Search results

this is moronic....Trump did not commit a crime... you cited to a statute dealing with court room type proceedings. no wonder you did not include the entire code... they were no proceedings https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1512 18 U.S. Code § 1512 - Tampering with a witness...

I am not even saying Seth Rich is the leaker and Russia was not. I am not even saying Trump is innocent. We really don't have any proof that it was Russia or Rich. Unfortunately we are probably going to have to wait to FOIA requests get litigated just like we are finding out today about...

this is of course is a plausible scenario. or another plausible scenario is they figured it out after Julian Assange hinted at it on I think it was the Hannity show. I mean the FBI would have had to do some investigating after that interview.

I am offering no timelines. I keep telling you that. The NSA captures everything so in theory so they could have seen this happen real time or they could had queried the database at any time after the docs were captured and stored.

I told you why now would be a great time to leak. Comey is gone and not protecting the establishment. let the info out again. the administration and congress call for a better inquiry. its a prefect leak in the interests of justice.

http://www.shouselaw.com/hearsay.html so lets start with easy one. What law did Trump break when he was speaking with Comey?

who says they knew real time? you?

The federal investigator, who requested anonymity, said 44,053 emails and 17,761 attachments between Democratic National Committee leaders, spanning from January 2015 through late May 2016, were transferred from Rich to MacFadyen before May 21. that seems like a pretty detailed piece of info...

what the hell are you talking about The FBI could have obtained those documents at any time. Just as the white house could ask to pull out of the database conversations after the fact and then unmask the parties.. I am sure the FBI can pull up the conversations of dead people and overseas...

I already realize the info was classified. The question is whether it should have been shared or as McMaster said whter it was wholly appropriate to share. I don't know. And I have no desire to vouch for Trump. I am just trying to stop the bullshit democrat spin.

I offered no timeline. you are the one offering up timelines. I don't think you are getting what I wrote. Everything is captured whether you are under wiretap orders or not. So most likely they were not monitoring Rich real time. But... at some point in time after it occurred they could have...

the way I read it works is that Echelon captures everything and it is stored. So while it is possible the surveillance was real time... it was likely called up after it was stored.

are you denying the FBI was investigating the DNC email leaks? WTF? are you playing stupid on purpose?

explain how this 96 hours limits whether the fbi might know if rich leaked dnc emails to wikileaks in london. you realize that we have learned we capture all communications with foreigners. the program is called echelon... the Obama administration is accused of unmasking people who are caught...

isn't this what McMaster said. "In the context of that discussion, what the president discussed with the foreign minister was wholly appropriate to that conversation and is consistent with the routine sharing of information between the president and any leaders with whom he’s engaged," McMaster...

those notes do not sound like they were contemporaneous. those notes may not overcome foundation and hearsay objections for instance this was not an investigation the notes might also not overcome hearsay objections. the notes might also not overcome foundation objections finally I am not...

The initial Russia investigation / scandal is based on those emails being leaked. given that comey was just fired. does it not make sense that an FBI source would leak the info that it was from Rich... right now. you obviously are not thinking. now there are apparently other Russia...

Whatever... we have seen you for pages today assume every partial statement could be slanted for your side... but you won't allow me to speculate the post was trying to give us guidance. the last thing I am going to to is vouch for the Post's journalistic efforts.

if you can't trust the post to give you guidance about the subject matter than what the hell is the point of reading an article based on a leak anyway... you think they purposely sent us off on a red herring or do you think they were trying to give the reader a bit of guidance. putting a...

you are misrepresenting the situation. you have no idea if the FBI source is real. you have no idea if the FBI has access to the emails if they exist even if the FBI had no physical access to the source of the emails... Wikileaks in London is overseas. I am sure they are surveilled. The FBI...