Illinois Matmen Forums Illinois Matmen Forums

Go Back   Illinois Matmen Forums > Non-Wrestling > Non-Wrestling Talk

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #321  
Old 12-14-2019
MAL MAL is offline
Olympian
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 2,486
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flynmaggot View Post
Sorry but the fudged Fisa request against one guy doesn't change all the other facts. Keep clinging to that one morsel because it is all you got. There was plenty of evidence to investigate the Trump campaign's ties to Russias. Everyone on his staff and Trump lying about meetings, calls, etc. really didn't help their case. Plus you and all your panty wringing buddies are assuming these agents were bias toward the Dems. Maybe they just thought Carter Page was d bag and they wanted to pull a Jack Bauer on him. Either way it doesn't matter because it had ZERO bearing on the rest of the evidence. Carter Page's surveillance contributed nothing. So you are just engaging in deflection which doesn't change the key findings:

THE FBI DETERMINED THAT THE RUSSIA INVESTIGATION'S ORIGINS WERE LEGITIMATE AND NOT ORIGINATED BY THE STEELE DOSSIER.

Trump's FBI. Trump's newly appointed FBI director.

Let's let the IG investigate Barr now. Congress give them the power to do so. The FBI is dying to investigate the partisan sycophantic clown.
Horowitz was walking a thin line with the truth. He can claim the investigations origins were lawful because the first FISA application was filed with out the Steele Dossier and It did not contain the doctored email. That Fisa Warrant was denied. 98% of all FISA warrants are approved because of the very low standard of evidence needed to obtain a warrant.

Carter Page was working for the CIA. The FBI requested confirmation from the CIA that Page was in fact working for them. When the CIA confirmed that he was a source, that would have ended the FISA application right then and there. Everything that happened after the FBI change the content of the email to say that Page was not a source for the CIA was illegal.

There were 17 serious errors and omissions found...all 17 were hurtful to the Trump campaign.

Omitted information from another U.S. government agency detailing its prior relationship with Page, including that Page had been approved as an operational contact for the other agency from 2008 to 2013, and that Page had provided information to the other agency concerning his prior contacts with certain Russian intelligence officers, one of which overlapped with facts asserted in the FISA application;

Included a source characterization statement asserting that Steele’s prior reporting had been “corroborated and used in criminal proceedings,” which overstated the significance of Steele’s past reporting and was not approved by Steele’s FBI handling agent, as required by the Woods Procedures;

Omitted information relevant to the reliability of Person 1, a key Steele sub-source (who, as previously noted, was attributed with providing the information in Report 95 and some of the information in Reports 80 and 102 relied upon in the application), namely that (1) Steele himself told members of the Crossfire Hurricane team that Person 1 was a “boaster” and an “egoist” and “may engage in some embellishment” and (2) [redacted]

Asserted that the FBI had assessed that Steele did not directly provide to the press information in the September 23 Yahoo News article, based on the premise that Steele had told the FBI that he only shared his election-related research with the FBI and [Fusion GPS Founder Glenn] Simpson; this premise was factually incorrect (Steele had provided direct information to Yahoo News) and also contradicted by documentation in the Woods File-Steele had told the FBI that he also gave his information to the State Department;

Omitted Papadopoulos’s statements to an FBI CHS in September 2016 denying that anyone associated with the Trump campaign was collaborating with Russia or with outside groups like WikiLeaks in the release of emails;

Omitted Page’s statements to an FBI CHS [Confidential Human Source] in August 2016 that Page had “literally never met” or “said one word to” Paul Manafort and that Manafort had not responded to any of Page’s emails; if true, those statements were in tension with claims in Steele’s Report 95 that Page was participating in a “conspiracy” with Russia by acting as an intermediary for Manafort on behalf of the Trump campaign; and

Selectively included Page’s statements to an FBI CHS in October 2016 that the FBI believed supported its theory that Page was an agent of Russia but omitted other statements Page made, including denying having met with Sechin and Divyekin, or even knowing who Divyekin was
; if true, those statements contradicted the claims in Steele’s Report 94 that Page had met secretly with Sechin and Divyekin about future cooperation with Russia and shared derogatory information about candidate Clinton.

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 had no 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;

Omitted Page’s prior relationship with another U.S. government agency, despite being reminded by the other agency in June 2017, prior to the filing of the final renewal application, about Page’s past status with that other agency; instead of including this information in the final renewal application, the FBI OGC [Office of the General Counsel] Attorney altered an email from the other agency so that the email stated that Page was “not a source” for the other agency, which the FBI affiant relied upon in signing the final renewal application;

Omitted information provided by persons with direct knowledge of Steele’s work-related performance in a prior position about Steele’s professional judgment, including statements that Steele had held a “moderately senior” position (not “high-ranking” as noted in the applications), had no history of reporting in bad faith but demonstrated “poor judgment,” “pursued people with political risk but no intelligence value,” “didn’t always exercise great judgment,” and it was “not clear what he would have done to validate” his reporting;

Omitted information from Department attorney Bruce Ohr about Steele and his election reporting, including that (1) Steele’s reporting was going to Clinton’s presidential campaign and others, (2) Simpson was paying Steele to discuss his reporting with the media, and (3) Steele was “desperate that Donald Trump not get elected and was passionate about him not being the U.S. President”;

Failed to update the description of Steele after information became known to the Crossfire Hurricane team, not only from Ohr but from others, that provided greater clarity on the political origins and connections of Steele’s reporting, including that Simpson was hired by someone associated with the Democratic Party and/or the DNC;

Failed to correct the assertion in the first FISA application that the FBI did not believe that Steele directly provided information to the reporter who wrote the September 23 Yahoo News article, even though there was no information in the Woods File to support this claim and even after certain FBI officials involved in Crossfire Hurricane learned in 2017, before the third renewal application, of an admission that Steele made in a court filing about his interactions with the news media in the late summer and early fall of 2016;

Omitted the finding from a formal FBI source validation report that Steele was suitable for continued operation but that his past contributions to the FBI’s criminal program had been “minimally corroborated,” and instead continued to assert in the source characterization statement that Steele’s prior reporting had been “corroborated and used in criminal proceedings”;

Omitted Papadopoulos’s statements to an FBI CHS in late October 2016 (after the first application was filed) denying that the Trump campaign was involved in the circumstances of the DNC email hack;

Omitted Joseph Mifsud’s denials to the FBI that he supplied Papadopoulos with the information Papadopoulos shared with the FFG (suggesting that the campaign received an offer or suggestion of assistance from Russia); and

Omitted evidence indicating that Page played no role in the Republican platform change on Russia’s annexation of Ukraine as alleged in Steele Report 95, which was inconsistent with a factual assertion relied upon to support probable cause in all four FISA applications.
Reply With Quote
  #322  
Old 12-14-2019
drewfustmcfirefly's Avatar
drewfustmcfirefly drewfustmcfirefly is offline
Newbie
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: Lake in the Hills, IL
Posts: 9
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChiefIllini1 View Post
As Sergeant at Arms of the ILLINOISMatmen House, I have been asked by the Speaker to conduct a Roll Call of votes on the issue of the Articles of Impeachment in the matter of ILLINOISMatmen House of Representatives versus President Donald J. Trump.

All those in favor of Impeachment signify by "Aye," all those opposed, say "Nay."

Nay Nay Nay Nay. Why is this on a wrestling blog??!!
Reply With Quote
  #323  
Old 12-14-2019
MAL MAL is offline
Olympian
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 2,486
Quote:
Originally Posted by drewfustmcfirefly View Post
Nay Nay Nay Nay. Why is this on a wrestling blog??!!
Wrestling talk is not allowed in the Non-Wrestling forum.
Reply With Quote
  #324  
Old 12-14-2019
Fighting Scot Fighting Scot is offline
Newbie
 
Join Date: Nov 2019
Posts: 10
I vote yes for impeachment. Even though an impeachment conviction is out of the question in the U.S. Senate, the effort is worthwhile for these reasons:
1. It memorializes Donald Trump’s behavior and actions. The record will be there for the ages.
2. It underscores the courage of Democrats. Instead of playing it safe to garner a few more votes, they chose to do what was right for the nation. They did not appease. They did not shy away. They did not show cowardice, even though their actions will likely exact a great electoral cost. Some things matter more than winning an election. (The Trumpist-Republican party, by the way, wants to keep Democrats in perpetual fear of action…If you protest, you will anger the Trump base and lose the election…If you impeach, you will anger the Trump base and lose the election…If you don’t shut up, you will anger the Trump base and lose the election. Following this line of reason, Democrats will become permanently frozen, frightened to do anything that might raise the ire of Trumpists. It’s like the wolf telling its prey that all will go well, so long as it doesn’t resist).
3. The impeachment process stripped away the veneer of the Trumpist-Republican party. It has become crystal clear that we can expect nothing but furious support for Donald Trump from virtually everyone in his party. No words or evidence will sway them to cross the president, no matter how eloquent, reasoned, or compelling. Trump will always be right in their eyes. There must be absolutely no illusion about that.
4. The impeachment process makes clear the Trumpist-Republican endgame—the permanent marginalization of the Democratic Party. In other words, Democrats DO NOT get to have their Supreme Court nominees considered. Democrats DO NOT get congressional subpoena powers—at least when it comes to infringing on Republican leadership. Democrats DO NOT get to have their votes carry the same weight as Republican votes (through gerrymandering and voter restriction efforts). The marginalization campaign is out in the open and in full display.
5. The impeachment process is worthwhile because it puts the Democrats’ backs against the wall. Here is what I mean:
A. When the Senate acquits Donald Trump, it will bring great joy and gloating among Trumpist-Republicans. The feeling among Democrats will be despair—but more importantly—absolute fear. This existential terror of an encroaching American autocracy will be useful going into the 2020 election. Nothing will make Democrats fight harder than the threat of their very existence.
B. It will hopefully refocus Democrats on the right pathway to win in the future. That pathway DOES NOT involve convincing the Trump base to switch sides. The impeachment process has shown just how hardened and devoted that block is. Instead there needs to be a concentrated effort to get voters who did not show up in 2016 out to the polls. Here is a quick example: In 2016, Donald Trump received roughly the same number of votes that Mit Romney did in Wisconsin in 2012. Howevever, 238,000 fewer Democratic votes were cast in the 2016 presidential election. If votes like those can be reclaimed, then Democrats have a chance. All effort should be focused on getting that non-voting block to show up. This will be difficult, of course, because the Trumpist-Republican propaganda machine/foreign influence campaign will be dialed up to 11. Maybe there should be an ad campaign focused on ending the drama of the Trump presidency once and for all. Vote to end the drama!—that might be a winning campaign slogan.
C. Democrats should consider a great blue migration to offset the polarization of the nation. Republican lawmakers in Texas, Florida, or North Carolina, for instance, might not be so hard-right if there were more Democrats moving into their districts. That’s one way to restore balance and end the destructive viewpoint that half the nation is “the enemy of the people.”
Reply With Quote
  #325  
Old 12-14-2019
Flynmaggot Flynmaggot is offline
Olympian
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 1,309
Quote:
Originally Posted by MAL View Post
This article is a year old...it mirrors the last article that you posted. It claims that there are verified allegations from the Steele Dossier right before it starts bullet pointing allegations that have not been proven. Indicting Russians that will never see the inside of a court room in the United States doesn't prove anything. It has never been proven that Guccifer 2.0 was Russian...It was never proven that Wikileaks was fed information by Russians...there is no proven link between the Trump campaign and Wikileaks...it may be possible that some of this could be true, but it is highly unlikely because Steel himself said that he could not verify anything in his dossier, and his primary source for the dossier said that it is all BS. If there is anything true in it, it is purely by accident. The IG report confirms that it is BS.
Yeah I guess the age of my articles just demonstrate how long you have been out of touch. Never proven that there is a link between the Trump campaign and wikileaks? Are you serious right now? Trump's CAMPAIGN manager met with Assange himself. Oh all the lovely Trump campaign ties and to Russian. There are so many:

https://themoscowproject.org/explain...ed-operatives/
Reply With Quote
  #326  
Old 12-14-2019
Flynmaggot Flynmaggot is offline
Olympian
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 1,309
Quote:
Originally Posted by MAL View Post
Horowitz was walking a thin line with the truth. He can claim the investigations origins were lawful because the first FISA application was filed with out the Steele Dossier and It did not contain the doctored email. That Fisa Warrant was denied. 98% of all FISA warrants are approved because of the very low standard of evidence needed to obtain a warrant.

Carter Page was working for the CIA. The FBI requested confirmation from the CIA that Page was in fact working for them. When the CIA confirmed that he was a source, that would have ended the FISA application right then and there. Everything that happened after the FBI change the content of the email to say that Page was not a source for the CIA was illegal.

There were 17 serious errors and omissions found...all 17 were hurtful to the Trump campaign.

Omitted information from another U.S. government agency detailing its prior relationship with Page, including that Page had been approved as an operational contact for the other agency from 2008 to 2013, and that Page had provided information to the other agency concerning his prior contacts with certain Russian intelligence officers, one of which overlapped with facts asserted in the FISA application;

Included a source characterization statement asserting that Steele’s prior reporting had been “corroborated and used in criminal proceedings,” which overstated the significance of Steele’s past reporting and was not approved by Steele’s FBI handling agent, as required by the Woods Procedures;

Omitted information relevant to the reliability of Person 1, a key Steele sub-source (who, as previously noted, was attributed with providing the information in Report 95 and some of the information in Reports 80 and 102 relied upon in the application), namely that (1) Steele himself told members of the Crossfire Hurricane team that Person 1 was a “boaster” and an “egoist” and “may engage in some embellishment” and (2) [redacted]

Asserted that the FBI had assessed that Steele did not directly provide to the press information in the September 23 Yahoo News article, based on the premise that Steele had told the FBI that he only shared his election-related research with the FBI and [Fusion GPS Founder Glenn] Simpson; this premise was factually incorrect (Steele had provided direct information to Yahoo News) and also contradicted by documentation in the Woods File-Steele had told the FBI that he also gave his information to the State Department;

Omitted Papadopoulos’s statements to an FBI CHS in September 2016 denying that anyone associated with the Trump campaign was collaborating with Russia or with outside groups like WikiLeaks in the release of emails;

Omitted Page’s statements to an FBI CHS [Confidential Human Source] in August 2016 that Page had “literally never met” or “said one word to” Paul Manafort and that Manafort had not responded to any of Page’s emails; if true, those statements were in tension with claims in Steele’s Report 95 that Page was participating in a “conspiracy” with Russia by acting as an intermediary for Manafort on behalf of the Trump campaign; and

Selectively included Page’s statements to an FBI CHS in October 2016 that the FBI believed supported its theory that Page was an agent of Russia but omitted other statements Page made, including denying having met with Sechin and Divyekin, or even knowing who Divyekin was
; if true, those statements contradicted the claims in Steele’s Report 94 that Page had met secretly with Sechin and Divyekin about future cooperation with Russia and shared derogatory information about candidate Clinton.

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 had no 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;

Omitted Page’s prior relationship with another U.S. government agency, despite being reminded by the other agency in June 2017, prior to the filing of the final renewal application, about Page’s past status with that other agency; instead of including this information in the final renewal application, the FBI OGC [Office of the General Counsel] Attorney altered an email from the other agency so that the email stated that Page was “not a source” for the other agency, which the FBI affiant relied upon in signing the final renewal application;

Omitted information provided by persons with direct knowledge of Steele’s work-related performance in a prior position about Steele’s professional judgment, including statements that Steele had held a “moderately senior” position (not “high-ranking” as noted in the applications), had no history of reporting in bad faith but demonstrated “poor judgment,” “pursued people with political risk but no intelligence value,” “didn’t always exercise great judgment,” and it was “not clear what he would have done to validate” his reporting;

Omitted information from Department attorney Bruce Ohr about Steele and his election reporting, including that (1) Steele’s reporting was going to Clinton’s presidential campaign and others, (2) Simpson was paying Steele to discuss his reporting with the media, and (3) Steele was “desperate that Donald Trump not get elected and was passionate about him not being the U.S. President”;

Failed to update the description of Steele after information became known to the Crossfire Hurricane team, not only from Ohr but from others, that provided greater clarity on the political origins and connections of Steele’s reporting, including that Simpson was hired by someone associated with the Democratic Party and/or the DNC;

Failed to correct the assertion in the first FISA application that the FBI did not believe that Steele directly provided information to the reporter who wrote the September 23 Yahoo News article, even though there was no information in the Woods File to support this claim and even after certain FBI officials involved in Crossfire Hurricane learned in 2017, before the third renewal application, of an admission that Steele made in a court filing about his interactions with the news media in the late summer and early fall of 2016;

Omitted the finding from a formal FBI source validation report that Steele was suitable for continued operation but that his past contributions to the FBI’s criminal program had been “minimally corroborated,” and instead continued to assert in the source characterization statement that Steele’s prior reporting had been “corroborated and used in criminal proceedings”;

Omitted Papadopoulos’s statements to an FBI CHS in late October 2016 (after the first application was filed) denying that the Trump campaign was involved in the circumstances of the DNC email hack;

Omitted Joseph Mifsud’s denials to the FBI that he supplied Papadopoulos with the information Papadopoulos shared with the FFG (suggesting that the campaign received an offer or suggestion of assistance from Russia); and

Omitted evidence indicating that Page played no role in the Republican platform change on Russia’s annexation of Ukraine as alleged in Steele Report 95, which was inconsistent with a factual assertion relied upon to support probable cause in all four FISA applications.
Yes 17 out of several hundred damning pieces of evidence. Cling to your morsels while the overwhelming evidence proves there was no bias according to all the Trump appointees. All the Trump appointees. All of them. Try to deflect and post weak irrelevant points that had little to no bearing to overarching results of the investigation. It is a lame tactic does nothing to change the results.

You know what this report proved more than anything else? That Trump is a crazy conspiracy theorist. He makes crazy unproven statements all the time. Every day of his Presidency. Continuous crazy proclamations that keep getting proven as wrong time and time again. Over and over. Every single day.

Any given week of the Trump admin would have been the end of Obama. It would have been non-stop 24/7 news broadcasts from Fox. But we accept such incompetence from Trump that no one cares anymore. We all accept now that he is just a lunatic spouting gibberish everyday.

The FBI didn't buy his lying gibberish. His AG does because he is a diehard partisan hack.

You buying it just makes you look like a buffoon. Don't be a buffoon
Reply With Quote
  #327  
Old 12-14-2019
oldpioneer oldpioneer is offline
Olympian
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 3,103
It is all Hillary and Obama’s fault! Benghazi!
__________________
Always support your local wrestling tournament concession stands!!!
Reply With Quote
  #328  
Old 12-14-2019
Flynmaggot Flynmaggot is offline
Olympian
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 1,309
Quote:
Originally Posted by MAL View Post
Nobody from the Trump campaign has been convicted of anything related to collusion with Russia.
That is because collusion is not a crime. Manafort colluded with the Russians. That couldn't be more clear.
Reply With Quote
  #329  
Old 12-14-2019
Flynmaggot Flynmaggot is offline
Olympian
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 1,309
Quote:
Originally Posted by oldpioneer View Post
It is all Hillary and Obama’s fault! Benghazi!
The whiny baby little righties complain about secret meetings about the Impeachment hearings (that they were invited to btw) and forget that they met how many dozens of times about the BS Benghazi hearings? How much money did they spend on that bogus politically motivated investigation? Way more hearings and way more money than this impeachment inquiry. They cleared Hillary like what? A dozen times? Oh and Hillary had the balls to meet with Congress. Something Trump and his lawyers are absolutely terrified of. Such hypocrites.
Reply With Quote
  #330  
Old 12-14-2019
Flynmaggot Flynmaggot is offline
Olympian
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 1,309
Quote:
Originally Posted by MAL View Post
Nobody from the Trump campaign has been convicted of anything related to collusion with Russia.
Sorry missed all your red ink.

Trump lifts Russian sanctions:

/www.theguardian.com/world/2019/jan/27/us-lifts-sanctions-oleg-deripaska-russia

Trump not even tougher on Russia than the last President. Obama called them merely a "regional" power. Trump kisses Putin's *** non stop:

https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-m...ssia-barack-o/
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:23 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.