... What does it say?
### Salty
- Salty Again
- 05-17-2023, 03:41 PM
- 1blackman1
- 05-17-2023, 04:34 PM
The Office located no evidence that in conducting the Crossfire Hurricane investigation the FBI considered whether and how the Clinton Plan intelligence might impact the investigation. No FBI personnel who were interviewed by the Office recalled Crossfire Hurricane personnel taking any action to vet the Clinton Plan intelligence. For example, Brian Auten stated that he could not recall anything that the FBI did to analyze, or otherwise consider the Clinton Plan intelligence, stating that it was "just one data point."
Nor did the Office identify any evidence that the FBI disclosed the contents of the Clinton Plan intelligence to the OI attorneys working on FISA matters related to Crossfire Hurricane. Similarly, the FBI did not disclose any ofthe Clinton Plan intelligence materials to the FISC (despite relying on the uncorroborated Steele reporting in its FISA applications concerning Carter Page), and we uncovered no evidence that anyone at the FBI considered doing so.
The Office showed portions of the Clinton Plan intelligence to a number of individuals who were actively involved in the Crossfire Hurricane investigation. Most advised they had never seen the intelligence before, and some expressed surprise and dismay upon learning of it. For example, the original Supervisory Special Agent on the Crossfire Hurricane investigation, Supervisory Special Agent-1, reviewed the intelligence during one of his interviews with the Office. After reading it, Supervisory Special Agent-I became visibly upset and emotional, left the interview room with his counsel, and subsequently returned to state emphatically that he had never been apprised ofthe Clinton Plan intelligence and had never seen the aforementioned Referral Memo. The Supervisory Special Agent-1 expressed a sense of betrayal that no one had informed him ofthe intelligence. When the Office cautioned Supervisory Special Agent-1 that we had not verified or corroborated the accuracy of the intelligence and its assertions regarding the Clinton campaign, Supervisory Special Agent-I responded firmly that regardless of whether its contents were true, he should have been informed of it
On August 3, 20 I 6, within days ofreceiving the Clinton Plan intelligence, Director Brennan met with the President, Vice President and other senior Administration officials, including but not limited to the Attorney General (who participated remotely) and the FBI Director, in the White House Situation Room to discuss Russian election interference efforts. According to Brennan's handwritten notes and his recollections from the meeting, he briefed on relevant intelligence known to date on Russian election interference, including the Clinton Plan intelligence. Specifically, Director Brennan's declassified handwritten notes reflect that he briefed the meeting's participants regarding the "alleged approval by Hillary Clinton on 26 July of a proposal from one of her [campaign] advisors to vilify Donald Trump by stirring up a scandal claiming interference by the Russian security services.
Nor did the Office identify any evidence that the FBI disclosed the contents of the Clinton Plan intelligence to the OI attorneys working on FISA matters related to Crossfire Hurricane. Similarly, the FBI did not disclose any ofthe Clinton Plan intelligence materials to the FISC (despite relying on the uncorroborated Steele reporting in its FISA applications concerning Carter Page), and we uncovered no evidence that anyone at the FBI considered doing so.
The Office showed portions of the Clinton Plan intelligence to a number of individuals who were actively involved in the Crossfire Hurricane investigation. Most advised they had never seen the intelligence before, and some expressed surprise and dismay upon learning of it. For example, the original Supervisory Special Agent on the Crossfire Hurricane investigation, Supervisory Special Agent-1, reviewed the intelligence during one of his interviews with the Office. After reading it, Supervisory Special Agent-I became visibly upset and emotional, left the interview room with his counsel, and subsequently returned to state emphatically that he had never been apprised ofthe Clinton Plan intelligence and had never seen the aforementioned Referral Memo. The Supervisory Special Agent-1 expressed a sense of betrayal that no one had informed him ofthe intelligence. When the Office cautioned Supervisory Special Agent-1 that we had not verified or corroborated the accuracy of the intelligence and its assertions regarding the Clinton campaign, Supervisory Special Agent-I responded firmly that regardless of whether its contents were true, he should have been informed of it
On August 3, 20 I 6, within days ofreceiving the Clinton Plan intelligence, Director Brennan met with the President, Vice President and other senior Administration officials, including but not limited to the Attorney General (who participated remotely) and the FBI Director, in the White House Situation Room to discuss Russian election interference efforts. According to Brennan's handwritten notes and his recollections from the meeting, he briefed on relevant intelligence known to date on Russian election interference, including the Clinton Plan intelligence. Specifically, Director Brennan's declassified handwritten notes reflect that he briefed the meeting's participants regarding the "alleged approval by Hillary Clinton on 26 July of a proposal from one of her [campaign] advisors to vilify Donald Trump by stirring up a scandal claiming interference by the Russian security services.
- Salty Again
- 05-18-2023, 07:43 AM
... The Clinton PLAN!
... See?
... Thanks for posting that, mate. ...
#### Salty
... See?
... Thanks for posting that, mate. ...
#### Salty
- Jackie S
- 05-18-2023, 08:10 AM
It all started with that lying bitch.
What the Liberals do not seem to grasp, is none of this means anything until you look at the results and what this entire fiasco turned in to.
A three year investigation into “RUSSIA,RUSSIA,RUSSIA. US Senators and Representatives getting on live TV and saying……”US intelligence says “Trump is a Russian asset”. A willing and culpable press parroting anything that the the likes of Schiff, Clapper, Brennen, Nadler, Pelosi etc said as “verified truth”, when in fact it was all lies.
The real victims? The American Voter, whom enough of them believed the lies and subjugation to actually choose a demented, corrupt piece of shit as their next President.
I suppose all involved never want to know the answer to the question…..”who is worse. The lying polititian, or those who believe him”?
What the Liberals do not seem to grasp, is none of this means anything until you look at the results and what this entire fiasco turned in to.
A three year investigation into “RUSSIA,RUSSIA,RUSSIA. US Senators and Representatives getting on live TV and saying……”US intelligence says “Trump is a Russian asset”. A willing and culpable press parroting anything that the the likes of Schiff, Clapper, Brennen, Nadler, Pelosi etc said as “verified truth”, when in fact it was all lies.
The real victims? The American Voter, whom enough of them believed the lies and subjugation to actually choose a demented, corrupt piece of shit as their next President.
I suppose all involved never want to know the answer to the question…..”who is worse. The lying polititian, or those who believe him”?
- 1blackman1
- 05-18-2023, 08:12 AM
- dilbert firestorm
- 05-18-2023, 10:08 AM
- dilbert firestorm
- 05-18-2023, 10:10 AM
donald already has a suit against Hillary.
he should also file suit against other players of the hoax.
we are looking at damaged reputation at massive scale but then the way they look at things, they prolly would see it as badge of honor.
he should also file suit against other players of the hoax.
we are looking at damaged reputation at massive scale but then the way they look at things, they prolly would see it as badge of honor.
- 1blackman1
- 05-18-2023, 02:18 PM
Surely you don’t mean the one that’s been dismissed because it was stupid, I mean frivolous.
Isn’t that the one where his lawyers were sanctioned a half million, or was it 900,000. I can’t recall right off hand.
Surely that’s not the suit you’re referring to.
I suppose if your source is news is opinion sites you might not know that suit was thrown out. Ya know they don’t like providing Trumpys with bad news.
Isn’t that the one where his lawyers were sanctioned a half million, or was it 900,000. I can’t recall right off hand.
Surely that’s not the suit you’re referring to.
I suppose if your source is news is opinion sites you might not know that suit was thrown out. Ya know they don’t like providing Trumpys with bad news.
- Salty Again
- 05-18-2023, 02:24 PM
... You think "it's frivolous" NOW? ... 
You think it will be "thrown out" this time - when it's re-filed
- if it hasn't been already?
How many lawsuits should Biden and OBama see?
They didn't stop Hillary's plan.
Now Carter Page and the other blokes all sue.
Continue to downplay everything though, mate.
Some of us surely enjoy the LAUGHTER... 
#### Salty
You think it will be "thrown out" this time - when it's re-filed
- if it hasn't been already?
How many lawsuits should Biden and OBama see?
They didn't stop Hillary's plan.
Now Carter Page and the other blokes all sue.
Continue to downplay everything though, mate.
Some of us surely enjoy the LAUGHTER...
#### Salty
- 1blackman1
- 05-18-2023, 04:41 PM
Yes. It’s still frivolous and stupid. It never made it past the stage of showing a cause of action so the suit is and was dead on arrival.
I believe it was dismissed with prejudice which would mean it couldn’t be refilled and it’s likely beyond the statute of limitations even if he could possibly bring the suit again.
I believe it was dismissed with prejudice which would mean it couldn’t be refilled and it’s likely beyond the statute of limitations even if he could possibly bring the suit again.
- golferguy55
- 05-18-2023, 06:24 PM
Yes. It’s still frivolous and stupid. It never made it past the stage of showing a cause of action so the suit is and was dead on arrival.
I believe it was dismissed with prejudice which would mean it couldn’t be refilled and it’s likely beyond the statute of limitations even if he could possibly bring the suit again. Originally Posted by 1blackman1
You believe or you know? If you don't then just admit it instead of posting more of your useless partisan bullshit.
- 1blackman1
- 05-18-2023, 07:18 PM
Well, since I was going from memory rather than looking up the actual order I said I believe. See that’s what people with good sense do rather than making some asinine statement like those of golfdude aka whomever has been given a bancation and came back with another identity.
If I cared, I look it and let you know whether it was with or without prejudice and the statute of limitations. But I don’t care enough to get that sorted out. So I’ll stick with I Believe it was 1) dismissed with prejudice making it res judicata or 2) a new claim is time barred by the statute of limitations.
As for you petty insults, they don’t matter. I’m sure you’ll be on another bancation long before your other identity gets off its 3 months. You won’t be missed.
If I cared, I look it and let you know whether it was with or without prejudice and the statute of limitations. But I don’t care enough to get that sorted out. So I’ll stick with I Believe it was 1) dismissed with prejudice making it res judicata or 2) a new claim is time barred by the statute of limitations.
As for you petty insults, they don’t matter. I’m sure you’ll be on another bancation long before your other identity gets off its 3 months. You won’t be missed.
- golferguy55
- 05-18-2023, 07:27 PM
Well, since I was going from memory rather than looking up the actual order I said I believe. See that’s what people with good sense do rather than making some asinine statement like those of golfdude aka whomever has been given a bancation and came back with another identity.
If I cared, I look it and let you know whether it was with or without prejudice and the statute of limitations. But I don’t care enough to get that sorted out. So I’ll stick with I Believe it was 1) dismissed with prejudice making it res judicata or 2) a new claim is time barred by the statute of limitations.
As for you petty insults, they don’t matter. I’m sure you’ll be on another bancation long before your other identity gets off its 3 months. You won’t be missed. Originally Posted by 1blackman1
LMFAO just as I figured more of your useless partisan bullshit that you so eloquently like to post. Here is a clue since you seem to be a little slow and challenged but like you so eloquently like to say no one gives a fuck about your useless posts. And BTW this is the only handle that I have had for several years and never been on a ban. I don't think that you can say the same as if I am not mistaken you recently came back from a forced vacation. I think if the mods would do a deep dive they would find that you probably have multiple handles.
- Salty Again
- 05-18-2023, 08:41 PM
... Mates, let's all stick to the issue.
This revelation from Durham surely changes the landscape.
For all of 'em... From Hillary - to OBama - and right on
down the line! ... $$$$ $$$$$
Oh.. almost forgot --- TRUMP 2024!
#### Salty
This revelation from Durham surely changes the landscape.
For all of 'em... From Hillary - to OBama - and right on
down the line! ... $$$$ $$$$$
Oh.. almost forgot --- TRUMP 2024!
#### Salty