First I will start off because I know our liberal forum members will start bashing the credibility of the source Don't concern your self with the source just watch the dam vid and if you don't want to watch the full 10 minutes which you should start at 9:00 Now I'm not going to comment any further no need the vid speaks for itself I'm just going sit back and be entertained by the spin, distraction, and off topic comments our liberal forum members will attempt
And Dirty Donald had a White House full of aides who could not get security clearances reading all hisTop Secret,Secret and Confidential mail for him because he doesn't like to be bothered by anything requiring he read!!
But it was Obama’s people who broke every security protocol extant and here you are busting the balls of people who didn’t. Lemme guess, you voted Clinton while ignoring her security breaches.
I saw that today watching the hearings. So highly secret that Horowitz couldn't even tell a U.S. Senator what it was. Maybe I can find it on Wikileaks ?
Why does Amanda Renteria ring a bell ? That's right, Wikileaks and the Podesta emails. Hillary was looking for a "taco bowl" (taco bowl is the DNC code word for Mexicans) as director of her campaign thinking having a Latina on her staff was good for 100,000 undocumented Democrat votes. I seriously doubt Amanda Renteria has a security clearance of any kind.
I did find Amanda Renteria on Wikileaks. That's the third time in a week I have used Wikileaks and found stuff that everyone has forgotten about.
From Wikileaks Podesta hacked emails where John Podesta password to his email account was "password." And the DNC blamed the Russians. Re: Amanda Renteria - Public Records Check From:jennifer.m.palmieri@gmail.com To: robbymook2015@gmail.com CC: john.podesta@gmail.com Date: 2015-02-10 22:52 Subject: Re: Amanda Renteria - Public Records Check Think it was just that she did not have a lot of experience. But John will know more. Sent from my iPad > On Feb 10, 2015, at 4:33 PM, Robby Mook <robbymook2015@gmail.com> wrote: > > Continue -> https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/30753
It's the Russians! Amanda Rentería, former Hillary Clinton national political director, said Thursday she feels “deeply” personally violated by reports that Russians used her identity to spread misinformation during the 2016 election. Rentería, the highest ranking Latina in the campaign, was reacting to a Washington Post report that FBI Director James Comey relied on a document considered unreliable and possibly fake by the FBI during his probe of Hillary Clinton's use of a private e-mail server while she was Secretary of State. NBC News has not independently verified the Washington Post report. File photo of Amanda Renteria, National Political Director for Hillary Clinton's 2016 presidential campaign.Jake Heller / NBC News According to the Post, FBI officials became more certain late last summer that there was nothing to substantiate the Russian document, which described a supposed email suggesting Attorney General Loretta Lynch had told Rentería privately that she would not let the FBI investigation go too far into Clinton. Russia Over Reports It Falsely Used Her Name by Suzanne Gamboa / May.25.2017 / 3:08 PM ET The FBI considered it bad intelligence, faked to confuse the bureau, the Post reported. “For many this will feel like ‘just another Russia story.’ But for me this is a deeply personal violation. I’m a proud public servant, and I’ve been honored to serve at the local, state and federal level over the last two decades,” Rentería wrote in a post on Medium. “I love this country, and I’ve tried to every day make it stronger. That’s why it’s absolutely infuriating to learn that the Russians would use my name in their efforts to harm our country” It's the Russians! But I plead the 5th The senators are seeking answers about a Russian intelligence memo — which was obtained by the FBI — that suggested former Attorney General Lynch had assured a member of the Clinton campaign that the investigation into Hillary Clinton’s emails would not go too far. | AP Photo Grassley, Feinstein want answers from Loretta Lynch By AUSTIN WRIGHT 06/23/2017 01:30 PM EDT Updated 06/23/2017 04:46 PM EDT https://www.politico.com/story/2017...hillary-clinton-probe-senate-judiciary-239905 he leaders of the Senate Judiciary Committee have officially launched their investigation into former Attorney General Loretta Lynch, trying to get to the bottom of whether she assured the Hillary Clinton campaign that the FBI probe into Clinton’s emails wouldn’t go too far. The Judiciary panel announced Friday it had sent letters to Lynch and other officials — the opening bid in what Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) said last week would be separate investigations into the firing of former FBI Director James Comey and whether the Obama administration attempted to influence FBI investigations. The letters announced Friday are signed by Grassley and his Democratic counterpart, Sen. Dianne Feinstein of California, along with leaders of the Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime and Terrorism, Chairman Lindsey Graham of South Carolina and ranking Democrat Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island. The senators are seeking answers about a Russian intelligence memo — which was obtained by the FBI — that suggested Lynch had assured a member of the Clinton campaign, Amanda Renteria, that the investigation into Clinton’s emails would not go too far. Oops, it wasn't the Russians after all. Now this denied communication between Lynch and Renteria has been found, 'it's highly clasified'. What the F was the AG Lynch talking about to Clinton's political campaign manager about? Start at 9:00 Lynch will down another 5th and take a nap now!'
The source is not credible. Pundit is the business of creating RW propaganda. Ask yourself if this is such a big deal, if it is real, why isn't it in the MSM? And I don't mean just US media but around the world. When no one else in the world pays attention to something that is in the RW propaganda press, that should tell you the story is fabricated. In this case obviously exaggerating the issues here and trying to make them something they are not.
Here's an odd article from just over a year ago. Note the reporters names, the ones Page and Strzok leaked to as they memorialized in thier texts and the IG slammed in the report. Strange narrative but worth the read: How a dubious Russian document influenced the FBI’s handling of the Clinton probe The FBI used an unreliable intelligence document to defend former FBI director James B. Comey’s handling of the Clinton email probe. (Bastien Inzaurralde/The Washington Post) By Karoun Demirjian and Devlin BarrettMay 24, 2017 A secret document that officials say played a key role in then-FBI Director James B. Comey’s handling of the Hillary Clinton email investigation has long been viewed within the FBI as unreliable and possibly a fake, according to people familiar with its contents. In the midst of the 2016 presidential primary season, the FBI received what was described as a Russian intelligence document claiming a tacit understanding between the Clinton campaign and the Justice Department over the inquiry into whether she intentionally revealed classified information through her use of a private email server. The Russian document cited a supposed email describing how then-Attorney General Loretta E. Lynch had privately assured someone in the Clinton campaign that the email investigation would not push too deeply into the matter. If true, the revelation of such an understanding would have undermined the integrity of the FBI’s investigation. Current and former officials have said that Comey relied on the document in making his July decision to announce on his own, without Justice Department involvement, that the investigation was over. That public announcement — in which he criticized Clinton and made extensive comments about the evidence — set in motion a chain of other FBI moves that Democrats now say helped Trump win the presidential election. But according to the FBI’s own assessment, the document was bad intelligence — and according to people familiar with its contents, possibly even a fake sent to confuse the bureau. The Americans mentioned in the Russian document insist they do not know each other, do not speak to each other and never had any conversations remotely like the ones described in the document. Investigators have long doubted its veracity, and by August the FBI had concluded it was unreliable. Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-Fla.), and sent to Leonard Benardo, an official with the Open Society Foundations, an organization founded by billionaire George Soros and dedicated to promoting democracy. The Russian document did not contain a copy of the email, but it described some of the contents of the purported message. In the supposed email, Wasserman Schultz claimed Lynch had been in private communication with a senior Clinton campaign staffer named Amanda Renteria during the campaign. The document indicated Lynch had told Renteria that she would not let the FBI investigation into Clinton go too far, according to people familiar with it. Current and former officials have argued that the secret document gave Comey good reason to take the extraordinary step over the summer of announcing the findings of the Clinton investigation himself without Justice Department involvement. Comey had little choice, these people have said, because he feared that if Lynch announced no charges against Clinton, and then the secret document leaked, the legitimacy of the entire case would be questioned. From the moment the bureau received the document from a source in early March 2016, its veracity was the subject of an internal debate at the FBI. Several people familiar with the matter said the bureau’s doubts about the document hardened in August when officials became more certain that there was nothing to substantiate the claims in the Russian document. FBI officials knew the bureau never had the underlying email with the explosive allegation, if it ever existed. Amanda Renteria in Washington in April 2014. (Jacquelyn Martin/AP) Yet senior officials at the bureau continued to rely on the document before and after the election as part of their justification for how they handled the case. Wasserman Schultz and Benardo said in separate interviews with The Washington Post that they do not know each other and have never communicated. Renteria, in an interview, and people familiar with Lynch’s account said the two also do not know each other and have never communicated. Lynch declined to comment for this article. I posted 1/3, more at the link. https://www.washingtonpost.com/worl...ory.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.2bee43189fb7 It's a pay wall sometimes so let me know if you need more.
The Emails by themselves do not proove anything. The paragraph that starts with Debbie Wasserman Schultz is not even a sentence. I see Soris throw in but no meat on that. Then pointing to Lynch not letting the FBI probe go to far and the basis is according to people familiar with it. When reports like that say things about Trump Trump fans cry foul if "according tomoeople" is cited.
