TrumpPutingate III: the beginning of the end

#5,406
#5,406
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#5,411
#5,411
Mick said:
Do you feel the OIG cannot do the investigation? Your overreaction comes across as desperate.
Click to expand...

Wtf are you talking about? I’m overjoyed OIG is doing an investigation.

See that’s how it works. First you do an investigation to provide an evidencary basis. THEN you appoint a special prosecutor to follow the evidencary finding.

You dont hire a special prosecutor and give him a bucket of minnows and say “good luck call us if you find anything!” like Muller was hired.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4 people
#5,412
#5,412
NorthDallas40 said:
Wtf are you talking about? I’m overjoyed OIG is doing an investigation.

See that’s how it works. First you do an investigation to provide an evidencary basis. THEN you appoint a special prosecutor to follow the evidencary finding.

You dont hire a special prosecutor and give him a bucket of minnows and say “good luck call us if you find anything!” like Muller was hired.
Click to expand...

What evidence do they have? You are the one that brought a premature special council into this.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#5,413
#5,413
Mick said:
What evidence do they have? You are the one that brought a premature special council into this.
Click to expand...

Ok are you purposely being dense? The OIG is taking another look at the matter. Doing an investigation. If that investigation leads to an evidencary finding one option, which has already been discussed, is appointment of a Special Prosecutor. That’s it

That’s how this actually works Mick.
 
Last edited:
#5,414
#5,414
Woohoo! Alright we have our own fishing expedition! Awesome!

The statement continued, “If circumstances warrant, the OIG will consider including other issues that may arise during the course of the review.”
Click to expand...
 
#5,415
#5,415
NorthDallas40 said:
Ok are you purposely being dense? The OIG is taking another look at the matter. Doing an investigation. If that investigation leads to an evidencary finding one option, which has already been discussed, is appointment of a Special Prosecutor. That’s it

That’s how this actually works Mick.
Click to expand...

Jeff Sessions trying to take the heat off the Trump Campaign that he was involved with. I'm sure the investigation will show the paperwork consistent with FISA application of the past. Look at it this way, If Carter Page was innocent and nothing was gained from the surveillance then why so much effort to try to discredit the FISA application by the Trump Team? Carter Page should have a lawsuit against the Government and a strong case if the surveillance did not gain information and unlawful in nature. He does not have a suit against the Government. If there is one thing about the Dossier is true that the Trump Campaign was running around and meeting and talking to people from Russia.

It is what the FBI does. They take raw intelligence and verify or refute it through investigation. They did verify the Trump Team was running around meeting with Russians and a Special Prosecutor had to be appointed because Trump Fires the one investigating it.

Jeff Sessions and Team Trump call foul and you are ready for a Special Prosecutor. That's how it works in TrumpTopia.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#5,416
#5,416
Actually it was Congress that called foul Mick. Sessions reviewed their request and agreed and engaged the OIG. Again that’s how this works.
 
#5,417
#5,417
NorthDallas40 said:
Actually it was Congress that called foul Mick. Sessions reviewed their request and agreed and engaged the OIG. Again that’s how this works.
Click to expand...

Michael Horowitz, the department's inspector general, said in a statement his review will examine whether the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the Justice Department followed the proper procedures when they applied for a warrant with the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court to secretly conduct surveillance on Carter Page and his ties to Russia.

The review comes after Attorney General Jeff Sessions told reporters last month he planned to ask Horowitz to investigate the alleged surveillance abuses.

Alleged By who?

The allegations were outlined in a controversial memo commissioned by House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes and declassified for public release by Trump, over the objections of Justice Department officials and Democrats on the panel.

Now What evidence do they have other than the Nunes Memo?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#5,418
#5,418
Ok so yes you’re being dense. Got it.

The OIG is not a prosecutor. They have no authority to do so. They are acting on a recommendation to AG Sessions from Congress which AG Sessions concurred with and sent to the for further investigation.

Again, for the third time, this is how you go about evidencary discovery. If any evidence of misconduct is found it will be reviewed and a follow on path will be chosen. One possible path is the assignment of a Special Prosecutor to further investigate and possibly indict based on their investigation results

I realize you don’t like this. I also don’t GAF. This is the path that should have been followed in the Muller appointment and was the recommended path by Dershowitz. You know? The highly respected liberal Democrat Harvard attorney in a recent op ed?

You’re either being dumb or just deflecting. I don’t realky GAF which but I’m not explaining anymore

TLDR: we don’t have to have evidence for an OIG review. But if we find it then we can constitutionally appoint a special prosecutor to pursue it.
 
Last edited:
#5,419
#5,419
Mick said:
Michael Horowitz, the department's inspector general, said in a statement his review will examine whether the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the Justice Department followed the proper procedures when they applied for a warrant with the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court to secretly conduct surveillance on Carter Page and his ties to Russia.

The review comes after Attorney General Jeff Sessions told reporters last month he planned to ask Horowitz to investigate the alleged surveillance abuses.

Alleged By who?

The allegations were outlined in a controversial memo commissioned by House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes and declassified for public release by Trump, over the objections of Justice Department officials and Democrats on the panel.

Now What evidence do they have other than the Nunes Memo?
Click to expand...

Ummm, all the testimony that was bundled into the Nunes Memo. Nunes didn't make up the testimony - he packaged it in a way that makes the worst case (like a prosecutor would do). However, the evidence is there that merits the internal investigation. It isn't Nunes fiction.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#5,420
#5,420
#5,421
#5,421
NorthDallas40 said:
Ok so yes you’re being dense. Got it.

The OIG is not a prosecutor. They have no authority to do so. They are acting on a recommendation to AG Sessions from Congress which AG Sessions concurred with and sent to the for further investigation.

Again, for the third time, this is how you go about evidencary discovery. If any evidence of misconduct is found it will be reviewed and a follow on path will be chosen. One possible path is the assignment of a Special Prosecutor to further investigate and possibly indict based on their investigation results

I realize you don’t like this. I also don’t GAF. This is the path that should have been followed in the Muller appointment and was the recommended path by Dershowitz. You know? The highly respected liberal Democrat Harvard attorney in a recent op ed?

You’re either being dumb or just deflecting. I don’t realky GAF which but I’m not explaining anymore

TLDR: we don’t have to have evidence for an OIG review. But if we find it then we can constitutionally appoint a special prosecutor to pursue it.
Click to expand...

Are you saying that Mueller Appointment was unconstitutional and the FISA warrant on Carter Page was illegal. Got it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#5,425
#5,425
Mick said:
Are you saying that Mueller Appointment was unconstitutional and the FISA warrant on Carter Page was illegal. Got it.
Click to expand...

Dershowitz’s argument in the op ed is basically the Special Prosecutor was premature and recommended a pause of Muller while a bipartisan evidencary review was conducted. And then if the review warranted it to reengage Muller with specific focus.

That is the path occurring here. Congress reviews, recommends to AG, who concurs and engages OIG. We don’t know the next step yet because we don’t have the OIG report. It just started.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement

Back
Top