don't hear a lot of denial that the FBI spied on the Trump campaign. They do like to rearrange the words

Comey Tweet today:




Comey says that a lot. "How will xxxx explain this to their grandchildren?"

I guess the same way Bill Clinton explained it to Loretta Lynch on that isolated part of the airport.

Clapper says the spy was to protect the Trump campaign. Clapper and Comey stress that their "intelligence" proved that Putin wanted to hurt the Clinton campaign and help the Trump campaign.

So why didn't Clapper put a spy in the Clinton campaign?

You know, to help protect them.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Good to know that Stefan Halper was essential to helping the country.

Can't wait till Peter Strzok publicly spills his guts.


another Comey tweet today

This message has been edited. Last edited by: sdy,

quote:

You know, to help protect them.

Well, the Clinton Campaign already had the full protection of the sitting President of the USA, along with the DOJ, FBI, CIA, National Security Council, the State Department, the DNC, and the media.......probably more than enough protection, it just wasn't enough to get the bitch elected.

When I first started typing this out, I was trying to be funny, but now that I see what I typed and think about it; it was an Act of God that Trump got elected and made it to Inauguration. Now they have to take down Trump in order to cover themselves and the apparatus that they put in place. Obummer, Holder, Lynch, Mueller, Comey, and company all had a hand in it and there are plenty of pieces still on the board for the Deep State.

Comey, I don't have to explain it to the grandkids, but I want to see you and the rest of the Beltway Swamp critters explain it to a jury.

quote:

Originally posted by TMats:
Clapper can’t possibly expect anybody (not even Joy Behar) to believe that line...right? Produce evidence that there was an FBI spy in the Clinton campaign “trying to understand, were the Russians infiltrating,” and perhaps yet another man involved in this illegal and immoral scam entirely without honor, James Clapper, can regain some. I doubt it, but perhaps.

Lying Liar James Clapper Just Lied Again About His Previous Lies About NSA Spying
'I made a mistake. I didn't lie.'

Clapper unhinged

Clapper has a book coming out

https://www.realclearpolitics...._to_a_trump_win.html

from the book:

writing about the Russians,

"Surprising even themselves, they swung the election to a Trump win. To conclude otherwise stretches logic, common sense, and credulity to the breaking point,"

"Less than eighty thousand votes in three key states swung the election,"

"I have no doubt that more votes than that were influenced by this massive effort by the Russians."

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

I really hope Clapper and Brennan go down hard.

quote:

Originally posted by sdy:
Clapper unhinged

Clapper has a book coming out

Why should Hillary, Comey and Clapper hog the spotlight?...

I think I'll have a book coming out in a few months...

Chapter one..."Why Bisleyblackhawk stayed up way past his bedtime on November 8th 2016 and laughed his effin ass off at the results"...

Wait...I think it's the View calling to schedule my appearance on the show!

quote:

Originally posted by sdy:
Clapper unhinged

Clapper has a book coming out

https://www.realclearpolitics...._to_a_trump_win.html

from the book:

writing about the Russians,

"Surprising even themselves, they swung the election to a Trump win. To conclude otherwise stretches logic, common sense, and credulity to the breaking point,"

"Less than eighty thousand votes in three key states swung the election,"

"I have no doubt that more votes than that were influenced by this massive effort by the Russians."

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

I really hope Clapper and Brennan go down hard.

“..... logic, common sense and credulity......”

This guy was head of CIA?

quote:

Originally posted by JALLEN:

...This guy was head of CIA?

No, that was Brennan. Clapper was Obama's Director of National Intelligence, a "super" position created after 9-11. This is from Wki, someone else can 'splain it better:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...ational_Intelligence

quote:

Originally posted by Sigmund:

quote:

Originally posted by JALLEN:

...This guy was head of CIA?

No, that was Brennan. Clapper was Obama's Director of National Intelligence, a "super" position created after 9-11. This is from Wki, someone else can 'splain it better:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...ational_Intelligence

Correct, Brennan was the head of the CIA appointed by Obama that testified he voted for the Communist party candidate for U.S. President.

It is easy to confuse the two, Brennan and Clapper.

quote:

Originally posted by Sigmund:

quote:

Originally posted by JALLEN:

...This guy was head of CIA?

No, that was Brennan. Clapper was Obama's Director of National Intelligence, a "super" position created after 9-11. This is from Wki, someone else can 'splain it better:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...ational_Intelligence

Even worse, then.

So Clapper is somehow able to read the minds of those 80,000 some odd people and knows why they voted the way they did, is that it?

Seriously, this guy is deranged. Who here can even point to one thing from the Russians during that campaign cycle that swayed your decision to vote for Trump over Hillary?

Really, think about the massive campaign effort by both parties--the absolute massive amount of resources contributed to this election by both campaigns--and this idiot Clapper wants us to believe that a few Tweets and Facebook postings by a few masquerading Russian agents turned tens or even hundreds of thousand of votes toward Trump? Mother of pearl! He must think we're as dumb as he looks.

switching gears to the Mueller indictment of the Russians for a moment

http://dailycaller.com/2018/05...-delay-russia-trial/

Special Counsel Robert Mueller asked a federal judge Tuesday to reject the four-decade-old speedy trial law in the case against 13 Russians and three Russian companies and has asked for an indefinite delay to the Russian collusion trial.

It is the second time Mueller tried to delay the trial. Judge Dabney L. Friedrich, a Trump appointee, rejected the earlier request without comment and ordered the case to go forward

One of the Russian companies — Concord Management and Consulting — entered the U.S., hired American lawyers, and demanded a speedy trial. The Speedy Trial Act is a 44-year old federal law that dictates that a federal criminal case must begin within 70 days from the date of the indictment.

The “complexity” of the case warrants excluding the speedy trial law and delaying the trial, Mueller argued in Tuesday’s court filing.

Former federal prosecutor and National Review Contributing Editor Andrew C. McCarthy told TheDCNF it was too late for Mueller to claim that the complexity of the case warranted a delay.

“Speedy trial rights belong to the defendant, and if the defendant pushes for a trial within the 70 days, the government has little cause to complain,” McCarthy said. “If the case was too complex, the government had the option of holding off on seeking an indictment until it was ready to proceed to trial. When a prosecutor files an indictment, it is tantamount to saying, ‘We are ready to go.'”

On May 9, Eric A. Dubelier, a partner with Reed Smith, a prestigious American law firm that represents Concord, entered a not guilty plea in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. He also repeated his client’s interest for a speedy trial.

Dubelier has repeatedly notified the court he would insist on using “discovery” to review the “evidence” the special counsel had accumulated about their charge of Russian collusion. His use of discovery would compel Mueller to turn over the U.S. intelligence about Russian activities.

In response, Mueller informed the court on May 16 his office was prepared to enter two terabytes of Russian social media into the record, thereby flooding the docket with a huge amount of evidence, all of it in Russian . The volume could fill 3,000 CD-ROM discs.

classic Mueller tactic to overwhelm defendants

It’s “inappropriate for a prosecutor to manufacture complexity and then contend that things are too complex,” McCarthy told TheDCNF. “If a prosecutor is disclosing mountains of foreign language materials without an understanding or explanation of their relevance to the case, that is a delaying tactic and an attempt to chew up the defendant’s resources.”

Friedrich has yet to rule on Mueller’s request for a delay

How did the grand jury have evidence for an indictment if these documents were in Russian, 3,000 CD-ROMS worth.

Tell the prosecution to comply with Brady, quit playing games.

How is a jury supposed to deal with evidence in Russian?

it is a crappy tactic by Mueller.

one of the FBI agents assigned to the Mueller team is fluent in Russian. The presentation to the grand jury could have been verbal (in English).

I have no idea how it would work in a trial.

I would like the judge to move forward w a speedy trial, and tell Mueller the only evidence he can introduce is evidence in English.

might be a big day today

https://www.cnn.com/2018/05/23...f-8-nunes/index.html

The Trump administration will now brief a bipartisan group of lawmakers in addition to two key House Republicans on a confidential intelligence source in the Russia investigation, after initially scheduling a briefing only for the pair of GOP congressmen.

The Justice Department announced Wednesday evening that it will hold back-to-back meetings on Thursday, one for House Intelligence Chairman Devin Nunes and Oversight Chair Trey Gowdy and another immediately after for the bipartisan "Gang of Eight" and Gowdy.

The schedule change occurred following sharp criticism from Democrats that the White House was politicizing intelligence by initially offering the briefing only to Republicans. The White House had announced shortly before the bipartisan meeting was scheduled that they were working on holding a briefing for the "Gang of Eight" before the Memorial Day recess

Nunes and Gowdy are scheduled to meet at noon with White House chief of staff John Kelly, Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, FBI Director Chris Wray and Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats

Then at 2 p.m., the Gang of Eight, plus Gowdy, will meet with the same administration officials.

Gang of eight: McConnell, Schumer, Burr, Warner, Ryan, Pelosi, Nunes and Schiff

Rep. Joaquin Castro, a Democratic member of the House Intelligence Committee, told CNN he confronted Nunes on the floor and told him Democrats wanted to attend the briefing. Castro said Nunes' response was "I'm not going to play that game."

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Some months ago, Nunes got tired of Adam Schiff's obstruction of the House Intel Comm from doing any real look into what had happened. Nunes starting meeting w a group of REPs only. Things took off after that.

At this point, I would be happy to see this briefing put on national tv. So tired of the deep state hiding behind "national security".

The real threat to national security is the ongoing coup attempt to overturn the 2016 election.

Nunes and Gowdy wouldn't Leak so they send in the "Gang of 8" to guarantee a leak to frame the debate.

Frim Jonathan Turley

There is an old joke among criminal defense attorneys that “justice delayed is justice,’ a twist of the old adage that “justice delayed is justice denied.” The joke reflects that fact that the defense almost always benefits from the passage of time and it is the prosecution that often pushes for earlier trial debates to deny the defense enough time to absorb and address evidence. That is not the case with Special Counsel Robert Mueller who has asked federalJudge Dabney L. Friedrich to deny a speedy trial motion and delay any trial of 13 Russians and three Russian companies for efforts to influence the 2016 election. The effort reflects problems in Mueller’s matinee case, including the allegation that he has charged a company that did not exist at the time of the alleged offenses.




Mueller previously tried to delay the trial despite the demand of Concord Management and Consulting for a speedy trial within 70 days of the indictment. That is a right that protects the defendant and is meant to be honored by the court under The Speedy Trial Act absent a waiver or exceptional circumstances. Often defendants waive the time period as a matter of course to allow more time to develop a case. Here it is the prosecution that appears desperate for more time.

One of the Russian companies — Concord Management and Consulting — entered the U.S., hired American lawyers, and demanded a speedy trial. The Speedy Trial Act is a 44-year old federal law that dictates that a federal criminal case must begin within 70 days from the date of the indictment.

Mueller continuance motion — available here — cited the complexity of the case and the voluminous record as the basis for the delay. He argues that “This case . . . warrants a continuance and exclusion of time to accommodate the voluminous discovery at issue and to allow sufficient time for the Court to resolve certain outstanding procedural issues unique to discovery in this case.” Mueller notes that the court has the authority to delay the trial “if ‘the ends of justice served by taking such action outweigh the best interest of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial.’”

The speed of the defense, particularly Eric A. Dubelier, a partner with Reed Smith, seems to have take Mueller’s people by some surprise. The defense is demanding to see evidence which Mueller has been keeping closely held in his office. It could be the first serious disclosure of the cards in Mueller’s hand for defendants and potential targets. Thus far the defense is doing an excellent job in setting Mueller’s team back on its heels.

As a general rule, the desire of the defense for a speedy trial should carry the day. The prosecutors control when to issue an indictment. That triggers the Act and the clock ticking. The danger for Mueller is that, if he is unwilling to show the evidence or go to trial, he could face the embarrassing prospect of pulling the indictment. Conversely, if he is not ready, his matinee case could prove a flop in whole or in part with acquittals or hung juries.

As Dr. Seuss once asked, “How did it get so late so soon?”

Link

It occurs to me that it is not the trial Mueller wishes to delay but the discovery. The prosecutor is required to turnover to defendants all the information it has gathered, evidentiary or not, exculpatory and all. Some of this stuff, assuming it actually exists, may show no crimes at all, or may reveal this indictment was grandstanding, etc.

The indictment of the Russians was 16 Feb 2018

Speedy trial law requires a federal criminal case must begin within 70 days from the date of the indictment.

We are already beyond 70 days

So what does "must begin" mean ? Actually presenting evidence? Don't know if this will be a judge or jury trial.

Quick question for James Clapper, James Comey, Rod Rosenstein, and any other member of that cabal (like former President Obama).

Assuming you are still clinging to the story that Clinton lost the 2016 election because The Russians hacked the DNC server; how can you be so sure when the FBI was not allowed to forensically examine the server?

It appears the “Russians (probably colluding with the Trump election committee) stole the election” mantra is based on the report of a third party company? Is that true?

quote:

Originally posted by sdy:
The indictment of the Russians was 16 Feb 2018

Speedy trial law requires a federal criminal case must begin within 70 days from the date of the indictment.

We are already beyond 70 days

So what does "must begin" mean ? Actually presenting evidence? Don't know if this will be a judge or jury trial.

From the U.S. Attorneys Manual:

quote:

The information or indictment must be filed within 30 days from the date of arrest or service of the summons. 18 U.S.C. § 3161(b). Trial must commence within 70 days from the date the information or indictment was filed, or from the date the defendant appears before an officer of the court in which the charge is pending, whichever is later. 18 U.S.C. § 3161(c)(1).

Moreover, in order to ensure that defendants are not rushed to trial without an adequate opportunity to prepare, Congress amended the Act in 1979 to provide a minimum time period during which trial may not commence. Speedy Trial Act Amendments of 1979, Pub. L. No. 96-43, Section 3, 93 Stat. 327. Thus, the Act provides that trial may not begin less than 30 days from the date the defendant first appears in court, unless the defendant agrees in writing to an earlier date. 18 U.S.C. § 3161(c)(2). In United States v. Rojas-Contreras, 474 U.S. 231 (1985), the Supreme Court held that this 30-day trial preparation period is not restarted upon the filing of a substantially similar superseding indictment.

Link