What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

The investigation investigations: DOJ exonerates McCabe (1 Viewer)

BroadwayG

Footballguy
Huber - investigating FBI surveillance of Page and Clinton/Uranium One since November '17. The FBI investigation has been taken over by Horowitz. Unknown how long the Clinton/Uranium One will drag out. This entire thing has been shrouded in secrecy, no one really knows what is going on.

Duration: 23 months
Cost: unknown
Results: unknown

Horowitz - More investigation into the Page surveillance and possible FISA abuse since March '18. Completed early July '19. Report in progress.

Duration: 18 months
Cost: unknown
Results: Report says: no political bias, Steele dossier had zero impact, some mis-steps

Durham - Broad investigation into the origins of the Russia investigation since May '19. Just getting started. Hold on to your hats.

Duration: 5 months
Cost: unknown
Results: unknown

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Well, the IG has completed his investigation into FISA abuse. He's working on his report, might get to Congress by the August recess.
Let's take some wagers on the outcome.

My prediction - No one gets indicted, no one gets fired, only minor professional reprimands issued.

 
Let's take some wagers on the outcome.

My prediction - No one gets indicted, no one gets fired, only minor professional reprimands issued.
And Trump and the GOP still claim widespread abuse and harassment...Hillary!!! Obama!!!! FUSION GPS!!!

 
Huber - investigating FBI surveillance of Page and Clinton/Uranium One since November '17. The FBI investigation has been taken over by Horowitz. Unknown how long the Clinton/Uranium One will drag out. This entire thing has been shrouded in secrecy, no one really knows what is going on.

Duration: 20 months
Cost: unknown
Results: unknown
I posted on this in the Russia investigation thread. The original mandate from Sessions was broader than this, Huber was told to investigate anything and everything on the Nunes-Jordan hit list, almost unlimited really.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Horowitz - More investigation into the Page surveillance and possible FISA abuse since March '18. Completed early July '19. Report in progress.
I also want to pointy out that this is the only true "investigation" and he has had two of them. Huber and Durham are at best reviews, they are not formally opened FBI/DOJ investigations.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
On Thursday, Driscoll sent a letter to United States Attorney for the District of Connecticut John Durham, who was appointed by Attorney General William Barr to investigate the FBI’s handling of the Russia investigation; Inspector General Michael Horowitz, who is conducting an investigation into the bureau’s origins of the Trump probe and Corey Amundson, with the U.S. Department of Justice’s Office of Professional Responsibility.

“In writing, the government denied the existence of any such Brady material,” Driscoll stated in his letter. “Orally, during debrief sessions with Maria, I directly told the government that I believed Patrick Byrne, Chief Executive of Overstock.com, who had a sporadic relationship with Maria over a period of years prior to her arrest, was a government informant. My speculation was flatly denied. My associate Alfred Carry made similar assertions in a separate debrief that he covered and was also rebuffed.”

“Mr. Byrne has now contacted me and has confirmed that he, indeed, had a ‘non-standard arrangement’ with the FBI for many years, and that beginning in 2015 through Maria’s arrest, he communicated and assisted government agents with their investigation of Maria. During this time, he stated he acted at the direction of the government and federal agents by, at their instruction, kindling a manipulative romantic relationship with her. He also told me that some of the details he provided the government regarding Maria in response was exculpatory—that is, he reported to the government that Maria’s behavior and interaction with him was inconsistent with her being a foreign agent and more likely an idealist and age-appropriate peace activist.”

“As an adjunct university professor and CEO of a public company, Mr. Byrne is a credible source of information, who from my view has little to gain but much to lose by disclosing a sporadic relationship with Maria. His claims are worthy of investigation. Indeed, he has much to say about the government’s handling of Maria’s case that go far beyond the Brady issue I raise in this letter. Regardless of these other issues, which I suggest you pursue directly with him, I was told the following by Mr. Byrne,” Driscoll’s letter states.

https://saraacarter.com/russia-probe-twist-a-billion-dollar-ceo-a-convicted-russian-agent-and-the-fbi/

This is a pretty rightwing website.  But the information about Byrne/Butina appears to be legit.

 
If a more credible outlet is reporting something, I prefer to post from it.  If a more biased outlet is reporting something that appears credible, but no one else is, I'm going to link to it anyway.  I'm well aware that Carter is a former Circa contributor who does work for Fox News.  But that doesn't mean the information here isn't worth looking at.  I said it's a rightwing website and to take it with a grain of salt.  🤷‍♂️

Most establishment press like NYT and Wapo shat the bed on this thing a long time ago, certainly a lot moreso than the reporting in this piece.  

 
Look if you’re right that there’s some huge scandal here, the IG will give a press conference, and that will be covered by all the news media. ren won’t have to worry about a cover up, and trust me I will be the first one to come in here and say “DN was right, it WAS a conspiracy, Trump got screwed after all.” And my mind will be permanently changed on this entire issue. That’s what facts do. 

On the other hand if the IG finds nothing wrong will you accept it? Will Trump accept it? Or will you guys just assume that the Deep State got to the IG? 

 
Look if you’re right that there’s some huge scandal here, the IG will give a press conference, and that will be covered by all the news media. ren won’t have to worry about a cover up, and trust me I will be the first one to come in here and say “DN was right, it WAS a conspiracy, Trump got screwed after all.” And my mind will be permanently changed on this entire issue. That’s what facts do. 

On the other hand if the IG finds nothing wrong will you accept it? Will Trump accept it? Or will you guys just assume that the Deep State got to the IG? 
Is this like a year ago when each side asked the other if they'd accept Mueller's conclusions, whatever they were?

Anti-Trump people generally said yes, as far as I remember. I recall pro-Trump people being less committal, but I could be remembering wrong.

The funny thing is that now that we have the report, the conclusions actually reached by Mueller are all favorable to Trump -- no coordination with the IRA, insufficient evidence of coordination with the GRU and WikiLeaks, no conclusion about obstruction -- and yet it's the anti-Trump people trusting Mueller's work while pro-Trump people are trying to trash him.

Weird?

In any case, I will say the same thing now about the IG that I've always said about Mueller: I'll trust that his conclusions, whatever they are, will be reasonable.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Is this like a year ago when each side asked the other if they'd accept Mueller's conclusions, whatever they were?

Anti-Trump people generally said yes, as far as I remember. I recall pro-Trump people being less committal, but I could be remembering wrong.

The funny thing is that now that we have the report, the conclusions actually reached by Mueller are all favorable to Trump -- no coordination with the IRA, insufficient evidence of coordination with GRU and WikiLeaks, no conclusion about obstruction -- and yet it's the anti-Trump people trusting Mueller's work any pro-Trump people trying to trash him.

Weird?

In any case, I will say the same thing now about the IG that I've always said about Mueller: I'll trust that his conclusions, whatever they are, will be reasonable.
Not really weird, Maurile. Just sort of suiting one's own personal predilections and dependent on media narrative. I'm sort of in a bubble here at FBG as I don't really read the papers or get politics in my real life. I'm amazed at the different reactions to Mueller both here and in the media. I can't believe the same event happened. The mainstream press is trashing he and the Democrats. But to read here, he's a hero. So there's definitely some media narrative shaping going on here; I just can't figure out exactly what. 

 
It is one of the most enduring and consequential mysteries of the Trump-Russia investigation: Why did former FBI Director James Comey refuse to say publicly what he was telling President Trump in private -- that Trump was not the target of an ongoing probe?

That refusal ignited a chain of events that has consumed Washington for more than two years – including Comey’s firing by Trump, the appointment of Special Counsel Robert Mueller, and ongoing claims that Trump obstructed justice. 

Now an answer is emerging. Sources tell RealClearInvestigations that Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz will soon file a report with evidence indicating that Comey was misleading the president. Even as he repeatedly assured Trump that he was not a target, the former director was secretly trying to build a conspiracy case against the president, while at times acting as an investigative agent.

Two U.S. officials briefed on the inspector general’s investigation of possible FBI misconduct said Comey was essentially “running a covert operation against” the president, starting with a private “defensive briefing” he gave Trump just weeks before his inauguration. They said Horowitz has examined high-level FBI text messages and other communications indicating Comey was actually conducting a “counterintelligence assessment” of Trump during that January 2017 meeting in New York. 

In addition to adding notes of his meetings and phone calls with Trump to the official FBI case file, Comey had an agent inside the White House who reported back to FBI headquarters about Trump and his aides, according to other officials familiar with the matter.

Although Comey took many actions on his own, he was not working in isolation. One focus of Horowitz’s inquiry is the private Jan. 6, 2017, briefing Comey gave the president-elect in New York about material in the Democratic-commissioned dossier compiled by ex-British intelligence officer Christopher Steele. Reports of that meeting were used days later by BuzzFeed, CNN and other outlets as a news hook for reporting on the dossier’s lascivious and unsubstantiated claims. 

Comey’s meeting with Trump took place one day after the FBI director met in the Oval Office with President Obama and Vice President Joe Biden to discuss how to brief Trump — a meeting attended by National Security Adviser Susan Rice, Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson, Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates and National Intelligence Director James Clapper, who would soon go to work for CNN. //

Though Comey claims in his book he was “protecting" the president-elect from “any kind of coercion” or blackmail by Moscow, several former and current federal law enforcement officials said he was really testing his reaction to see if he showed signs of guilt or revealed information that could be used against him in the conspiracy case the FBI had already been building against no fewer than four of his advisers — Flynn, Page, George Papadopoulos and Paul Manafort. In fact, it was Comey who just a couple of weeks later would dispatch two agents to the White House to grill Flynn about his post-election conversations with Russian diplomats. (Flynn’s lawyers argue the FBI set a “perjury trap” for the retired general.)

“We are not investigating you, sir,” Comey told Trump, an assurance that “seemed to quiet him,” the former director remarked in his book.

That statement seems undercut by the fact that Comey typed up his notes on his laptop in his government vehicle less than five minutes after he walked out of Trump Tower, according to a heavily redacted Jan. 7, 2017, email to his top aides. Comey self-classified the notes at the “SECRET” level.

“I executed the session exactly as planned,” Comey reported back to his “sensitive matter team.”

https://www.realclearinvestigations.com/articles/2019/07/22/comey_under_scrutiny_for_own_inquiry_and_misleading_trump_119584.html

 
Why do I get the feeling that Trump was under some sort of criminal investigation beforehand and had to run for president? I mean, this guy has been straight Americana all the way down and through it.  

The Deep State #### and Qanon and Epstein are all too ####in' weird for me. I have no stomach for this ####. FBI has been ####ed up since its inception. Too big. Too federal.  

 
Why do I get the feeling that Trump was under some sort of criminal investigation beforehand and had to run for president? I mean, this guy has been straight Americana all the way down and through it.  

The Deep State #### and Qanon and Epstein are all too ####in' weird for me. I have no stomach for this ####. FBI has been ####ed up since its inception. Too big. Too federal.  
I dunno why you get this feeling, but it's pretty crazy man.

 
It is one of the most enduring and consequential mysteries of the Trump-Russia investigation: Why did former FBI Director James Comey refuse to say publicly what he was telling President Trump in private -- that Trump was not the target of an ongoing probe?
It’s not a mystery. Someone asked Comey about it at his hearing and he answered. Among the reasons was that if he said that Trump wasn’t a target and then he later became one, correcting the record would be in order lest the statement become a lie — but that’s a terrible situation to be in because correcting the record would mean publicly saying that Trump was the target of an investigation, which would be bad for a bunch of reasons. (For one thing, it would unfairly cast a shadow over Trump when a conclusion of criminal culpability hadn’t been reached.) That’s why the FBI has a general policy of not saying who is or isn’t a target unless and until a decision to indict has been made.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Look if you’re right that there’s some huge scandal here, the IG will give a press conference, and that will be covered by all the news media. ren won’t have to worry about a cover up, and trust me I will be the first one to come in here and say “DN was right, it WAS a conspiracy, Trump got screwed after all.” And my mind will be permanently changed on this entire issue. That’s what facts do. 

On the other hand if the IG finds nothing wrong will you accept it? Will Trump accept it? Or will you guys just assume that the Deep State got to the IG? 
I am just happy they are looking in to it.  Unlike most anti-Trump folks who haven't accepted the results of the Mueller investigation I will accept the results of this investigation.

 
I am just happy they are looking in to it.  Unlike most anti-Trump folks who haven't accepted the results of the Mueller investigation I will accept the results of this investigation.
I accept the Mueller report. Ten documented instances of obstruction is what the Trump followers are burying their heads in the sand about.

Keep focusing on Mueller's appearance though.

 
I accept the Mueller report. Ten documented instances of obstruction is what the Trump followers are burying their heads in the sand about.

Keep focusing on Mueller's appearance though.
I accept the Attorney General's decision and Rosenstein along with the Senate's opinion.

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top