Plan B Forum

I'm not seeing much outrage in this place about the Horowitz report. Sadly, it plays exactly into Trump's "witchhunt" mantra because it turns out there was er . . . at least a bitch hunt. From Fox? No; that bastion of liberal fake newsery, the WSJ: https://www.wsj.com/articles/a-trail-of ... 1575938300

The press corps is portraying Monday’s report by Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz as absolution for the Federal Bureau of Investigation, but don’t believe it. The report relates a trail of terrible judgment and violations of process that should shock Americans who thought better of their premier law-enforcement agency.

Mr. Horowitz says Crossfire Hurricane investigators never verified any of the Steele dossier allegations against Mr. Page. Even a year after the first FISA warrant, in September 2017, the report says the FBI had only “corroborated limited information in the Steele election reporting.” Robert Mueller later spent two years looking for proof of collusion and found nothing, while the Trump Presidency was besieged.

The Horowitz report should not be the end of this tawdry tale. Whether or not there are prosecutions, Messrs. Barr and Durham should release the entire FISA record to the public. The GOP Senate also needs to call the FISA judges to tell their story under oath.

If there ever was a chance that the Senate would vote for impeachment, Horowitz's report kills it. No, it has no bearing on Trump's obvious tit-for-tat with Ukraine; it has nothing to do with his obstruction of justice in the impeachment investigation. But it does make Trump look wronged from the get-go.

Heads should roll.

Google COINTELPRO. The FBI has a long history supporting a culture that pursues foggy wisps of foreign conspiracy. The 'due process' that justifies the investigation or my local public library activity since the aftermath of 9-11 and the creation of 'home land security' Is an abomination to the liberties of only one branch of the 'American Way of Life' Others (mostly traditional Republicans) cheer the FBI's constance vigilance for boogy men hiding in the closet. At least they did until we got a POTUS that prefers his intelligence from Putin.

Inspite of the WJ, it till standing un-refuted that Russian conducted a massive disinformation and disruption cyber attack on our 2016 electon that as effective. That is completely independent of any need for 'collusion' with Trump.

By the way, the news department of the WSJ is very solid and reliable for factual information. The editorial and opinion pages are just as objective and fact-based as Sean Hannity.

snailgate

S O R R Y A B O U T T H E D O U B L E P O S T. I A M T O D U M B T O D E L E TE T H I S

Google COINTELPRO. The FBI has a long history supporting a culture that pursues foggy wisps of foreign conspiracy. The 'due process' that justifies the investigation or my local public library activity since the aftermath of 9-11 and the creation of 'home land security' Is an abomination to the liberties of only one branch of the 'American Way of Life' Others (mostly traditional Republicans) cheer the FBI's constance vigilance for boogy men hiding in the closet. At least they did until we got a RINO POTUS that prefers his intelligence from Putin.

Inspite of the WJ, it is still standing un-refuted that Russia conducted a massive disinformation and disruption cyber attack on our 2016 electon that was effective. That is completely independent of any need for 'collusion' with Trump.

By the way, the news department of the WSJ is very solid and reliable for factual information. The editorial and opinion pages are just as objective and fact-based as Sean Hannity. As the current tired cliche has it, 'at the end of the day' it was statements from the FBI about Hillary that had an impact on the election; there was nothing detrimental to Trump.

snailgate

the IG was very clear in his senate testim0ney.

he vindicated n0 0ne inv0lved with the FISA stuff

t0p t0 b0tt0m,

the Flynn trial is revealing much 0f the same

Surprise, surprise, normal service has been resumed.

It should come as no surprise that the FBI makes shit up. In 2015 there was a report that the FBI had got some huge number of hair analysis cases wrong and 95% of them were wrong in favor of the prosecution. Well, well, well - who'd have thunk it?

So when a James Comey (remember him? the guy who essentially put Trump in office?) comes out and publicly tells me what an ignoranus Trump is, I have several choices. I can assume that as usual they have made stuff up and he (Trump) is just misunderstood. In reality he's a caring sensitive vulnerable POS (Paragon of Society) and he doesn't deserve this degree of opprobrium. Or they are making up shit to bolster an otherwise reasonable case. Or it's business and usual, and when assholes are fighting assholes, you have to pick a side or risk getting caught in the turdnado.

In this case I know whose side I'm on.

And BTW I absolutely agree on SG's assessment of the WSJ news reporting.

BTW SG - deleting extra posts is simple enough. If you are logged in, you can see, at the top right of your post, EDIT, X, ! and QUOTE. The X button deletes it after an 'Are you sure?' prompt.

Imran awan was in c0urt yesterday

if y0u want 0utrage, his st0ry is the place t0 find it.

washer-w0man Schultz might just swing if the truth 0uts.

muhammed atta is quite the tale as well.....

fl0rida flight sch00ls are definitely s0mething special.

s0metimes I wish that I was still asleep.

trump, assh0le that he is, may be the c0untry s saving grace

the l0rd m0ves in mysterius ways

paul, david, even jesus, br0ke all the rules and yet did great things.

the scales are dr0pping fr0m 0ur eyes

Burning Petard wrote:Inspite of the WJ, it is still standing un-refuted that Russia conducted a massive disinformation and disruption cyber attack on our 2016 electon that was effective. That is completely independent of any need for 'collusion' with Trump.

Completely true. Russia massively targeted Clinton, even tried giving Bernie a leg-up. Anything to get Trump in. Or was it solely to keep Clinton out? Or both? (Which may be the same thing). Whatever the standard of WSJ editorials/opinion, the facts are as stated by Horowitz - awful FBI mendacity that makes Trump's story seem valid.

Let's not lose sight of the big picture with the Horowitz report...

The BIG story here is that the primary tale Trump has been weaving for the past two years; that there was some politically motivated "deep-state' plot spear-headed by the FBI against him was 100% FALSE...an intensive and exhaustive investigation produced absolutely ZERO evidence to support this spurious claim...

A charge that was always made ludicrous by the fact (that I have pointed out before, and someone else reiterated in this thread) that every single public pronouncement and leak that came from anyone in the FBI during the entire course of the 2016 Presidential campaign was to the advantage of Trump and the detriment of Clinton...

It should also be remembered that this FISA warrant was not (as Trump and his minions have been dishonestly claiming) the cause for the investigation into connections between Russian intelligence and the Trump campaign to be initiated by the FBI...

That happened weeks earlier as the result of a tip provided by the intelligence service of an allied country (Australia)...

Nor was any info gathered from this FISA warrant of any great importance to the FBI investigation or later to the Mueller Investigation.

All of that having been said however, it is of course not helpful to the cause of removing Trump and saving the Republic that errors were made in the obtaining of this warrant. Though it is very much a minor element in the grand scheme of the mountain of evidence that makes Trump guilty of the Impeachment Articles that have been placed against him, without question the Senate Dems and the White House are sure to try and make it look central. They telegraphed this strategy in the Senate Judiciary Committee hearing with Horowitz this past week.

WSJ Opinion? Not worth anything any more, even for fish-wrapping. They have been 1000% in Trump’s pocket, and even supporting his racism and misogyny. I cancelled my subscription.

Isn’t WSJ the pretend responsible journalism arm of Murdoch/FOX?

Andy, I do not find the X, only an 'edit' then a red triangle that says I am reporting a copyright violation or something nasty, and 'quote'

sorry. Snailgate

I may be wrong but I think the "X" is only there before your post has been read by anyone. After that, if the 'Edit' Feature is still available, you can change the post but not delete it.

Yes I meant to point that out. I've used it occasionally to delete a doubled post but only if you do it right away.

i watched the entire IG testimney and Jim s descripti0n is entirely full 0f shit.

it was 0nly a limited hang0ut th0

m0st busy pe0ple w0n t n0tice, but all 0f the 0ld f0lks watched, and they v0te.

I h0pe that the secret service is up t0 snuff.

BoSoxGal wrote:Isn’t WSJ the pretend responsible journalism arm of Murdoch/FOX?

Correct. Murdoch bought it in 2007. It took a while, but it has sunk to the same lows as FOX. It’s a shame, because while always business oriented, the editorial content was at least grounded in facts and law. Its totally unhinged now and there is not even a pretense at meeting journalistic standards.

I can t believe that chris Wallace actually did a halfway decent j0b 0f interviewing James C0mey t0day.

I d enc0urage every0ne t0 listen t0 the IG testimney f0r y0urselves

he referred the wh0le l0t 0f them t0 the D0J f0r further investigatin

clinesmith was criminally referred.

maybe lisa page will flip f0r barr

she seems t0 have flipped f0r every0ne else at the FBI