Lesh
Diamond Member
- Dec 21, 2016
- 71,246
- 35,667
- 2,615
And neither did he dossierSussman and the Alfabank stuff had mothing to do with the FISA warrant
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
And neither did he dossierSussman and the Alfabank stuff had mothing to do with the FISA warrant
The Page warrant led nowhere and the Mueller investigation had basically nothing to do with it. Everything you complain about would have happened if Page had never had a FISA warrant against him
The lies told to the FBI by Trump’s people directly led to the Mueller investigation as they continued to pursue Russian collusion given how suspicious it is for people to be lying about their connections.
So you see, reality is actually the exact opposite of what you claim.
Go ahead and charge Strzok with something if you think he did something so egregious.
And neither did he dossier
JesusWhat we do know is that the fake dossier was part of the submission to the FISA court. We also know that the FISA court expressed concerns that they were misled regarding the know origins of this reports…namely that it was funded by a political rival. What we also know is that they most certainly believed they had to submit the dossier to the FISA court to obtain the warrant, otherwise, why risk it? They clearly didn’t feel as though they had enough evidence otherwise.
You have been fooled by the MSM that spoon feeds misinformation. Think for yourself.
First, because justice is not supposed to be partisan. Second, did you know justice should not depend on what party you are in? No, you don't know that. You still don't.![]()
Durham was installed into this role by Barr in 2019.
So, why would Barr put a democrat into such a role?
Are you on crack?
um no…the indictment is about lying about working for clintonAn indictment for supposedly lying about the intent of his notifying the FBI about suspicious DNS activity.
Ohhh
You mean the indictment isn’t for hacking Trump’s servers?um no…the indictment is about lying about working for clinton
did you bother reading it?
no, that’s mentioned as to what they were doing in later filings about the charge.You mean the indictment isn’t for hacking Trump’s servers?
So no charges for hacking. Why not?no, that’s mentioned as to what they were doing in later filings about the charge.
That's what I said nitwitum no…the indictment is about lying about working for clinton
did you bother reading it?
no you didn’tThat's what I said nitwit
You still believe someone other than Russia hacked the DNC don’t you?
Crowdstrike said that?
Crowdstrike said that they saw data stacked and ready to be exfiltrated, but had no concrete evidence any data ever left the server over the internet.
Crowdstrike said that?
Where?
Post a link
Mueller tracked the data.
Crowdstrike said that they saw data stacked and ready to be exfiltrated, but had no concrete evidence any data ever left the server over the internet.
You're talking about data being "exfiltrated" from the DNC servers by RUSSIANSYup . . .
House Intelligence Committee
Testimony of Crowdstrike President Shawn Henry
December 5, 2017
Page 32
View attachment 603776
This means the FBI and DOJ, and all of the subsequent "Russia hacked the DNC" claims in the Joint Analysis Report and Brennan's Intelligence Community Assessment, all the way to the Weissmann/Mueller witch hunt and all their perfectly tuned choral hack claims; were just based on them accepting a hunch of a hired contractor for the Democrat party.
All it means is when their proprietary software was monitoring all the ports in real time there was no unauthorized data transfers. The forensic copy of the hard drives as well as a snap shot of the CPU memory prior to the shut down and clean up of the network was provided to the FBI. If I recall.You're talking about data being "exfiltrated" from the DNC servers by RUSSIANS
WTF