Posted on 12/11/2019 10:18:00 AM PST by pilgrim
Like disgraced former FBI director James Comey before him exonerating Hillary Clinton for her crimes, DOJ inspector general Michael Horowitz presents us with a documented list of crimes, fraud, and deception in the FISA warrant application process by the FBI but then says never mind — these are bureaucratic mistakes made without bias and without intent. There still was sufficient predicate, says he, for starting an investigation and surveillance of Team Trump, even as Horowitz admits that the first FISA warrant, the one authorizing surveilling Carter Page, was riddled with errors and omissions of key exculpatory evidence. It was the first of four frauds committed on the FISA court, a felony. We have confirmation that the first FISA application, at least, was based almost solely on what Comey himself called the "unverified and salacious" Steele dossier, paid for by the Clinton campaign and the DNC. Yet the FBI "forgot" to ask or inform the court who paid for it. Former deputy FBI director Andrew McCabe has stated that without the Steele dossier, there would have been no FISA warrants at all and no investigation of Team Trump. Ironically, this was confirmed by the I.G. Report: The much awaited Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) report, conducted by Inspector General Michael Horowitz, was released today. It finds that the FBI would not have had enough claimed evidence to secretly surveil former Trump aide Carter Page, and thus the Trump 2016 campaign, without using a "dossier" of opposition research funded by the Hillary Clinton campaign. In 2016, after Page left the Trump campaign, the FBI asked the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) for a warrant to secretly surveil Page.
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
And ‘conspiracy theory’!
Until some are held responsible it is a farce.
Pray nightly God will continue to pull back the curtain!
Was told by an attorney if the public knew what was going on in state gov there would be a revolt. Think that is true with fed gov, also.
pssst- chris wallace and juan aren’t the only folks on fox- some are ardent Trump Supporters and strong conservatives— so yeah, i’ll continue watching fox- thanks-
You are absolutely right!
We want these to be cases that stick !
Lead to a conviction!
Can you imagine the chaos if its hurried, slopped up and some .. particularly “Big Fish” get off. It will make the FBI screw up of the “Weather Underground” case (The one that kept William Ayers on the streets & active!) look like a “fixed” parking ticket.
Twenty-two trillion in debt. ZERO accounting or accountability. BHO purchases a $12,000,000 home, with huge money to spare. Every “politician” avoids TRUMP like the plague. Yet TRUMP is a highly successful business man, with little to no skeletons in his closet. The government is out of freaking control.
How much cash did bho send to Iran?
How much ‘ruckus’ was raised when that happened?
“... James Comey before him exonerating Hillary Clinton”
That wasn’t Comey’s decision to make and I’ve never understood why no one demanded a decision from the proper person, committee or what have you.
Mr. Hawley had the best diatribe,Hillary paid for the dossier,got it into the FBI,got 4 Fisa warrants got investigations into a rival presidential campaign for the first time in our history,she was really a pretty damn successful candidate!
Watched that and it was a great one.
Mr (I served in Vietnam) ‘bloomytheld’ is smarmy, jmo!!
The network is anti trump. The presence of a few ‘loss leaders’ that are pro trump doesn’t negate that fact. Fox is just a little less anti trump than CNN is all.
I see your point - but I also see Durham’s point in rebutting the “no bias” point.Grand Juries are secret - if Durham has already convened one, and is presently using it to indict "ham sandwiches" (with bloody hands in the cookie jar), we wouldn’t know it.
So I assume that is the case, and that Durham rebuts Horowitz’s “no bias” point because he is pursuing indictments on precisely those grounds.
there are actually a number of strong conservatives that we enjoy listening to on fox- there is no alternative in our area- and no, they aren’t nearly as bad as CNN- You have your opinion on the matter- i disagree- There are a umber of folks on fox that are not anti- trump- I don’t listen to the owners on fox, or the lefties for the most part except to counter their nonsense- -
documentary evidence
testimonial evidence
Bias can also be shown by
remarks,
decisions contrary to fact, REASON, or law, or
other unfair conduct.
Do you ever listen to Dobbs on Fox Business. Watch him through the internet as often as possible.
http://ustvgo.tv/fox-business-live-streaming-free/#
Sometime at the time he is on the stream is disrupted. Think it is my provider.
Not much TV watching other than him.
Won't matter what Barr decides clearly it will just be sour grapes because Horowitz already said they were innocent, even though he didn't say that the MSM all reported he did.
“the first FISA application for Page...was turned down”
Not quite. What was turned down was a request from the FBI to the DOJ to get approval to make a FISA application, not the application itself.
Then, the very same day that the FBI first recieved Steele’s report, they began working on a new request for a FISA application, based on Steele’s allegations. The bastards didn’t even take a single day to read Steele’s report and see if they could verify anything in it.
Agreed but motive is one of the big three (motive, capability, and opportunity) that a criminal prosecutor shoots for.
“Intent is an element of just about every crime, meaning that the prosecution must establish that the defendant intended to commit the criminal act. (Sometimes it’s enough to prove that the defendant didn’t act intentionally, but was reckless or criminally negligent.) But motive usually isn’t a criminal element—the prosecution doesn’t have to prove the defendant had it. Instead, prosecutors try to establish motive in order to convince the jury that the defendant is guilty.” - nolo
“A motive is the cause that moves people to induce a certain action.[1] In criminal law, motive in itself is not an element of any given crime; however, the legal system typically allows motive to be proven to make plausible the accused’s reasons for committing a crime, at least when those motives may be obscure or hard to identify with. However, a motive is not required to reach a verdict.[2] Motives are also used in other aspects of a specific case, for instance, when police are initially investigating.[2]” - Wikipedia
The other good one,the FBI meddled in the 2016 elections!
imo, yes!
Hope it is proven in a court of law and subsequent penalties provided!
But saying what he Did say was a willful act of coverup from the texting alone.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.