Countdown to Horowitz beginning

[TreeFrogTrader]

The report is an altered document, not documents - Charlie. It’s hard to believe one document will make or break an investigation as large as the one the trump campaign was under.

But, like I said I am actually interested in the Horowitz report and will review it earnestly. You never know. My inclination is this has to do with a date.

You can't put all the pieces together until Durham's report comes out because the scam involves state department and intel agency traitors and Horowitz does not have jurisdiction over them, but Durham does. Just sayin, Horowitz report will be good for foreplay but Durham is looking at the big picture.

Fortunately, we will have a senate trial in progress for months and they can use that forum to discuss all these matters, and then just when that is over, Durham's report will be out in about May or so- Just in time for the campaign season. We can keep this going for another year, easily.

 

[Tony Stark]

You can't put all the pieces together until Durham's report comes out because the scam involves state department and intel agency traitors and Horowitz does not have jurisdiction over them, but Durham does. Just sayin, Horowitz report will be good for foreplay but Durham is looking at the big picture.

Fortunately, we will have a senate trial in progress for months and they can use that forum to discuss all these matters, and then just when that is over, Durham's report will be out in about May or so- Just in time for the campaign season. We can keep this going for another year, easily.

For months you have been telling us The Horowitz report would be released any day and some earth shattering conspiracy would be revealed and Obama and his administration would be going down.Now Horowitz is just foreplay and we have to wait 6 months for Durham.You're a fucking idiot.

 

[UsualName]

You can't put all the pieces together until Durham's report comes out because the scam involves state department and intel agency traitors and Horowitz does not have jurisdiction over them, but Durham does. Just sayin, Horowitz report will be good for foreplay but Durham is looking at the big picture.

Fortunately, we will have a senate trial in progress for months and they can use that forum to discuss all these matters, and then just when that is over, Durham's report will be out in about May or so- Just in time for the campaign season. We can keep this going for another year, easily.

Well there’s an altered document. Woo-wie

 

[TreeFrogTrader]

Well there’s an altered document. Woo-wie

Yup, just business as usual in the swamp.

I get what you are sayin.

Everyone there falsified documents if they needed to do it to get a fisa warrant. Nothing to see there. Time to move on.

 

[elderado]

Well there’s an altered document. Woo-wie

That's not how it works. That's not how any of this works.

You must be from Zimbabwe or something.

 

[UsualName]

That's not how it works. That's not how any of this works.

You must be from Zimbabwe or something.

Ohh. Please tell us how this works, Captain America.

 

[UsualName]

Yup, just business as usual in the swamp.

I get what you are sayin.

Everyone there falsified documents if they needed to do it to get a fisa warrant. Nothing to see there. Time to move on.

My point is that it would be a significant development if it was a material change such as witness stated something they didn’t or something along those lines. I doubt it but it’s possible.

Taking a person off of a list of people present at an interview who did not participate would not be material or changing a recieved date either. These are common alterations when trying to present facts to a court. These may not be appropriate but do happen and aren’t material.

The correct way to submit evidence that needs clarification is an amendment memo. Again, this doesn’t always happen when you have hundreds, if not, thousands of documents.

The point is evidence gets altered no matter what that’s why there’s tight records on chain of custody.

We’ll see though. Like I said, Horowitz will most likely dramatize the narrative of the report but I don’t doubt his findings.

 

[TreeFrogTrader]

My point is that it would be a significant development if it was a material change such as witness stated something they didn’t or something along those lines. I doubt it but it’s possible.

Taking a person off of a list of people present at an interview who did not participate would not be material or changing a recieved date either. These are common alterations when trying to present facts to a court. These may not be appropriate but do happen and aren’t material.

The correct way to submit evidence that needs clarification is an amendment memo. Again, this doesn’t always happen when you have hundreds, if not, thousands of documents.

The point is evidence gets altered no matter what that’s why there’s tight records on chain of custody.

We’ll see though. Like I said, Horowitz will most likely dramatize the narrative of the report but I don’t doubt his findings.

You think that the person who was involved was referred for potential prosecution for anything less than a material violation? Ahh, I don't think so.

Your best defense here to make it all go away is to point out that it is a story that CNN broke so it is probably all fake news.

There, just helped you out.

 

[UsualName]

You think that the person who was involved was referred for potential prosecution for anything less than a material violation? Ahh, I don't think so.

Your best defense here to make it all go away is to point out that it is a story that CNN broke so it is probably all fake news.

There, just helped you out.

No. Look at what Barr referred McCabe for. That was a nothing referral. His track record on this is poor.

 

[TreeFrogTrader]

No. Look at what Barr referred McCabe for. That was a nothing referral. His track record on this is poor.

He referred him on a potential felony charge of obstruction. That was the underlying issue. Whether he is prosecuted or not is another matter.

You just made my point for me in tard fashion.

Similarly, horowitz and others would not even be talking about referral on the fisa fraud misrepresentation unless it was a material violation. They are not referring him for misspelling his street address type of thing as you are foolishly trying your luck with.

Nevermind anyway. I want to hear from Horowitz and Durham, not your lame shiite.