[Newsbot]

Title: FBI was justified in probing Trump-Russia, fed watchdog says
Category: Uncle Sam
Posted By: BeaverFever
Date: 2019-12-10 02:27:55

[BeaverFever]

Once again telling us what we already know

[DrCaleb]

BeaverFever BeaverFever:

Once again telling us what we already know

Telling you what you wanted to hear, you mean.

I prefer to keep an open mind.

[BeaverFever]

Huh?

You don’t think the FBI is as justified in investigating Trump? Trump’s own witch-hunt of the incident vindicated them and dismissed his crackpot accusations.

Which we all knew was the truth

[DrCaleb]

BeaverFever BeaverFever:

Huh?

You don’t think the FBI is as justified in investigating Trump? Trump’s own witch-hunt of the incident vindicated them and dismissed his crackpot accusations.

Which we all knew was the truth

Of course, there should have been an investigation. But that doesn't mean the investigation was above board, not politically motivated or done from malice.

I would prefer to keep an open mind with respect to those things, and let someone who has access to the facts make a determination. Now we know for sure that Obama didn't direct the FBI to look into his rival, even if mistakes were made along the way. Those mistakes can now be attributed to being human, not because of political interference.

[PluggyRug]

BeaverFever BeaverFever:

Once again telling us what we already know

Did you know this.....


Bill Barr Indicts 8 For Illegally Funneling Foreign Money To Adam Schiff And Multiple Dem Senators

https://newsthud.com/bill-barr-indicts- ... -senators/

[DrCaleb]

Pluggy, why do you post crap like that, when you know we will check it?

A story that big, yet some unknown right wing website is the only one reporting it?

[BartSimpson]

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

ROTFL

Pluggy, why do you post crap like that, when you know we will check it?

A story that big, yet some unknown right wing website is the only one reporting it?

The right wing website is reporting exactly what the US Department of Justice announced. If they're the only ones reporting it then you need to ask why all the rest of the media are ignoring the story.

https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/californ ... ntribution

$1:

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Tuesday, December 3, 2019

California CEO and Seven Others Charged in Multi-Million Dollar Conduit Campaign Contribution Case

Earlier today, an indictment was unsealed against the CEO of an online payment processing company, and seven others, charging them with conspiring to make and conceal conduit and excessive campaign contributions, and related offenses, during the U.S. presidential election in 2016 and thereafter.

Assistant Attorney General Brian A. Benczkowski of the Justice Department’s Criminal Division and Assistant Director in Charge Timothy R. Slater of the FBI’s Washington Field Office made the announcement.

A federal grand jury in the District of Columbia indicted Ahmad “Andy” Khawaja, 48, of Los Angeles, California, on Nov. 7, 2019, along with George Nader, Roy Boulos, Rudy Dekermenjian, Mohammad “Moe” Diab, Rani El-Saadi, Stevan Hill and Thayne Whipple. The 53 count indictment charges Khawaja with two counts of conspiracy, three counts of making conduit contributions, three counts of causing excessive contributions, 13 counts of making false statements, 13 counts of causing false records to be filed, and one count of obstruction of a federal grand jury investigation. Nader is charged with conspiring with Khawaja to make conduit campaign contributions, and related offenses. Boulos, Dekermenjian, Diab, El-Saadi, Hill, and Whipple are charged with conspiring with Khawaja and each other to make conduit campaign contributions and conceal excessive contributions, and related offenses.

According to the indictment, from March 2016 through January 2017, Khawaja conspired with Nader to conceal the source of more than $3.5 million in campaign contributions, directed to political committees associated with a candidate for President of the United States in the 2016 election. By design, these contributions appeared to be in the names of Khawaja, his wife, and his company. In reality, they allegedly were funded by Nader. Khawaja and Nader allegedly made these contributions in an effort to gain influence with high-level political figures, including the candidate. As Khawaja and Nader arranged these payments, Nader allegedly reported to an official from a foreign government about his efforts to gain influence.

The indictment also alleges that, from March 2016 through 2018, Khawaja conspired with Boulos, Dekermenjian, Diab, El-Saadi, Hill, and Whipple to conceal Khawaja’s excessive contributions, which totaled more than $1.8 million, to various political committees. Among other things, these contributions allegedly allowed Khawaja to host a private fundraiser for a presidential candidate in 2016 and a private fundraising dinner for an elected official in 2018.

The indictment further alleges that, from June 2019 through July 2019, Khawaja obstructed a grand jury investigation of this matter in the District of Columbia. Knowing that a witness had been called to testify before the grand jury, Khawaja allegedly provided that witness with false information about Nader and his connection to Khawaja’s company. Boulos, Diab, Hill, and Whipple also are charged with obstructing the grand jury’s investigation by lying to the FBI.

Currently, Nader is in federal custody on other charges.

An indictment is not a finding of guilt. It merely alleges that crimes have been committed. A defendant is presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

The FBI’s Washington Field Office is investigating the case and Deputy Chief John D. Keller and Trial Attorneys James C. Mann and Michael J. Romano of the Criminal Division’s Public Integrity Section are prosecuting the case.

[Thanos]

Christopher Wray, Trump's own appointee to lead the FBI, said the investigation was fair and above-board and that he has no doubt about the integrity of the auditors and reviewers who made that determination. Not that this will matter to the MAGAs. At this stage Jesus himself could appear and call Trump a lying criminal and the cultists would still follow that evil asshole on the road that leads straight to hell.

[BartSimpson]

Bill Barr was on MSNBC earlier and this analysis/commentary includes a transcript of an MSNBC interview.

$1:

Ok, if you’re still sitting around worrying that Attorney General William Barr has gone all wobbly – even after yesterday’s pointed statements by he and U.S. Attorney John Durham in response to the IG Report – then I think I may have found your cure. Earlier today, MSNBC aired an interview involving one of their hack reporters and Attorney General Barr, and boy, is it epic. Mr. Barr is making no bones about his continued consistent views on what he bluntly still refers to as the “spying” on the Trump Campaign by the Obama FBI, and is not backing off even a little bit from his assessment of the contents of the IG Report.

Below is a clip of the first 3:17 of the interview, followed by a transcript. Watch and/or read, and if you don’t feel better after doing that, then I’m afraid there is nothing more I can do to help you.

Benny ✔ @bennyjohnson AG Barr on the IG Report and FISA Abuse

Embedded video 1,109 11:48 AM - Dec 10, 2019 Twitter Ads info and privacy 741 people are talking about this

Now, the Transcript, lovingly and laboriously prepared by we here at the Campaign Update for our audience made up mostly of voracious readers:

MSNBC Hack: Why do you say the FBI opened the investigation on the Trump Campaign on the “thinnest of suspicions?”

Barr: Well, I’m glad to get into the issue of predication, but let me just start out by saying that I think you have to put this in context. I think the heart of the IG’s report really focused on how the investigation was conducted once it got going, and that is especially the very serious abuses of FISA that occurred, much of which has in my view not been accurately reported by the press over the last day.

But, in one area I do disagree with the IG, and that was whether there was sufficient predication to open a full-blown counterintelligence investigation, specifically using the techniques that they did to collect intelligence about the Trump Campaign.

MSNBC Hack: W, w, well as a policy matter, why not open an investigation on a thin pretext? [Seriously???] I guess on the one hand you could say that it’s a presidential campaign, it’s very sensitive, you need better evidence. On the other hand, you could say, it’s a presidential campaign, we have to be very careful, it’s a threat to our political process.

Barr: I think probably from a civil liberties standpoint [Which liberals USED to be concerned about – remember?] the greatest danger to our free system is that the incumbent government use the apparatus of the state – principally the law enforcement agencies and the intelligence agencies – both to spy [!] on political opponents, but also to use them in a way that could affect the outcome of the election.

As far as I’m aware, this is the first time in our history that this has been done to a presidential campaign. The use of these counterintelligence techniques against a presidential campaign. And we have to remember, in today’s world, presidential campaigns are frequently in contact with foreign persons, and indeed, in most campaigns there are signs of illegal foreign money coming in [!!!].

And we don’t automatically assume that the campaigns are nefarious and traitors and acting in league with foreign powers. There has to be some basis before we use these very potent powers in our core first amendment activity. And here, I felt this was very flimsy.

Basically, I think the Department has a “rule of reason” which is, at the end of the day, what you’re relying on – sufficiently powerful to justify the techniques you’re using. And the question there is, how strong is the evidence? How sensitive is the activity you’re looking at? And what are the alternatives?

I think when you step back here and say, what was this all based on?, it’s not sufficient.

Remember, there was and never has been any evidence of “collusion.” And yet, this campaign, and the President’s Administration has been dominated by this investigation into what turns out to be completely baseless.

[End]

Things to note in this:

Barr’s intentional and pointed use of the word “spy” to describe what the Coup Cabal did to the Trump Campaign. He knows this will cause Democrats and the media to fry their own brains. Epic.

Barr’s unqualified statement that “there was and never has been ANY evidence of ‘collusion.'” That tells you that he – and presumably also Durham – simply do not accept that there was ANY premise at all for operation “Crossfire Hurricane” to begin in the first place, nor was there ANY reason for the appointment of a special counsel, much less a two-year-long investigation by Mueller. That is bad, bad news for not just Comey, Strzok, Page and McCabe, but also for Mueller and Rosenstein, who made the decision to appoint Mueller based on…nothing.

Also very interesting is this statement’s phrasing: “… the greatest danger to our free system is that the incumbent government use the apparatus of the state…”. The use of the words “incumbent government” rather than the more limited “Department of Justice,” or the even more limited “FBI” is very, very interesting, and implies that Barr and Durham are not limiting their investigation to those outside of the Obama White House, but may well be looking inside it as well. Boom, if so.

Then there’s the seemingly gratuitous noting of the fact that “…in most campaigns there are signs of illegal foreign money coming in.” Think about that one: Which two recent campaigns have been most prominent in having allegations of benefiting from foreign money? If you said “the Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton Campaigns,” you win the prize.

William Barr is a man with a well-earned history of choosing the words he uses carefully and with intent. He doesn’t just shoot his mouth off in public without giving a lot of forethought to exactly what the message is that he wants to convey.

There are a lot of very powerful messages directed at the bad actors from the Obama years in that short three-minute clip.

Those messages are also directed at those of you who still doubt Mr. Barr’s real intentions here. Are you listening?

That is all.

[PluggyRug]

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

ROTFL

Pluggy, why do you post crap like that, when you know we will check it?

A story that big, yet some unknown right wing website is the only one reporting it?

So have you checked it?

[DrCaleb]

PluggyRug PluggyRug:

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

ROTFL

Pluggy, why do you post crap like that, when you know we will check it?

A story that big, yet some unknown right wing website is the only one reporting it?

So have you checked it?

I did a search, and found nothing. Sill don't find mainstream stories for it. Bart has updated my search however.

[BartSimpson]

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

PluggyRug PluggyRug:

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

ROTFL

Pluggy, why do you post crap like that, when you know we will check it?

A story that big, yet some unknown right wing website is the only one reporting it?

So have you checked it?

I did a search, and found nothing. Sill don't find mainstream stories for it. Bart has updated my search however.

The source document from the USDOJ supports the article.

Period.

[N_Fiddledog]

As far as the IG report goes Kimberly Strassel reports on what's actually in it (a lot of damning evidence.) It also appears this investigation is in 2 parts.

$1:

1) Key findings of Horowitz report:
--Yup, IG said FBI hit threshold for opening an investigation. But also goes out of its way to note what a "low threshold" this is. Durham's statement made clear he will provide more info for Americans to make a judgment on reasonableness.

Beave and the Progressive media want to sell you on the idea the report can be digested into

" FBI was justified in probing Trump-Russia, fed watchdog says"

Kind of...but not really.

Strassel gives you another 15 points from the report that paint a darker picture.

Here's the last 2.

$1:

15)Last point. When IG says he found no "documentary" evidence of bias, he means just that: He didn't find smoking gun email that says "let's take out Trump." And it isn't his job to guess at the motivations of FBI employees. Instead...

16) He straightforwardly lays out facts. Those facts produce a pattern of FBI playing the FISA Court--overstating some info, omitting other info, cherrypicking details. Americans can look at totality and make their own judgment as to "why" FBI behaved in such a manner.

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1204 ... 19232.html

Also, I believe there's some second part to this that comes out tomorrow. I think that's what I heard and there's no back-pedaling in that one. From what I heard.

[N_Fiddledog]