see evidence of a weaponized DOJ: Read the Horowitz report, and more importantly, watch/listen to his testimony.

You are literally stating the antithesis of the report's conclusions as fact.

#63 | Posted by jpw at 2019-12-12 12:23 PM | Reply

#60

They don't even have any evidence that Barr was weaponized the DOJ.

After what Horowitz uncovered it is absolutely appropriate to dig deeper into how the investigation even started in the first place.

Durham's budget should be increased 10-fold effective immediately.

#64 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-12 12:23 PM | Reply

You are literally stating the antithesis of the report's conclusions as fact.

#63 | POSTED BY JPW

Do you need me to post quotes from the hearing?

Are you really this obtuse?

That testimony was absolutely devastating and it shattered a narrative that you've been desperately clinging to for 2 years - that there was nothing wrong with the Page FISA applications, along with other abuses.

#65 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-12 12:25 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 3

Well, now it has been vindicated. I know it's something your over-sized ego makes very difficult for you but you need to take the medicine.

#59 | Posted by JeffJ

LOL how hard are you squinting at the report to come to this conclusion?

And you keep acting as if I'm denying the findings. I haven't nor will I. The findings are the findings.

But none of it supports the assertions from the right about partisanship witch hunts with no legal basis, no matter how much you ignore that primary finding.

#66 | Posted by jpw at 2019-12-12 12:25 PM | Reply

That testimony was absolutely devastating and it shattered a narrative that you've been desperately clinging to for 2 years - that there was nothing wrong with the Page FISA applications

That's a gross mischaracterization of the entire thing.

If you have a poor memory, please tell me so I don't take this as intentional misrepresentation, which is what it's looking like.

The "narrative" has been that the investigation wasn't based solely on the Steele dossier and that it wasn't partisan actions by "deep state" members trying to oust Trump for personal reasons.

Period. Full stop. THAT was the narrative of the last two years no matter how desperately you try to retroactively fit the report onto the past.

#67 | Posted by jpw at 2019-12-12 12:28 PM | Reply

After what Horowitz uncovered it is absolutely appropriate to dig deeper into how the investigation even started in the first place.

LOL did Mackris take over your account?

Don't address me again until he's lost control. I'm tired of yet another brazen, characterless liar showing their face.

#68 | Posted by jpw at 2019-12-12 12:29 PM | Reply

What has me unsettled is people who act as if they're accurately assessing reality while supporting an AG who is weaponizing the DOJ to go after political enemies while touting an executive branch that's far more powerful and independent than our Constitution allows for.

Perhaps someday you will get through your thick skull is that what was weaponized was the ------- FISA court and this investigation and further investigations are clearly warranted. I'm sorry if our government lying to secret courts isn't as exciting as Trump tweeting at Greta, but you're going to have to bear with the adults for a while longer.

You know, maybe if you idiots actually read the reports rather than the narratives that have been written about what's in the report, you wouldn't look like such imbeciles. But why bother with that when you can have great people like Jennifer Rubin put words in your mouth?

#69 | Posted by Ben_Berkkake at 2019-12-12 01:23 PM | Reply

I'm tired of yet another brazen, characterless liar showing their face.

#68 | POSTED BY JPW

Don't watch the debates. The Republicans are lying their rear ends off.

I have never seen anything like it.

Republicans need to review their oaths of office and remember why they are there.

To defend the constitution. Not partisan politics.

The IG was right about FISA. It obviously needs attention.

But it also addressed the Oranges.

The Oranges were legit and legally appropriate.

So suck on them Oranges -----!

Winning! blah blah blah!

#70 | Posted by donnerboy at 2019-12-12 01:23 PM | Reply

The "narrative" has been that the investigation wasn't based solely on the Steele dossier and that it wasn't partisan actions by "deep state" members trying to oust Trump for personal reasons.

Well, we could believe your reshaping of history, or we can head on over to the old twitter machine and see nearly every leading media member covering this story telling us over and over with hundreds and hundreds of tweets for months on end that the Page FISA applications were legit, and the reason they had done so because Page is a lynchpin to the case. Type it into google and search it yourself, the compilations are a delight. Just an absolute consensus of wrong.

#71 | Posted by Ben_Berkkake at 2019-12-12 01:30 PM | Reply

#68

You're full of it.

A few months ago I mentioned Bruce Ohr acting's as a conduit between Steele and the FBI and you went -------. You are in no position to call anyone a partisan stooge.

Also quit taking statements made by rabid right wingers and trying to attribute them to me. Hannity doesn't speak for me.

#72 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-12 01:30 PM | Reply | Funny: 1 | Newsworthy 1

Hannity doesn't speak for me.

#72 | POSTED BY JEFFJ

Jeff. You are no Hannity. You are not near as bad as Hannity. Only Donald Trump is as bad as Hannity. They are very similar. You are not anything like him.

But everyone here knows you apparently speak FOR HIM.

#73 | Posted by donnerboy at 2019-12-12 01:34 PM | Reply

Perhaps someday you will get through your thick skull is that what was weaponized was the ------- FISA court

Facts not in evidence, moron.

You know, maybe if you idiots actually read the reports

#69 | Posted by Ben_Berkkake

LOL this from a sycophantic cultist regurgitating talking points.

Or have you actually read all 476 pages?

#74 | Posted by jpw at 2019-12-12 02:27 PM | Reply

Don't watch the debates. The Republicans are lying their rear ends off.

I caught a little bit of the audio yesterday morning (IIRC) that was absurd.

It went something like:

GOP Congressman (GC): Are you willing to answer this question, on the record?

Guy testifying (GT): Yes, I will answe....*cut off*

GC: REMEMBER YOU ARE UNDER OATH SIR! ARE YOU WILLING TO ANSWER MY QUESTION UNDER OATH SIR?!?!

GT: Yes, if you'll allow me to...*cut off*

GC:THE AMERICAN PEOPLE WANT YOU TO ANSWER THIS QUESTION SIR! WILL YOU DARE ANSWER THIS QUESTION! UNDER OATH!?!?!

GT: Uhhhh absolutely, you see..*cut off*

GC: DO YOU DARE ANSWER MY QUESTION!!!!!!!

I had to shut it off. It was beyond absurd.

#75 | Posted by jpw at 2019-12-12 02:30 PM | Reply

A few months ago I mentioned Bruce Ohr acting's as a conduit between Steele and the FBI and you went -------. You are in no position to call anyone a partisan stooge.

LOL link?

Also quit taking statements made by rabid right wingers and trying to attribute them to me. Hannity doesn't speak for me.

#72 | Posted by JeffJ

FF!

#76 | Posted by jpw at 2019-12-12 02:32 PM | Reply

LOL link?

Oh, so now you are going to pretend the conversation never happened. How convenient.

FF!

#76 | POSTED BY JPW

It is funny how epically wrong you've been for 2 years that you feel the need to resort to straw men in order to avoid having to own up.

#77 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-12 02:59 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

I'm specifically talking about all of the malfeasance that Horowitz uncovered.

#78 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-12 03:00 PM | Reply

"I'm specifically talking about all of the malfeasance that Horowitz uncovered."

More like specifically NOT talking about all of the malfeasance that Trump committed.

#79 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-12-12 03:03 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Oh, so now you are going to pretend the conversation never happened. How convenient.

Soooo I'm guessing that means no link.

It is funny how epically wrong you've been for 2 years that you feel the need to resort to straw men in order to avoid having to own up.

#77 | Posted by JeffJ

It's funny how easily you've tossed the facade of impartiality and interest in truth.

Because here's a simplified version of what you and the other cultists are doing.

For two years, we heard endlessly how the sky is green.

And that this investigation was surely going to prove how the sky is the greenest of greens.

Then the report comes out and says, no the sky isn't green. It's blue but sometimes has shades of red.

You tools are now running around going "ahhaaaaa we told you the sky was red! It's probably green too as surely the next investigation will prove!"

It's goal post moving on an epic scale with a healthy dose of faux indignity thrown in because we refuse to go along with your historical revisions.

#80 | Posted by jpw at 2019-12-12 03:08 PM | Reply | Funny: 1 | Newsworthy 1

More like specifically NOT talking about all of the malfeasance that Trump committed.

#79 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-12-12 03

Maybe they all do get paid.

#81 | Posted by Zed at 2019-12-12 03:08 PM | Reply

#80 | POSTED BY JPW

Early in 2018 Nunes alleged that the core of the FISA warrant applications was the Steele Dossier and the courts were mislead not only about the origins of the dossier but also it's veracity.

You and all of the other lefties excoriated him.

Now he's been vindicated and you've been repudiated so you are obfuscating and moving the goalposts. You very specifically eviscerated the claim that the Steele report was central to the FISA applications even as recently as within the last 2 months.

I almost admire how brazen you are. It takes stones to have been that wrong and still play attack dog.

#82 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-12 03:13 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 3

Soooo I'm guessing that means no link.

I don't have the ability to find an online DR exchange between you and I that happened almost a year ago and I didn't Hans the conversation.

It's funny how easily you've tossed the facade of impartiality and interest in truth.

My commentary has been mostly limited to what has been exposed by the IG report.

You obviously can't handle what it exposed so you are flinging straw faster than a farmer in a barn.

#83 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-12 03:16 PM | Reply

More like specifically NOT talking about all of the malfeasance that Trump committed.

#79 | POSTED BY DANFORTH

LOL. There are multiple threads going about all things Trump every day on this site.

The IG testimony was yesterday and like JPW you can't handle what it exposed.

#84 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-12 03:18 PM | Reply

"Carter Page"

Carter Page?!? You mean the guy who told US authorities the Russians were trying to recruit him? The guy who got FISA warrants renewed, which requires NEW findings since the prior warrant?

Yeah...hang your hat on that one.

Meanwhile, if the tables were turned, and Page was an HRC operative meeting with Russians, your head would've exploded if the FBI hadn't investigated.

#62 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-11-23 01:43 AM

#85 | Posted by Ben_Berkkake at 2019-12-12 04:01 PM | Reply

Nothing could be further from the truth, Danforth.

DANFORTH

I think he's trying to say that FISA warrants are automatically rubber stamped.

Nothing could be further than the truth. I seem to remember the signing off goes through 8 different arbiters at the DOJ and is arduous and time consuming before it ever reaches the A.G. ~ and they double check everything.

#63 | Posted by Twinpac at 2019-11-23 03:15 AM | Reply

#86 | Posted by Ben_Berkkake at 2019-12-12 04:02 PM | Reply

Painful ignorance Andrea...painful!

It's truly sad how often Andrea shows just how painfully ignorant he is. The issue was with the RENEWING of the warrant, not its origin as you've wrongly alleged for months and months.

Anyone who keeps spouting obvious lies and distortions should be considered allies and or operatives in the ongoing Russian disinformation campaign and treated as such until further notice. Stop being traitorous, the truth is right before your eyes.

#64 | Posted by tonyroma at 2019-11-23 06:28 AM | Reply

#87 | Posted by Ben_Berkkake at 2019-12-12 04:03 PM | Reply

It's funny how easily you've tossed the facade of impartiality and interest in truth.

This has been my take on Jeff as well.

He's a full blown partisan. He got off the fence and jumped deep into Trumpublican territory.

#88 | Posted by ClownShack at 2019-12-12 04:10 PM | Reply

There are multiple threads going about all things Trump every day on this site.

This is a political website and Trump is the president.

Welcome to the Drudge Retort.

Your boy is a fat sack of rotten shht.

#89 | Posted by ClownShack at 2019-12-12 04:12 PM | Reply

courts were mislead...about the origins of the dossier...Now he's been vindicated

Still haven't read pages 15-16 of the declassified FISA application? It's okay for you to remain willfully stupid but please try to limit your contagion to others.

#90 | Posted by JOE at 2019-12-12 04:34 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

It's okay for you to remain willfully stupid

That's all they have going for them.

#91 | Posted by ClownShack at 2019-12-12 04:51 PM | Reply

#90 what I said was accurate.

#92 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-12 05:01 PM | Reply

Still haven't read pages 15-16 of the declassified FISA application? It's okay for you to remain willfully stupid but please try to limit your contagion to others.

Hey dummy, that's been addressed:

"8. Omitted the fact that Steele's Primary Sub-source, who the FBI found credible, had made statements in January 2017 raising significant questions about the reliability of allegations included in the FISA applications, including, for example, that he/she did not recall any discussion with Person 1 concerning Wikileaks and there was "nothing bad" about the communications between the Kremlin and the Trump team, and that he/she did not report to Steele in July 2016 that Page had met with Sechin;"

Lies.

You are an embarrassment like the rest of these clowns.

#93 | Posted by Ben_Berkkake at 2019-12-12 05:04 PM | Reply

Barr should carry Wet Wipes to get the Trump brown stuff off his nose.

#94 | Posted by AMERICANUNITY at 2019-12-12 05:35 PM | Reply

Your assigning positions to others game
I don't recall ever discussing the Holder issue.

#61 | POSTED BY JPW AT 2019-12-12 12:22 PM

Try to keep up, last I checked you weren't Donkey Suit Dan, who I was responding to.

#95 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2019-12-12 08:38 PM | Reply

You're still upset about Holder, but this is your first condemnation of Barr.
It's not my fault your hypocrisy was exposed.

#62 | POSTED BY DONKEY SUIT DAN AT 2019-12-12 12:22 PM

No hypocrisy at all, I was just pointing out confirmation that Holder did what you are accusing Barr of doing. Are you also unsettled by what Holder did, like JPW is with Barr?

ANY weaponization of the DOJ is unacceptable.

#96 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2019-12-12 08:40 PM | Reply

"The IG testimony was yesterday and like JPW you can't handle what it exposed.'

What it exposed is 17 lies are too much, but if Trump jizzes out 17,000 lies, you're first in line to swallow.

#97 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-12-12 09:59 PM | Reply

"No hypocrisy at all,'

Bullschitt. Your first words against Barr were AFTER I pointed out your raging hypocrisy.

But keep pretending; at least you're fooling yourself.

#98 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-12-12 10:00 PM | Reply

"ANY weaponization of the DOJ is unacceptable.'

Welcome to the club.

Now go back to polishing the turds, like we all expect from you.

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

Keep deflecting Donkey Suit Dan, we expect nothing more from you.

#100 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2019-12-12 10:24 PM | Reply

Keep deflecting Donkey Suit Dan, we expect nothing more from you.

#100 | Posted by Rightocenter

This from the guy who's brought up Holder on at least two Barr threads...

#101 | Posted by jpw at 2019-12-12 10:44 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

What it exposed is 17 lies are too much, but if Trump jizzes out 17,000 lies, you're first in line to swallow.

#97 | POSTED BY DANFORTH

Uh huh. How many of Trump's lies have spurred an invasive counter-intelligence investigation into him and his team and how many of said lies were used to deceive FISC in order to obtain warrants to spy on his opponents?

Your attempt at equivalence would draw ire from Snoofy, of all people. It really was that bad.

#102 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-12 11:06 PM | Reply

#101

Hmmm, Holder was AG and was accused of weaponizing the DOJ. Barr is the AG and is accused of weaponizing the DOJ.

See a connection?

#103 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2019-12-12 11:06 PM | Reply

See a connection?

#103 | POSTED BY RIGHTOCENTER

If he does, he will never acknowledge it. Never.

I predict he will respond by calling you a "schitheap".

#104 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-12 11:10 PM | Reply

"Uh huh. How many of Trump's lies have spurred an invasive counter-intelligence investigation into him"

Not enough.

"How many of Trump's lies..."

...will you swallow? ALL of them.

#105 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-12-12 11:16 PM | Reply

"Keep deflecting '

It's not a deflection to point out the first time you took Barr to task was AFTER your hypocrisy was exposed.

Try again, Humpty Dumpty.

#106 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-12-12 11:18 PM | Reply

See a connection?

#103 | Posted by Rightocenter

Yeah, you're as guilty of deflecting as the person you're condemning for deflecting.

Snarky responses won't hide that, sport.

#107 | Posted by jpw at 2019-12-12 11:28 PM | Reply

I predict he will respond by calling you a "schitheap".

#104 | Posted by JeffJ

Nah, you guys haven't lied enough to warrant that honor.

#108 | Posted by jpw at 2019-12-12 11:29 PM | Reply

Hmmm, Holder was AG and was accused of weaponizing the DOJ. Barr is the AG and is accused of weaponizing the DOJ.

This is also rather laughable given the Post link you provided lists such terrible things as not enforcing pot or immigration laws to the extent righties wanted them to be enforced. Hence the politicization and, therefore, "weaponization".

Compared to espousing a crazy ridiculous view of the executive while supporting arguments for executive immunity while distorting investigative findings into a highly corrupt POTUS in violation of his oath to serve THE PEOPLE, not Trump.

Beyond that unfortunate nuance, you're completely correct *snark*.

#109 | Posted by jpw at 2019-12-12 11:33 PM | Reply

#106 | Posted by Danforth

It's not the first time he's played the "duuuhhh whatabout Holder" game with me. I'm sure there are others he's played it with too.

#110 | Posted by jpw at 2019-12-12 11:34 PM | Reply

The panic on the Left is truly palpable.

When Durham drops his report Donkey Suit Dan's and JPW's heads will explode.

#111 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2019-12-12 11:36 PM | Reply

Compared to espousing a crazy ridiculous view of the executive while supporting arguments for executive immunity while distorting investigative findings into a highly corrupt POTUS in violation of his oath to serve THE PEOPLE

Thanks for confirming that you have no clue that the argument made by the Trump Administration regarding EP was based on a memo written by Janet Reno for Bill Clinton during his impeachment.

Shrieks of "Whataboutism" incoming from the Usual Idiots in 3...2...1...

#112 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2019-12-12 11:39 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

No, that's just a good old fashioned goal post shift.

You quote my post about Holder and counter with Reno.

Jesus you're going terminal stupid too. Shame.

#113 | Posted by jpw at 2019-12-12 11:43 PM | Reply

When Durham drops his report Donkey Suit Dan's and JPW's heads will explode.

#111 | Posted by Rightocenter

Being angry at blatant dishonesty isn't an exploding head.

It's being angry at blatant dishonesty.

But you'd have to be honest to understand that.

But since all you can muster these days is whataboutism and goal post shifts, I expect nothing of substance from you on this post either.

#114 | Posted by jpw at 2019-12-12 11:45 PM | Reply

The panic on the Left is truly palpable.

Proud to be a dishonest schitheap.

Congrats...I think?

#115 | Posted by jpw at 2019-12-12 11:46 PM | Reply

Hey Jeff I'm curious. I live about an hour and forty five minutes from the the largest hand dug well I'm curious. Since you've been digging a hole for yourself for quite awhile how do you deal with the dirt?? Do you fling it over your shoulder or do you use the A frame and bucket and pulley method?? Oh and most importantly how do you plan on getting out of there?? I'm big enough I think I could pull yourself out provided it's not already too deep.

#116 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2019-12-13 12:15 AM | Reply

Sorry, that was harsh.

If you have a point, make it. Stop blathering as if you're making a point while jumping all over the place.

#117 | Posted by jpw at 2019-12-13 12:18 AM | Reply

#116 | POSTED BY LAURAMOHR

When I'm digging a ditch I don't have a pattern. I view it as much-needed exercise. So I variate between the right and left shoulder to try and keep it all even.

#118 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-13 12:23 AM | Reply

If you have a point, make it. Stop blathering as if you're making a point while jumping all over the place.

#117 | POSTED BY JPW

Up until the IG report was released a narrative on the right posited that the core of the FISA warrants was the Steele dossier. Going further - it was alleged that FISC was mislead regarding both the origins of this dossier and its trustworthiness.

That only scratches the surface of things the IG report has proven you to be wrong about. Let's set the other stuff aside and focus on the FISA warrants, since you appear to be asking.

I don't fault you for being wrong about these warrants. Devin Nunes provided the truth way back in early 2018 and Schiff provided a counter-narrative.

The MSM almost unilaterally sided with Schiff and viciously attacked Nunes and you were deceived. That is not your fault. I think it's totally appropriate to place more trust in a NYT piece than a piece at 'Washington Examiner'.

I would hope that what Horowitz testified to would shock and concern anyone. This IG report exposed a degree 0f malfeasance that it truly alarming. And this has been exposed by an IG that had to deal with significant limitations to the scope of the investigation.

Yet, here we are.

#119 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-13 12:36 AM | Reply

"Devin Nunes provided the truth..."

Was that when Nunes was investigating the meddling in Ukraine, or doing the meddling in Ukraine?

#120 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-12-13 12:38 AM | Reply

Was that when Nunes was investigating the meddling in Ukraine, or doing the meddling in Ukraine?

#120 | POSTED BY DANFORTH

I was speaking to his release of his FISA memo back in 2018. The IG validated what he exposed and the lack of MSM reaction is truly astounding.

#121 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-13 12:43 AM | Reply

"I was speaking to his release..."

Hopefully, that won't happen for 15-to-life.

#122 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-12-13 01:15 AM | Reply

It seems apparent that DNCForth is completely OK with unlawfully obtained FISA warrants as long as the GOP is being spied upon and as long as it's the Democratic party that is doing the spying.

How many donkey suits do you own?

#123 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-13 05:52 AM | Reply

Do you -------- even realize that you are turning a wholly underserving Trump into a sympathetic figure?

That is really hard to do.

"Mission Accomplished,", I guess

#124 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-13 06:49 AM | Reply

Do you -------- even realize that you are turning a wholly underserving Trump into a sympathetic figure?

#124 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-13 06:49 AM | Reply

This has been your job, JEFF.

#125 | Posted by Zed at 2019-12-13 08:08 AM | Reply

I don't care about impeachment either way. It means nothing to me. That said, if this were a nondescript ho hum criminal trial, ave the police had documentation that they acted irresponsibly, unethical, and in some cases bordering on criminally, the very least of which is the evidence would never be admitted into their proceedings. At worst the entire case dismissed, ave the investigating officers charged. Procedure matters in our justice system. It ensures fair trials. I am not saying that President is immune.... Though I find the obstruction of Congress charge laughable... But he shouldn't be treated any differently than any other defendant.

#126 | Posted by ABH at 2019-12-13 08:49 AM | Reply

Comments are closed for this entry.

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2020 World Readable

Drudge Retort