Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Jamie153 who wrote (1227675)	5/7/2020 12:09:43 PM
From: Sdgla	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1579682

TREASON By July 2018 the DOJ clearly knew the dossier was full of fabrications, yet they withheld that information from the court and said the predicate was still valid. Why?It doesn’t take a deep-weeds-walker to identify the DOJ motive. In July 2018 Robert Mueller’s investigation was at its apex. This letter justifying the application and claiming the current information would still be a valid predicate therein, speaks to the 2018 DOJ needing to retain the validity of the FISA warrant…. My research suspicion is that the DOJ needed to protect evidence Mueller had already extracted from the fraudulent FISA authority. That’s the motive. In July 2018 if the DOJ-NSD had admitted the FISA application and all renewals were fatally flawed Robert Mueller would have needed to withdraw any evidence gathered as a result of its exploitation. The DOJ in 2018 was protecting Mueller’s poisoned fruit. If the DOJ had been honest with the court, there’s a strong possibility some, perhaps much, of Mueller evidence gathering would have been invalidated… and cases were pending. The solution: mislead the court and claim the predication was still valid. This is not simply a hunch, because that motive also speaks to why the FISC would order the current DOJ to release the letter. Remember, in December the FISC received the IG Horowitz report; and they would have immediately noted the disparity between what IG Horowitz outlined about the FBI investigating Steele’s sub-source, as contrast against what the DOJ told them in July 2018. The DOJ letter is a transparent misrepresentation when compared to the information in the Horowitz report. Hence, the court orders the DOJ to release the July letter so that everyone, including congressional oversight and the public can see the misrepresentation. The court was misled; now everyone can see it.

To: Jamie153 who wrote (1227675)

5/7/2020 12:50:40 PM

From: locogringo

Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 1579682

Are we in agreement then that as of now it appears Mueller didn't investigate Trump or his conspiracy with Russia?

HUH?

You are going to have to get your bullshit together here zz. If Mugsy Mueller didn't investigate Trump, how was he going to charge Trump with something? Do you realize that you are arguing with yourself now and are making no sense at all?

You just posted this: He said he couldn't indict but that was based only on an FBI rule.

But now you are saying the complete opposite. How can you indict somebody that you never investigated and was a total sham? Should we call a doctor for you? Are you having another one of those mental breakdowns?