WOODWARD FOUND NO EVIDENCE OF COLLUSION, EVEN THOUGH HE ‘LOOKED FOR IT HARD’

Wait until everyone who is going to sing has sung in the Mueller Song Review.

 

Woodward is the messenger not a source.

 

Woodward and Bernstein brought out the attention.

 

I did see it. And naturally, it's always a joke when somebody says something they shouldn't have. Russia took it seriously.

 

You do not get or maybe you are ignoring what is meant by a third rate burglary. When they said third rate burglary they meant that it was not anything to do with the DNC info. What they meant was that it was just a bunch of punks trying tomsteal junk.

 

I’m happy you agree that Woodward is a credible journalist. Now that we know how dysfunctional this White House, what should be done?

 

The problem with this president is that he was born colluded with every pornstar, shyster, grifter, pearl-handle-gun toating pimp, oligarch, tinhorn dictator, shark, and more, that walks the earth. So of course he looks, acts, and feels guilty.

 

We Need To Get To The Bottom Of Abusive Pretextual Use of FISA

Do They Do This All the Time, or Just for the Trump Investigation?

The "Jamie Gorlick" Wall was removed to promote information-sharing and thus prevent terrorist attacks. Yet its removal did not change the fundamental rules. If agents have a factual basis to believe a crime has been or is being committed, the FBI opens a criminal investigation and uses criminal authorities. If, instead, the main purpose of the investigation is to gather foreign intelligence, the FBI opens a counterintelligence investigation and may use FISA. It remains improper to make pretextual use of FISA to conduct a criminal investigation when there is no factual basis to believe a crime has been committed. Yes, if agents conducting a good-faith FISA investigation incidentally discover evidence of a crime, they are not required to ignore it; but this sensible rule is not a license to conduct a FISA investigation with the objective of unearthing criminal evidence.

Yet, that is what happened in the Trump probe. The FBI has been investigating for well over two years, and for nine months of that time it expressly told the FISA court it believed the Trump campaign was engaged in a corrupt conspiracy with Russia. No one, though, has ever been charged with such a heinous offense. Meanwhile, Deputy Attorney General Rosenstein persists in his refusal to identify any crime for which there was such a strong basis to believe Trump could be guilty that a special counsel had to be appointed.

If there were such a crime, we would have been told about it by now. The “factual” basis for suspecting Trump of an espionage conspiracy with Russia was the uncorroborated, unverifiable Steele dossier. The Obama Justice Department and the FBI used the dossier to get FISA warrants, and in so doing told the court that “prosecutive authorities” would “evaluate” the “foreign intelligence” in a hunt for crimes.

The Justice Department and the FBI know they are not permitted to use FISA as a pretext. If I were a member of Congress, I’d be asking them whether this promise of “prosecutive” review in the Page warrant application

(a) was unique to the Trump investigation or
(b) is invoked whenever the FBI seeks a FISA warrant.
​

Either way, it’s a problem. Either way, it harms the country. If the public becomes convinced that national-security powers, such as those in FISA, are being employed to monitor Americans when there is insufficient evidence to justify a criminal investigation, there will be demands to strip these powers. And those who have insisted through the years that, with responsible supervision by the top tiers of the Justice Department and the Bureau, the government can be trusted not to abuse these powers, can no longer confidently make that assertion.

https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/09/trump-russia-probe-fbi-fisa-application/

 

I say read the DICTIONARY DEFINITION of collusion and then read all the reports of the DIRTY DONALD Jr.,Kushner,Manafort meeting with the Russians in Trump Tower, and the lies about the meetings purpose, and tell me they DON'T FULFILL EVERY PARAMETER OF COLLUSION!!

 

HE definitely is an authority on trump. ...and has tons of proof and recordings

 

Why did 2 or 3 judges grant the FISA?

 

Woodward is your source of information. Unless you know Anonymous.

 

That's a good question.

Here's another:

Why did the FBI redact the time stamps on the applications that shows the time received to the time approved? Deep national secret to protect sources and methods, or to conceal the fact that they were doing a Stevie Wonder imitation with the approval stamp slammed down as fast as the application hit their hands?

Do you give a damn about illegal spying by the US government on American citizens or do you have such a hardon for Trump that you're otherwise blind?

 

Anonymous is the supposed author of the OP-ED. Woodward wrote the book.

 

I do not know anything about any alleged timevstamp redactions. I have not seen any evidence of illegal spying.

An accusation is not evidence.

 

They represented 4 times that they had probable cause to believe that Carter Page was engaged in a criminal conspiracy with the Russian Government, in order to benefit Trump in the 2016 election. The submission to FISC was stamped VERIFIED in each and every submission.

What verified evidence of this have you seen? And, if such evidence exists, why hasn't Page been charged?

What are the odds that if the FBI was forced to produce verified evidence of their claim in a FISC review that the FBI comes up with nothing? And, if this proves to be the case, what would your response be?

 

Woodward relies on anonymous sources when he can't find one in a coma to interview.

Woodward and Bernstein have a long history of making stuff up.

 

My case will be made or not made when Mueller reaches his conclusion. If you think The Trump campaign didn't collude why are you so obsessed with trying to divert and/or discredit Mueller?

 

He doesn't have to try. Anyone with a modicum of intelligence realised long time ago that Mueller's investigation has been discredited beyond repair. Nothing to do with the rule of law. Everything to do with the politics. Favoring one side over the other.

 

Absoultely. Totally discredited. The U.S liberal media turned them into 'heroes'. A joke. The tragic thing is that some morons still view them as such. Their version of events has been debunked. Utterly.

Max Holland’s Leak: reconsidering Watergate’s Deep Throat
http://www.jeffersonflanders.com/2012/03/max-hollands-leak-reconsidering-watergates-deep-throat/


Questions of journalistic ethics

Bob Woodward is also not cast in the most flattering of lights in Leak. Felt found it relatively easy to steer Woodward and his reporting partner Carl Bernstein toward stories that would damage Gray. He fed Woodward “plain untruths—things Felt didn’t know because the FBI didn’t know them; exaggerations or misrepresentations of facts the Bureau had developed; and falsifications of what Felt knew to be the truth.” The Post published two such false stories: that Gray had essentially blackmailed Nixon into appointing him FBI acting director and that the White House was behind the “Canuck letter” that damaged Edmund Muskie’s presidential campaign.

Perhaps Felt’s wildest claim (made right after his confrontation with Ruckelshaus) was informing Woodward that “everyone’s life was in danger” and the CIA had instituted wide-spread wiretaps. This fabrication prompted the dramatic scene in All the President’s Men where Woodward summoned Bernstein to his apartment and—now worried about electronic surveillance— typed out the disturbing claims from Deep Throat. It did make for great drama, even if (as Holland reminds us) one Washington Post editor wondered at the time whether it was “a kind of paranoid delusion of persecution.”

Holland also raises questions about the ethics of the relationship between Woodward and Felt. Woodward’s decision to include Deep Throat in All the President’s Men represented a violation of the deep background agreement the two men had made in 1972. As Holland notes: “The fascination, if not fixation, over Deep Throat obscured the unilateral abrogation of the agreement…”

This expedience paid off: All the President’s Men made Woodward a celebrity (being played by Robert Redford in the film version certainly didn’t hurt) and he and Bernstein benefited handsomely from book sales and film rights. The decades-long guessing game about Deep Throat’s identity also translated into financial rewards: Woodward pocketed a healthy advance for his 2005 book The Secret Man about his relationship with Felt, and the Felt family sold his story to Hollywood for an estimated $1 million.

 

There is no evidence that W and B made anything up.

 

True, it was Butterfield that broke it open.

 

When did I say he's a liar?

 

Felt was the Acting Director of the FBI when he gave the story to Woodward and Bernstein. He was a Hoover boy, and knew how to use the Deep State to take down a president. The "reporters" were pawns.

 

They have ben caught doing it for decades. This is just the latest example.

"The story in question had quoted sources as saying that Cohen, the president's former personal lawyer, was ready to testify that Mr Trump was aware of the June 2016 Trump Tower meeting between his son, Donald Trump Jr and Russians who said they had dirt on Hillary Clinton."

"Cohen's attorney, Lanny Davis, revealed on Monday that he was CNN's source and has since recanted his statement.
CNN has stood by the story and Mr Bernstein, tweeting at the president: "Make no mistake, Mr President, CNN does not lie."
BBC, Carl Bernstein: Trump attacks 'degenerate' Watergate reporter, 30 August 2018.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-45358883