1. Forum
  2. Usenet
  3. REC.AUDIO.OPINION

  • It's on ongoing investigation of the investigators

    From ScottW@21:1/5 to All on Wed Jun 14 19:21:50 2023
    and a years long pursuit of the disciplinary process.

    https://twitter.com/abigailmarone/status/1668674746584559617

    Don't just read the tweet...but listen to how he responds to the question regarding the FBI's action when found by the FISA court that they lied to obtain warrants against members of the Trump campaign.

    How many years ago was it the FBI was smacked down by both the IG and the court itself ordered them to take steps to fix the problem and report back to the court.

    It's been 3 and 1/2 years and still the FBI has "an ongoing disciplinary process" with individuals responsible. WTF is that?
    Besides an admission they're still with the FBI.....

    ScottW

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From mINE109@21:1/5 to ScottW on Thu Jun 15 09:40:03 2023
    On 6/14/23 9:21 PM, ScottW wrote:
    and a years long pursuit of the disciplinary process.

    https://twitter.com/abigailmarone/status/1668674746584559617

    Don't just read the tweet...but listen to how he responds to the
    question regarding the FBI's action when found by the FISA court that
    they lied to obtain warrants against members of the Trump campaign.

    Assumes facts not in evidence.

    How many years ago was it the FBI was smacked down by both the IG and
    the court itself ordered them to take steps to fix the problem and
    report back to the court.

    It's been 3 and 1/2 years and still the FBI has "an ongoing
    disciplinary process" with individuals responsible. WTF is that?
    Besides an admission they're still with the FBI.....

    FBI MAGA is doing fine.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From ScottW@21:1/5 to All on Thu Jun 15 16:30:34 2023
    On Thursday, June 15, 2023 at 7:40:06 AM UTC-7, mINE109 wrote:
    On 6/14/23 9:21 PM, ScottW wrote:
    and a years long pursuit of the disciplinary process.

    https://twitter.com/abigailmarone/status/1668674746584559617

    Don't just read the tweet...but listen to how he responds to the
    question regarding the FBI's action when found by the FISA court that
    they lied to obtain warrants against members of the Trump campaign.
    Assumes facts not in evidence.

    Are you oblivious to the findings of the FISA court?
    How about the IG?

    And now you insist on being oblivious to testimony from an FBI senior official.

    You are one hopeless, head up your ass, fool.

    ScottW

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From mINE109@21:1/5 to ScottW on Fri Jun 16 09:31:32 2023
    On 6/15/23 6:30 PM, ScottW wrote:
    On Thursday, June 15, 2023 at 7:40:06 AM UTC-7, mINE109 wrote:
    On 6/14/23 9:21 PM, ScottW wrote:
    and a years long pursuit of the disciplinary process.

    https://twitter.com/abigailmarone/status/1668674746584559617

    Don't just read the tweet...but listen to how he responds to the
    question regarding the FBI's action when found by the FISA court that
    they lied to obtain warrants against members of the Trump campaign.
    Assumes facts not in evidence.

    Are you oblivious to the findings of the FISA court?

    The FBI didn't lie to get FISA warrants against Trump campaigners.

    How about the IG?

    The report I cited a year ago? "Non-Compliance with Woods Procedures"
    and "Weaknesses in FBI Supervisory Review Process" are not lying.

    And now you insist on being oblivious to testimony from an FBI senior official.

    No, what you showed was a Twitter link that leads to Hawley holding
    court in a Congressional hearing. I'm not obligated to make your
    argument for you.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From ScottW@21:1/5 to All on Fri Jun 16 08:14:59 2023
    On Friday, June 16, 2023 at 7:31:35 AM UTC-7, mINE109 wrote:
    On 6/15/23 6:30 PM, ScottW wrote:
    On Thursday, June 15, 2023 at 7:40:06 AM UTC-7, mINE109 wrote:
    On 6/14/23 9:21 PM, ScottW wrote:
    and a years long pursuit of the disciplinary process.

    https://twitter.com/abigailmarone/status/1668674746584559617

    Don't just read the tweet...but listen to how he responds to the
    question regarding the FBI's action when found by the FISA court that >>> they lied to obtain warrants against members of the Trump campaign.
    Assumes facts not in evidence.

    Are you oblivious to the findings of the FISA court?
    The FBI didn't lie to get FISA warrants against Trump campaigners.

    The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court issued a rare order Tuesday to the FBI and Department of Justice, demanding they spell out a series of planned reforms following a damning report from the DOJ's inspector general that scrutinized surveillance
    of a former aide to President Donald Trump's campaign.

    The order cites allegations of wrongdoing in a report released last week by Inspector General Michael Horowitz, and argues the FBI's handling of the surveillance was done in a way that is "antithetical to the heightened duty of candor" expected by the
    court.

    And we do have a conviction in that regard.

    https://www.justice.gov/usao-ct/pr/fbi-attorney-admits-altering-email-used-fisa-application-during-crossfire-hurricane

    If that's not lying....you don't play piano.

    I can do this all day.

    ScottW

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From mINE109@21:1/5 to ScottW on Fri Jun 16 13:41:06 2023
    On 6/16/23 10:14 AM, ScottW wrote:
    On Friday, June 16, 2023 at 7:31:35 AM UTC-7, mINE109 wrote:
    On 6/15/23 6:30 PM, ScottW wrote:
    On Thursday, June 15, 2023 at 7:40:06 AM UTC-7, mINE109 wrote:
    On 6/14/23 9:21 PM, ScottW wrote:
    and a years long pursuit of the disciplinary process.

    https://twitter.com/abigailmarone/status/1668674746584559617

    Don't just read the tweet...but listen to how he responds to
    the question regarding the FBI's action when found by the
    FISA court that they lied to obtain warrants against members
    of the Trump campaign.
    Assumes facts not in evidence.

    Are you oblivious to the findings of the FISA court?
    The FBI didn't lie to get FISA warrants against Trump campaigners.

    The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court issued a rare order
    Tuesday to the FBI and Department of Justice, demanding they spell
    out a series of planned reforms following a damning report from the
    DOJ's inspector general that scrutinized surveillance of a former
    aide to President Donald Trump's campaign.

    The order cites allegations of wrongdoing in a report released last
    week by Inspector General Michael Horowitz, and argues the FBI's
    handling of the surveillance was done in a way that is "antithetical
    to the heightened duty of candor" expected by the court.

    Still not lying "to obtain warrants against members of the Trump campaign."

    And we do have a conviction in that regard.

    https://www.justice.gov/usao-ct/pr/fbi-attorney-admits-altering-email-used-fisa-application-during-crossfire-hurricane

    If that's not lying....you don't play piano.

    No political motivation was found.

    "Kevin was not aware of that information, however. When he assisted the
    FBI’s efforts to obtain the initial FISA warrant, Kevin knew of no prior relationship between Individual #1 and the OGA. And he was not involved
    in any discussions—including the one discussed above between the case
    agent and DOJ attorney—concerning whether or not to include information
    about that relationship in the FISA application. As was typical, the DOJ attorney worked primarily with the case agent to collect and develop information for the FISA application. The first time Kevin was asked to
    inquire into whether, and to what extent, Individual #1 had a
    relationship with the OGA was in connection with the fourth and final application."

    He didn't know the statement to be false. As one commentator puts it,
    "it was a shortcut to avoid filing a footnote with the FISA court."

    I can do this all day.

    That's because you reject contrary evidence.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Art Sackman@21:1/5 to All on Fri Jun 16 13:43:05 2023
    I can do this all day.
    That's because you reject contrary evidence.

    That's because Scott is retired,
    You're excuse is that you don't have enough students to fill up your schedule.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From ScottW@21:1/5 to All on Fri Jun 16 16:17:02 2023
    On Friday, June 16, 2023 at 11:41:11 AM UTC-7, mINE109 wrote:
    On 6/16/23 10:14 AM, ScottW wrote:
    On Friday, June 16, 2023 at 7:31:35 AM UTC-7, mINE109 wrote:
    On 6/15/23 6:30 PM, ScottW wrote:
    On Thursday, June 15, 2023 at 7:40:06 AM UTC-7, mINE109 wrote:
    On 6/14/23 9:21 PM, ScottW wrote:
    and a years long pursuit of the disciplinary process.

    https://twitter.com/abigailmarone/status/1668674746584559617

    Don't just read the tweet...but listen to how he responds to
    the question regarding the FBI's action when found by the
    FISA court that they lied to obtain warrants against members
    of the Trump campaign.
    Assumes facts not in evidence.

    Are you oblivious to the findings of the FISA court?
    The FBI didn't lie to get FISA warrants against Trump campaigners.

    The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court issued a rare order
    Tuesday to the FBI and Department of Justice, demanding they spell
    out a series of planned reforms following a damning report from the
    DOJ's inspector general that scrutinized surveillance of a former
    aide to President Donald Trump's campaign.

    The order cites allegations of wrongdoing in a report released last
    week by Inspector General Michael Horowitz, and argues the FBI's
    handling of the surveillance was done in a way that is "antithetical
    to the heightened duty of candor" expected by the court.
    Still not lying "to obtain warrants against members of the Trump campaign."
    And we do have a conviction in that regard.

    https://www.justice.gov/usao-ct/pr/fbi-attorney-admits-altering-email-used-fisa-application-during-crossfire-hurricane

    If that's not lying....you don't play piano.
    No political motivation was found.

    And no one knows your motivation.
    Motivation implies some form of conscious intelligence.
    I'm hard pressed to believe you have a motive.


    ScottW

    "Kevin was not aware of that information, however. When he assisted the FBI’s efforts to obtain the initial FISA warrant, Kevin knew of no prior relationship between Individual #1 and the OGA. And he was not involved
    in any discussions—including the one discussed above between the case agent and DOJ attorney—concerning whether or not to include information about that relationship in the FISA application. As was typical, the DOJ attorney worked primarily with the case agent to collect and develop information for the FISA application. The first time Kevin was asked to inquire into whether, and to what extent, Individual #1 had a
    relationship with the OGA was in connection with the fourth and final application."

    He didn't know the statement to be false. As one commentator puts it,
    "it was a shortcut to avoid filing a footnote with the FISA court."
    I can do this all day.
    That's because you reject contrary evidence.

    One commentator puts it as BS.

    ScottW

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From mINE109@21:1/5 to ScottW on Fri Jun 16 18:33:15 2023
    On 6/16/23 6:17 PM, ScottW wrote:
    On Friday, June 16, 2023 at 11:41:11 AM UTC-7, mINE109 wrote:
    On 6/16/23 10:14 AM, ScottW wrote:
    On Friday, June 16, 2023 at 7:31:35 AM UTC-7, mINE109 wrote:
    On 6/15/23 6:30 PM, ScottW wrote:
    On Thursday, June 15, 2023 at 7:40:06 AM UTC-7, mINE109 wrote:
    On 6/14/23 9:21 PM, ScottW wrote:
    and a years long pursuit of the disciplinary process.

    https://twitter.com/abigailmarone/status/1668674746584559617

    Don't just read the tweet...but listen to how he responds to
    the question regarding the FBI's action when found by the
    FISA court that they lied to obtain warrants against members
    of the Trump campaign.
    Assumes facts not in evidence.

    Are you oblivious to the findings of the FISA court?
    The FBI didn't lie to get FISA warrants against Trump campaigners.

    The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court issued a rare order
    Tuesday to the FBI and Department of Justice, demanding they spell
    out a series of planned reforms following a damning report from the
    DOJ's inspector general that scrutinized surveillance of a former
    aide to President Donald Trump's campaign.

    The order cites allegations of wrongdoing in a report released last
    week by Inspector General Michael Horowitz, and argues the FBI's
    handling of the surveillance was done in a way that is "antithetical
    to the heightened duty of candor" expected by the court.
    Still not lying "to obtain warrants against members of the Trump campaign." >>> And we do have a conviction in that regard.

    https://www.justice.gov/usao-ct/pr/fbi-attorney-admits-altering-email-used-fisa-application-during-crossfire-hurricane

    If that's not lying....you don't play piano.
    No political motivation was found.

    And no one knows your motivation.

    I'm not applying for a FISA warrant..

    Motivation implies some form of conscious intelligence.
    I'm hard pressed to believe you have a motive.

    If you're looking to me to explain Clinesmith's motivation, you're
    looking in the wrong place.

    "Kevin was not aware of that information, however. When he assisted the
    FBI’s efforts to obtain the initial FISA warrant, Kevin knew of no prior >> relationship between Individual #1 and the OGA. And he was not involved
    in any discussions—including the one discussed above between the case
    agent and DOJ attorney—concerning whether or not to include information
    about that relationship in the FISA application. As was typical, the DOJ
    attorney worked primarily with the case agent to collect and develop
    information for the FISA application. The first time Kevin was asked to
    inquire into whether, and to what extent, Individual #1 had a
    relationship with the OGA was in connection with the fourth and final
    application."

    He didn't know the statement to be false. As one commentator puts it,
    "it was a shortcut to avoid filing a footnote with the FISA court."
    I can do this all day.
    That's because you reject contrary evidence.

    One commentator puts it as BS.

    It must be disappointing to go look for a vast conspiracy and only find
    a guy trying to cut corners filling out paperwork. Not only that, but
    your special prosecutor didn't find him, the IG did.

    The IG: "We do not speculate whether the correction of any particular misstatement or omission, or some combination thereof, would have
    resulted in a different outcome. Nevertheless, the Department’s decision makers and the court should have been given complete and accurate
    information so that they could meaningfully evaluate probable cause
    before authorizing the surveillance of a U.S. person associated with a presidential campaign."

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From ScottW@21:1/5 to All on Fri Jun 16 18:27:19 2023
    On Friday, June 16, 2023 at 4:33:18 PM UTC-7, mINE109 wrote:
    On 6/16/23 6:17 PM, ScottW wrote:
    On Friday, June 16, 2023 at 11:41:11 AM UTC-7, mINE109 wrote:
    On 6/16/23 10:14 AM, ScottW wrote:
    On Friday, June 16, 2023 at 7:31:35 AM UTC-7, mINE109 wrote:
    On 6/15/23 6:30 PM, ScottW wrote:
    On Thursday, June 15, 2023 at 7:40:06 AM UTC-7, mINE109 wrote: >>>>>> On 6/14/23 9:21 PM, ScottW wrote:
    and a years long pursuit of the disciplinary process.

    https://twitter.com/abigailmarone/status/1668674746584559617

    Don't just read the tweet...but listen to how he responds to
    the question regarding the FBI's action when found by the
    FISA court that they lied to obtain warrants against members
    of the Trump campaign.
    Assumes facts not in evidence.

    Are you oblivious to the findings of the FISA court?
    The FBI didn't lie to get FISA warrants against Trump campaigners.

    The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court issued a rare order
    Tuesday to the FBI and Department of Justice, demanding they spell
    out a series of planned reforms following a damning report from the
    DOJ's inspector general that scrutinized surveillance of a former
    aide to President Donald Trump's campaign.

    The order cites allegations of wrongdoing in a report released last
    week by Inspector General Michael Horowitz, and argues the FBI's
    handling of the surveillance was done in a way that is "antithetical
    to the heightened duty of candor" expected by the court.
    Still not lying "to obtain warrants against members of the Trump campaign."
    And we do have a conviction in that regard.

    https://www.justice.gov/usao-ct/pr/fbi-attorney-admits-altering-email-used-fisa-application-during-crossfire-hurricane

    If that's not lying....you don't play piano.
    No political motivation was found.

    And no one knows your motivation.
    I'm not applying for a FISA warrant..
    Motivation implies some form of conscious intelligence.
    I'm hard pressed to believe you have a motive.
    If you're looking to me to explain Clinesmith's motivation, you're
    looking in the wrong place.

    You're an expert on what isn't while ignorant of what is.

    I almost pity how difficult that must be.

    ScottW

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)