Quote:

---

Originally posted by THG:
Anybody else need more evidence six ( jack ) is a racist? I don't...

T

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
Apparently Elijah Cummings Died this past week.

---

Yes. He will be remembered for his legacy of rat infested streets in Baltimore, as well as being a recognized member of the White Power movement, according to the ADL's new rules.





https://www.adl.org/education/references/hate-symbols/okay-hand-gestur
e

Do Right, Be Right. :)

---

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
Hey dipshit.

You'll notice that not on one single occasion has anybody else replied to you reposting that link and using it to justify your claims that I am racist. Not even second or wishy.

That's because everybody knows that you're full of shit.



I will ask you again, please explain to the class how that post proves that I'm a racist.




Do Right, Be Right. :)

---

Quote:

---

Former NSA Tech Chief Says Mueller Report Was Based on CIA-Fabricated ‘Evidence’

NSA whistleblower, former NSA technical chief, Bill Binney, says CIA created the ‘evidence’ for the Mueller Report’s allegation that Russia had hacked DNC.

by Eric Zuesse Eric Zuesse
December 17, 2019

On December 12th, the retired NSA whistleblower and former Technical Director of the NSA, Bill Binney asserted, at 39:00-44:00 in this audio interview of him:

—

BILL BINNEY: I basically have always been saying that all of this Russian hack never happened, but we have some more evidence coming out recently. We haven’t published it yet, but what we have seen is that there are at least five items that we’ve found that were produced by Guccifer 2.0 back on June 15th, where they had the Russian fingerprints in them, suggesting the Russians made the hack. Well, we found the same five items published by Wikileaks in the Podesta emails. Those items do not have the Russian fingerprints, which directly implies that Guccifer 2.0 was inserting these into the files to make it look like the Russians did this hack. Taking that into account with all the other evidence we have; like the download speeds from Guccifer 2.0 were too fast, and they couldn’t be managed by the web...

Taking that into account with the fabrication of the Russian fingerprints, it leads us back to inferring that in fact the marble framework out of the Vault 7 compromise of CIA hacking routines was a possible user in this case. In other words, it looked like the CIA did this, and that it was a matter of the CIA making it look like the Russians were doing the hack. So, when you look at that and also look at the DNC emails that were published by Wikileaks that have this phat file format in them, all 35,813 of these emails have rounded off times to the nearest even second. That’s a phat file format property; that argues that those files were, in fact, downloaded to a thumb drive or CD-rom and physically transported before Wikileaks posted them.

Which again argues that it wasn’t a hack. So, all of the evidence we’re finding is clearly evidence that the Russians were not in fact hacking; it was probably our own people. It’s very hard for us to get this kind of information out. The mainstream media won’t cover it; none of them will.

---

Quote:

---

Horowitz Vows 'Deep Dive' On Potential FBI Surveillance Abuse

After the FBI was busted fabricating evidence to mislead the top-secret court that approves surveillance warrants, the Justice Department's Inspector General has vowed to conduct a "deep dive" to determine the extent of other potential abuses by the Federal Bureau of Investigation.

"We don’t know what we don’t know," Inspector General Michael Horowitz told the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee during a Wednesday hearing, according to Bloomberg.

Horowitz says he launched an inquiry into wiretap orders after finding 17 'significant errors or omissions' in the FBI's applications submitted to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) court to spy on former Trump campaign aide Carter Page.

"What we’re going to do in the first instance is have our auditors do some selections of counterintelligence and counterterrorism," he said, adding "We have limited resources, and we want to make sure we’re targeting them in the right places."

... On Tuesday, the FISA court issued a rare public statement, slamming the FBI over Horowitz's findings.

"In order to appreciate the seriousness of that misconduct and its implications, it is useful to understand certain procedural and substantive requirements that apply to the government's conduct of electronic surveillance for foreign intelligence purposes," reads the statement.

"The FBI's handling of the Carter Page applications, as portrayed in the OIG report, was antithetical to the heightned duty of candor" required by federal investigators, adding "The frequency with which representations made by FBI personnel turned out to be unsupported or contradicted by information in their possession, and with which they withheld information detrimental to their case, calls into question whether information contained in other FBI applications is reliable," wrote the court, which called the recent watchdog report from the DOJ's Inspector General "troubling."

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
JO, PHYSICAL EVIDENCE
Bill Binney helped write the correlation and search software for the NSA.

Quote:

---

Former NSA Tech Chief Says Mueller Report Was Based on CIA-Fabricated ‘Evidence’

NSA whistleblower, former NSA technical chief, Bill Binney, says CIA created the ‘evidence’ for the Mueller Report’s allegation that Russia had hacked DNC.

by Eric Zuesse Eric Zuesse
December 17, 2019

On December 12th, the retired NSA whistleblower and former Technical Director of the NSA, Bill Binney asserted, at 39:00-44:00 in this audio interview of him:

—

BILL BINNEY: I basically have always been saying that all of this Russian hack never happened, but we have some more evidence coming out recently. We haven’t published it yet, but what we have seen is that there are at least five items that we’ve found that were produced by Guccifer 2.0 back on June 15th, where they had the Russian fingerprints in them, suggesting the Russians made the hack. Well, we found the same five items published by Wikileaks in the Podesta emails. Those items do not have the Russian fingerprints, which directly implies that Guccifer 2.0 was inserting these into the files to make it look like the Russians did this hack. Taking that into account with all the other evidence we have; like the download speeds from Guccifer 2.0 were too fast, and they couldn’t be managed by the web...

Taking that into account with the fabrication of the Russian fingerprints, it leads us back to inferring that in fact the marble framework out of the Vault 7 compromise of CIA hacking routines was a possible user in this case. In other words, it looked like the CIA did this, and that it was a matter of the CIA making it look like the Russians were doing the hack. So, when you look at that and also look at the DNC emails that were published by Wikileaks that have this phat file format in them, all 35,813 of these emails have rounded off times to the nearest even second. That’s a phat file format property; that argues that those files were, in fact, downloaded to a thumb drive or CD-rom and physically transported before Wikileaks posted them.

Which again argues that it wasn’t a hack. So, all of the evidence we’re finding is clearly evidence that the Russians were not in fact hacking; it was probably our own people. It’s very hard for us to get this kind of information out. The mainstream media won’t cover it; none of them will.

---

MORE AT https://theduran.com/former-nsa-tech-chief-says-mueller-report-was-bas
ed-on-cia-fabricated-evidence/

---

Quote:

---

The Great Cover Up Of The Biggest Scandal In American History

Via The Z-Man blog,

Joe diGenova has been talking about the seditious plot to overturn the 2016 election for at least a year, maybe longer. Unlike a lot of the people commenting on this in the mass media, he is not using it to sell books or boost his cable career. He also knows how the FBI and DOJ works from a practical matter. Being knowledgeable makes him a rare guy in the commentariat. Most of the people brought on as experts for the cable chat shows know very little about their alleged areas of expertise.

Regardless, he has been one of the most hawkish people on the Barr investigation, claiming that it is a real investigation with real criminal targets. In this recent radio interview he goes into the details of both the Barr investigation and the ongoing impeachment fiasco. He is a Trump partisan, so his opinions on impeachment are predictable, but his thoughts on the conspiracy are interesting. He probably has access to information from the Trump White House.

The interesting thing about all of this is just how widespread the conspiracy was during the 2015-2016 period. In that interview he talks about former NSA Director Admiral Mike Rogers, who is allegedly cooperating with Barr and Durham. What makes the Rogers issue interesting is that he was the original whistle-blower. He is not treated as such, because the media hates Trump and anyone associated with him, but Rogers was the guy who blew the whistle on the spying to the Trump people.

What’s also interesting about Rogers is he seems to have been a good guy, who decided to put an end to the shenanigans with regards to access to top-secret data by FBI contractors. He closed off their access at some point in 2016, which put him in bad odor with the Obama administration. He was eventually pushed out, which suggests the conspiracy has roots into the Obama inner-circle. That may explain why the easy cases to be made against the FBI conspirators are on hold.

That’s the other thing about the Rogers case. As CTH explains in that post, his addition to the story reveals that the use of the NSA database by political contractors working for the Democrats goes back to at least 2012. It is an axiom of white-collar crime that the practice always goes back much further than the evidence initially reveals. Anyone who has done forensic accounting knows this. You find the first evidence of a crime, but it turns out that the pattern goes back much further.

That may be what lies beneath all of this. The great puzzle thus far has been the lack of prosecutions, despite ample evidence. The FBI agents are all guilty of crimes that have been detailed in public documents and the IG reports. There is now proof that Comey perjured himself many times. Just from a public relations perspective alone, rounding up these guys and charging them with corruption seems like a no-brainer. Almost a year into his tenure and Barr has charged no one with a crime.

One obvious explanation is that Barr is running a long con on Trump and the rest of the country, on behalf of the inner party. Robert Mueller was supposed to use his investigation to hoover up all the data so it could not be made public, in addition to harassing the Trump White House. His incompetence meant Barr took over the job and is now hoovering up all the information on the various parties. That way, everyone has an excuse for not doing anything about plot.

One bit of evidence in support of this is the handling of the James Wolfe issue. He was the Senate staffer caught leaking classified information to one of the prostitutes hired by the Washington Post. Big media hires good looking young women to sleep with flunkies like Wolf in order to get access to information. Wolf was caught and charged, but instead of getting a couple years in jail, he got two months. He will come out and land into a six-figure job as a reward for being a good soldier.

An alternative explanation is that what started as a straight forward political corruption case bumped into a long pattern of behavior. In the course of investigating that pattern, the trail went much further back than the 2016 election. If there is evidence of abuse going back to 2012, maybe it goes back further. It was the Bush people, after all, who pushed for the creation of secret courts and secret warrants. Maybe Dick Cheney was listening to your phone calls after all.

It is not just the linear aspect of this. The sheer number of people involved in just the FBI scandal is phenomenal. There are at least 20 FBI people named and dozens of bit players in the media and DOJ. So far, the “contractors” with access to the NSA database have not been revealed, but that could be hundreds of people, given that it seems to have been a free-for-all. The corruption may not only go back a long time, but cover a wide swath of official Washington.

That may be the answer to the great cover up. That’s what we are seeing. This is a great cover up of the biggest scandal in American history. To date, no one has been charged with a crime, despite hundreds of crimes being documented. Many of the principals are now enjoying high six figure lives, based on the fact they were part of the seditious plot to overturn the 2016 election. Instead of the scandal of the century, it is the celebration of the century for the inner party.

One of the signs of ruling class collapse is when they can no longer enforce the rules that maintain them as a ruling class. When the Romans started making exceptions to republican governance, it was a matter of time before someone simply decided the rules no longer applied to them. Perhaps the robot historians will consider Obama our Marius or Sulla. Maybe that person is in the near future. Either way, the rule of law is over and what comes next is the rule of men.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Horowitz, having stuck his finger in the air to see which way the political wind is blowing, now tries to be more rigorous.

Quote:

---

Horowitz Vows 'Deep Dive' On Potential FBI Surveillance Abuse

After the FBI was busted fabricating evidence to mislead the top-secret court that approves surveillance warrants, the Justice Department's Inspector General has vowed to conduct a "deep dive" to determine the extent of other potential abuses by the Federal Bureau of Investigation.

"We don’t know what we don’t know," Inspector General Michael Horowitz told the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee during a Wednesday hearing, according to Bloomberg.

Horowitz says he launched an inquiry into wiretap orders after finding 17 'significant errors or omissions' in the FBI's applications submitted to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) court to spy on former Trump campaign aide Carter Page.

"What we’re going to do in the first instance is have our auditors do some selections of counterintelligence and counterterrorism," he said, adding "We have limited resources, and we want to make sure we’re targeting them in the right places."

... On Tuesday, the FISA court issued a rare public statement, slamming the FBI over Horowitz's findings.

"In order to appreciate the seriousness of that misconduct and its implications, it is useful to understand certain procedural and substantive requirements that apply to the government's conduct of electronic surveillance for foreign intelligence purposes," reads the statement.

"The FBI's handling of the Carter Page applications, as portrayed in the OIG report, was antithetical to the heightned duty of candor" required by federal investigators, adding "The frequency with which representations made by FBI personnel turned out to be unsupported or contradicted by information in their possession, and with which they withheld information detrimental to their case, calls into question whether information contained in other FBI applications is reliable," wrote the court, which called the recent watchdog report from the DOJ's Inspector General "troubling."

---

MORE AT https://www.zerohedge.com/political/horowitz-vows-deep-dive-potential-
fbi-surveillance-abuse

---

Quote:

---

Both Roger Stone Prosecutors Resign 'Immediately' After DOJ Rejects Absurd

Update (1605ET): Just a few short hours after Aaron Zelinsky resigned, Roger Stone's other prosecutor Jonathan Kravis has also just resigned as Assistant US Attorney.

Jonathan Kravis "has resigned as an Assistant United States Attorney and therefore no longer represents the government in this case."

Kravis, a former clerk to Justice Stephen Breyer and Judge Merrick Garland on the US Court of Appeals, served as an associate White House counsel for the Obama administration from 2009 to 2010.

***

The prosecutor who recommended that Trump confidant Roger Stone receive up to nine years in prison has resigned, effective immediately - after reports have emerged that his office misled the DOJ over the proposal, which reportedly 'shocked' DOJ officials enough that they will re-file it.

Prosecutor Aaron Zelinsky gave no details in a Tuesday letter submitted in Stone's case, however a footnote reads that it was "effective immediately."

The notice doesn't give a reason - it cites to a local court rule that requires the U.S. government to designate a DOJ attorney who will appear on behalf of the government. Zelinsky signed the withdraw notice. pic.twitter.com/gSCTh6Y0zQ — Brad Heath (@bradheath) February 11, 2020

Gotta read the footnotes. Zelinsky, the former Mueller prosecutor still helping with the Stone case, resigned from DOJ "effective immediately." pic.twitter.com/kELeKQ11Eo — Brad Heath (@bradheath) February 11, 2020

Earlier Tuesday, AP reported that the Justice Department would "take the extraordinary step of lowering the recommended prison time for Roger Stone, an ally of President Donald Trump, a federal official said Tuesday."

This is a horrible and very unfair situation. The real crimes were on the other side, as nothing happens to them. Cannot allow this miscarriage of justice! https://t.co/rHPfYX6Vbv — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) February 11, 2020

Beg your pardon?

Hours later, The Federalist's Sean Davis reported that federal prosecutors were reportedly blindsided by the recommendation, which a Fox News source said the DOJ felt was "extreme, excessive, and grossly disproportionate" to Stone's crimes.

“The Department was shocked to see the sentencing recommendation in the filing in the Stone case last night,” the DOJ official reportedly told Fox. “The sentencing recommendation was not what had been briefed to the Department.”
The report from Fox News suggested that DOJ was in the process of rescinding the rogue prosecutors’ recommendation. -The Federalist

What's more, "Sources told The Federalist that Timothy Shea, who was recently appointed to take over as the top federal prosecutor in D.C. earlier this month, was bullied into agreeing to the sentence recommendation by Adam Jed and Aaron Zelinsky, who were originally tapped by Mueller to investigate whether Donald Trump treasonously colluded with the Russian government to steal the 2016 election from Hillary Clinton."

To put it in perspective: The FBI/special counsel/Democrats initially suspected that Trump associates actively conspired with Russia & WikiLeaks. At the end, all they found was that Roger Stone committed process crimes related to his *conversations* about (not with) WikiLeaks. — Chuck Ross (@ChuckRossDC) February 11, 2020

In a Monday evening sentencing memorandum, prosecutors asked for Stone to serve between 87 and 108 months in federal prison, which they argued was within federal guidelines. They argued in court filings that "Stone’s actions were not a one-off mistake in judgement," and that he "decided to double – and triple – down on his criminal conduct by tampering with a witness for months in order to make sure his obstruction would be successful."

Prosecutors charged that Stone lied to Congress about his conversations about WikiLeaks with New York radio host Randy Credico — who had scored an interview with WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange in 2016 — and conservative writer and conspiracy theorist Jerome Corsi. During the 2016 campaign, Stone mentioned in interviews and public appearances that he was in contact with Assange through a trusted intermediary and hinted at inside knowledge of WikiLeaks’ plans. But he started pressing Credico to broker a contact, and Credico testified that he told Stone to work through his own intermediary. -AP

News of the reversal has absolutely triggered the left, with former DOJ counterintelligence chief David Laufman calling it a "break-glass-in-case-of-fire moment."

Former counterintelligence chief at DOJ:
“We are now at a break-glass-in-case-of-fire moment for the Justice Department” https://t.co/yOQWIwStOS — Rachel Maddow MSNBC (@maddow) February 11, 2020

---

Quote:

---

As AP notes, federal prosecutors also recently softened their sentencing position on former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn, saying "they would not oppose a probation of punishment after initially saying that he deserved up to six months in prison for lying to the FBI. The Flynn prosecution is also being handled by the U.S. Attorney’s office in Washington."

He's a corrupt left-wing activist who has been wreaking havoc unchecked for years now. And guess who he was working for before Mueller hired him for Mueller's little coup operation? Rod Rosenstein. https://t.co/vgICR8KKoB — Sean Davis (@seanmdav) February 11, 2020

---

Quote:

---

Trump really should stop licking his fingers than sticking them in the pie.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 1KIKI:

Quote:

---

Trump really should stop licking his fingers than sticking them in the pie.

---

It should be 'then'.

---

Quote:

---

Fourth Stone Prosecutor Resigns After DOJ Rejects Absurd Sentencing Proposal

Update (1745ET): A fourth career prosecutor working the Roger Stone case has resigned, after Michael Marando notified the court of his withdrawal. He joins Aaron Zelinsky, Jonathan Kravis and Adam Jed - who reportedly bullied federal prosectuor Timothy Shea into recommending a heavy-handed sentence to the long-time Trump associate.

According to Axios, the DOJ has filed a new sentencing recommendation which does not offer a specific sentence recommendation - instead, deferring to the court.

The new memo argues "the witness Stone was convicted of attempting to intimidate, Randy Credico, claims that he "did not perceive a genuine threat,"" according to the report.

Following the Stone chaos, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) demanded that the DOJ Inspector General investigate the matter, saying "This situation has all the indicia of improper political interference in a criminal prosecution."

Stone was found guilty in November on seven counts related to attempts to learn more about when WikiLeaks would publish emails which were harmful to Hillary Clinton's bid for the White House in 2016.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:

I created this thread to track all of the coming resignations, firings, and indictments of those who plotted to depose Trump.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
Should Democrats be concerned that Trump has nearly 10 million more Twitter followers than people who voted for him in 2016?

---

Quote:

---

SIGNY: I created this thread to track all of the coming resignations, firings, and indictments of those who plotted to depose Trump.

SECONDRATE: You are not tracking plots to depose Trump. Instead, you are tracking Trump's crazy exploits and the futile attempts to make him act like he is not crazy or not the loose cannon you theorized he would become once elected President. Trump certainly proved your theory correct. He is a loose cannon.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

You mean the Democrats who lie for a living just haven't figured out how to game Twitter yet? C'mon dude. Democrats own Twitter.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by captaincrunch:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

You mean the Democrats who lie for a living just haven't figured out how to game Twitter yet? C'mon dude. Democrats own Twitter.

---

If the Dems own Twitter wouldn't they have more followers?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

They would, if there were number rigging going on like you suggested. But there isn't, so they don't.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:

Quote:

---

SIGNY: I created this thread to track all of the coming resignations, firings, and indictments of those who plotted to depose Trump.

SECONDRATE: You are not tracking plots to depose Trump. Instead, you are tracking Trump's crazy exploits and the futile attempts to make him act like he is not crazy or not the loose cannon you theorized he would become once elected President. Trump certainly proved your theory correct. He is a loose cannon.

---

Wow, you STILL don't get it, do you? I voted for Trump not DESPITE him being a loose cannon but BECAUSE of it. I figured even if he couldn't do anything positive he could at least shake things up. That should give you an idea of how much I despised the Bush1, Bill, Bush2, Barack, and Hillary dynasty.

In another post, you wrung your hands about how "change" is not possible thanks to the two-chamber structure of American legislatures. Well, Trump is change ... which you're clearly afraid of. You don't really want change, do you? You just want a specific kind of result, which reflects your hatred of Republicans and Americans. So, yanno, save me the sanctimonious hand-wringing. You hate Americans, so why do you pretend to care what happens to the rest of us? Just shut up and go count your money.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 1KIKI:
Yep. There's divisions in the Deep State. And one of them is between the spooks - favored by Obama, they did really well under his tenure, just look at Utah - and the military proper. It seems the spooks dislike Trump quite a bit, yanno, look at all the dirty tricks they unleashed. So I'm guessing Trump is looking for support from the traditional military/ industrial complex.

But dems have to be in on it too, or it goes nowhere. What do YOU think the dems are going to do about that unthinkable travesty?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by captaincrunch:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

They would, if there were number rigging going on like you suggested. But there isn't, so they don't.

---

And how do you know that? Do you even use Twitter?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by captaincrunch:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
They would, if there were number rigging going on like you suggested. But there isn't, so they don't.

---

And how do you know that? Do you even use Twitter?

---

Did you read the rest of my comment?

No. Apparently, you did not.


And how would using Twitter qualify one as being an expert on Twitter anyhow.

What a stupid, stupid question on several levels.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
The times.... and the DOJ... they are a-changing.

Quote:

---

Both Roger Stone Prosecutors Resign 'Immediately' After DOJ Rejects Absurd

Update (1605ET): Just a few short hours after Aaron Zelinsky resigned, Roger Stone's other prosecutor Jonathan Kravis has also just resigned as Assistant US Attorney.

Jonathan Kravis "has resigned as an Assistant United States Attorney and therefore no longer represents the government in this case."

Kravis, a former clerk to Justice Stephen Breyer and Judge Merrick Garland on the US Court of Appeals, served as an associate White House counsel for the Obama administration from 2009 to 2010.

***

The prosecutor who recommended that Trump confidant Roger Stone receive up to nine years in prison has resigned, effective immediately - after reports have emerged that his office misled the DOJ over the proposal, which reportedly 'shocked' DOJ officials enough that they will re-file it.

Prosecutor Aaron Zelinsky gave no details in a Tuesday letter submitted in Stone's case, however a footnote reads that it was "effective immediately."

The notice doesn't give a reason - it cites to a local court rule that requires the U.S. government to designate a DOJ attorney who will appear on behalf of the government. Zelinsky signed the withdraw notice. pic.twitter.com/gSCTh6Y0zQ — Brad Heath (@bradheath) February 11, 2020

Gotta read the footnotes. Zelinsky, the former Mueller prosecutor still helping with the Stone case, resigned from DOJ "effective immediately." pic.twitter.com/kELeKQ11Eo — Brad Heath (@bradheath) February 11, 2020

Earlier Tuesday, AP reported that the Justice Department would "take the extraordinary step of lowering the recommended prison time for Roger Stone, an ally of President Donald Trump, a federal official said Tuesday."

This is a horrible and very unfair situation. The real crimes were on the other side, as nothing happens to them. Cannot allow this miscarriage of justice! https://t.co/rHPfYX6Vbv — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) February 11, 2020

Beg your pardon?

Hours later, The Federalist's Sean Davis reported that federal prosecutors were reportedly blindsided by the recommendation, which a Fox News source said the DOJ felt was "extreme, excessive, and grossly disproportionate" to Stone's crimes.

“The Department was shocked to see the sentencing recommendation in the filing in the Stone case last night,” the DOJ official reportedly told Fox. “The sentencing recommendation was not what had been briefed to the Department.”
The report from Fox News suggested that DOJ was in the process of rescinding the rogue prosecutors’ recommendation. -The Federalist

What's more, "Sources told The Federalist that Timothy Shea, who was recently appointed to take over as the top federal prosecutor in D.C. earlier this month, was bullied into agreeing to the sentence recommendation by Adam Jed and Aaron Zelinsky, who were originally tapped by Mueller to investigate whether Donald Trump treasonously colluded with the Russian government to steal the 2016 election from Hillary Clinton."

To put it in perspective: The FBI/special counsel/Democrats initially suspected that Trump associates actively conspired with Russia & WikiLeaks. At the end, all they found was that Roger Stone committed process crimes related to his *conversations* about (not with) WikiLeaks. — Chuck Ross (@ChuckRossDC) February 11, 2020

In a Monday evening sentencing memorandum, prosecutors asked for Stone to serve between 87 and 108 months in federal prison, which they argued was within federal guidelines. They argued in court filings that "Stone’s actions were not a one-off mistake in judgement," and that he "decided to double – and triple – down on his criminal conduct by tampering with a witness for months in order to make sure his obstruction would be successful."

Prosecutors charged that Stone lied to Congress about his conversations about WikiLeaks with New York radio host Randy Credico — who had scored an interview with WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange in 2016 — and conservative writer and conspiracy theorist Jerome Corsi. During the 2016 campaign, Stone mentioned in interviews and public appearances that he was in contact with Assange through a trusted intermediary and hinted at inside knowledge of WikiLeaks’ plans. But he started pressing Credico to broker a contact, and Credico testified that he told Stone to work through his own intermediary. -AP

News of the reversal has absolutely triggered the left, with former DOJ counterintelligence chief David Laufman calling it a "break-glass-in-case-of-fire moment."

Former counterintelligence chief at DOJ:
“We are now at a break-glass-in-case-of-fire moment for the Justice Department” https://t.co/yOQWIwStOS — Rachel Maddow MSNBC (@maddow) February 11, 2020

---

I see Madcow is still hyperventilating

Quote:

---

As AP notes, federal prosecutors also recently softened their sentencing position on former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn, saying "they would not oppose a probation of punishment after initially saying that he deserved up to six months in prison for lying to the FBI. The Flynn prosecution is also being handled by the U.S. Attorney’s office in Washington."

He's a corrupt left-wing activist who has been wreaking havoc unchecked for years now. And guess who he was working for before Mueller hired him for Mueller's little coup operation? Rod Rosenstein. https://t.co/vgICR8KKoB — Sean Davis (@seanmdav) February 11, 2020

---

https://www.zerohedge.com/political/roger-stone-prosecutor-resigns-imm
ediately-after-doj-rejects-absurd-sentencing-proposal

-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake

Happy New Year, WISHY. I edited out your psychopathic screed!

---

Quote:

---

Is this your "unthinkable travesty"?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by captaincrunch:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
They would, if there were number rigging going on like you suggested. But there isn't, so they don't.

---

And how do you know that? Do you even use Twitter?

---

Did you read the rest of my comment?

No. Apparently, you did not.


And how would using Twitter qualify one as being an expert on Twitter anyhow.

What a stupid, stupid question on several levels.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

---

Wouldn't any nominal expert on tweeter by definition know better than to actually use tweeter?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by captaincrunch:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

They would, if there were number rigging going on like you suggested. But there isn't, so they don't.

---

And how do you know that? Do you even use Twitter?

---

Did you read the rest of my comment?

No. Apparently, you did not.

And how would using Twitter qualify one as being an expert on Twitter anyhow.

What a stupid, stupid question on several levels.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by captaincrunch:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
They would, if there were number rigging going on like you suggested. But there isn't, so they don't.

---

And how do you know that? Do you even use Twitter?

---

Did you read the rest of my comment?

No. Apparently, you did not.

And how would using Twitter qualify one as being an expert on Twitter anyhow.

What a stupid, stupid question on several levels.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

---

Wouldn't any nominal expert on tweeter by definition know better than to actually use tweeter?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by captaincrunch:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by captaincrunch:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

They would, if there were number rigging going on like you suggested. But there isn't, so they don't.

---

And how do you know that? Do you even use Twitter?

---

Did you read the rest of my comment?

No. Apparently, you did not.

And how would using Twitter qualify one as being an expert on Twitter anyhow.

What a stupid, stupid question on several levels.

---

If you used Twitter you would, gee, I don't know, actually learn more about how it works?

If the Dems owned Twitter wouldn't Dem candidates all have more followers than Trump? If the Silicon Valley was all Dem would Facebook be so Trump friendly?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
I know how Twitter works, dipshit. It's easy enough, even a monkey like you can use it.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
That's why there are hundreds of millions of people using it. Not a very good cross section of the best and the brightest minds in the world on that platform.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
The Democratic Party doesn't own twitter.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
You said the numbers are rigged for Trump. I said they weren't.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
But if number rigging were happening in Social Media, it would be much easier for Democrats to get away with it because of the obvious bias and countless examples of censorship of anybody who doesn't tow the "progressive" line.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by captaincrunch:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
I know how Twitter works, dipshit. It's easy enough, even a monkey like you can use it.

---

---

Quote:

---

Complete logic fail. It's easy - just write a check. It's especially easy if you are a conman and have zero scruples like that fat, Lying-f*ck-in-chief.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by captaincrunch:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
They would, if there were number rigging going on like you suggested. But there isn't, so they don't.

---

And how do you know that? Do you even use Twitter?

---

Did you read the rest of my comment?

No. Apparently, you did not.


And how would using Twitter qualify one as being an expert on Twitter anyhow.

What a stupid, stupid question on several levels.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

---

Wouldn't any nominal expert on tweeter by definition know better than to actually use tweeter?

---

I do believe you're right.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by captaincrunch:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
They would, if there were number rigging going on like you suggested. But there isn't, so they don't.

---

And how do you know that? Do you even use Twitter?

---

Did you read the rest of my comment?

No. Apparently, you did not.


And how would using Twitter qualify one as being an expert on Twitter anyhow.

What a stupid, stupid question on several levels.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

---

Wouldn't any nominal expert on tweeter by definition know better than to actually use tweeter?

---

I do believe you're right.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

---

Some people still won't get it, though. Like some people actually think that somebody who uses Apple actually knows more about how to use a computer than somebody who programs computers. Somebody who pushes the Start button on a machine actually knows more about the machine than somebody who programs it and calibrates it. And somebody who sets a mousetrap knows more about it that the inventor. Some folk are just clueless beyond comprehension.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

I'll point you to the CINEMA board where you can see plenty examples of companies losing millions again and again and again and again and again but not learning their lesson and continuing to push an agenda that doesn't sell in the box office.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

I'll point you to the CINEMA board where you can see plenty examples of companies losing millions again and again and again and again and again but not learning their lesson and continuing to push an agenda that doesn't sell in the box office.

---

If Hollywood could tell ahead of time which movies would be losers or barely break even, Hollywood wouldn’t waste its time and money making about two out of every three movies. But nobody knows how to tell, except maybe Disney, and even they occasionally make a loser or break even movie.

Overall 51% of movies made a profit and 49% made a loss.

How does profitability change with budget level? The 50:50 rule loosely applies to movies on every budget scale.

The top 6% of movies (i.e. those which made the most profit) provided 49% of all the money made by the profitable films. And similarly, the bottom 6% of movies (i.e. those which individually lost the largest amounts of money) accounted for 53% of the money lost by unprofitable films.

For more details, the graphs are at https://stephenfollows.com/hollywood-movies-make-a-profit/



The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

I'll point you to the CINEMA board where you can see plenty examples of companies losing millions again and again and again and again and again but not learning their lesson and continuing to push an agenda that doesn't sell in the box office.

---

If Hollywood could tell ahead of time which movies would be losers or barely break even, Hollywood wouldn’t waste its time and money making about two out of every three movies. But nobody knows how to tell, except maybe Disney, and even they occasionally make a loser or break even movie.

Overall 51% of movies made a profit and 49% made a loss.

How does profitability change with budget level? The 50:50 rule loosely applies to movies on every budget scale.

The top 6% of movies (i.e. those which made the most profit) provided 49% of all the money made by the profitable films. And similarly, the bottom 6% of movies (i.e. those which individually lost the largest amounts of money) accounted for 53% of the money lost by unprofitable films.

For more details, the graphs are at https://stephenfollows.com/hollywood-movies-make-a-profit/



The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly

---

You already tried to make this point in the CINEMA board, which I thoroughly debunked, regarding the percentages with the Woke Factor, and you did not reply.



Would you like me to bring that conversation into this thread, or are you going to go back there and pick it back up. Your choice.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

I'll point you to the CINEMA board where you can see plenty examples of companies losing millions again and again and again and again and again but not learning their lesson and continuing to push an agenda that doesn't sell in the box office.

---

If Hollywood could tell ahead of time which movies would be losers or barely break even, Hollywood wouldn’t waste its time and money making about two out of every three movies. But nobody knows how to tell, except maybe Disney, and even they occasionally make a loser or break even movie.

Overall 51% of movies made a profit and 49% made a loss.

How does profitability change with budget level? The 50:50 rule loosely applies to movies on every budget scale.

The top 6% of movies (i.e. those which made the most profit) provided 49% of all the money made by the profitable films. And similarly, the bottom 6% of movies (i.e. those which individually lost the largest amounts of money) accounted for 53% of the money lost by unprofitable films.

For more details, the graphs are at https://stephenfollows.com/hollywood-movies-make-a-profit/



The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly

---

You already tried to make this point in the CINEMA board, which I thoroughly debunked, regarding the percentages with the Woke Factor, and you did not reply.



Would you like me to bring that conversation into this thread, or are you going to go back there and pick it back up. Your choice.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

---

If Hollywood could hand 6ixStringJack a screenplay and reliably know whether the finished movie will be profitable, Hollywood would hire 6ix to read all their screenplays since 6ix has the magic/wisdom (it's not luck) to find the one winner script out of every three prospects. 6ix has already applied magic/wisdom (again, it's not luck) to pick Trump as the one winner out of two (rather than 3) prospects. If Trump loses, 6ix does not have the magic/wisdom to pick winners. 6ix is only guessing or flipping a coin.

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
Some people still won't get it, though. Like some people actually think that somebody who uses Apple actually knows more about how to use a computer than somebody who programs computers. Somebody who pushes the Start button on a machine actually knows more about the machine than somebody who programs it and calibrates it. And somebody who sets a mousetrap knows more about it that the inventor. Some folk are just clueless beyond comprehension.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by captaincrunch:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
I know how Twitter works, dipshit. It's easy enough, even a monkey like you can use it.

---

---

Quote:

---

Like Trump. He uses the sh*t out of it. Must be where he gets his bananas.

---

Okay.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
That's why there are hundreds of millions of people using it. Not a very good cross section of the best and the brightest minds in the world on that platform.

---

Quote:

---

That's why Trump uses it.

---

That's why they ALL use it.

Quote:

---

If - according to you - it's such a shit platform with so many idiots and controlled by the Dems, why does Trump spend so much time on it?

---

I said it has so many idiots use it AND was controlled by Dems. Please try to keep two thoughts in your head at the same time, as I asked you to do above.

Quote:

---

Also: if you know so much about Twitter then should I assume you know you can buy followers as easy as you can buy books at Amazon?

---

It's also gotten much easier for them to purge these bot accounts you're talking about. Jack Dorsey and Vijaya Gadde talked about this at length on the Joe Rogan podcast.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
The Democratic Party doesn't own twitter.

---

Quote:

---

You said they did. Direct quote: "You mean the Democrats who lie for a living just haven't figured out how to game Twitter yet? C'mon dude. Democrats own Twitter."

---

I said Democrats own Twitter. I didn't say the Democrat Party owns twitter.

Quote:

---

So... you meant something else maybe?

---

Yup.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
You said the numbers are rigged for Trump. I said they weren't.

---

Quote:

---

And I asked you how you knew and you haven't answered that yet. Not intelligently at least. How do you know they aren't rigged?

---

Because if they were rigged, they are rigged for everybody. And it's easier for Democrats to rig it. Given the numbers that everybody has, it shows that either A) the numbers are not rigged, or B) the Democrats know that the numbers that they did rig are all they could get away with without drawing suspicion, compared to the numbers that Trump has rigged.

Conversely, it's also believable that Obama has 113 Million followers compared to Trump's 72 Million, even though he is not the current president or he doesn't hold a political position of power at all. Even if he's rigging them too.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
But if number rigging were happening in Social Media, it would be much easier for Democrats to get away with it because of the obvious bias and countless examples of censorship of anybody who doesn't tow the "progressive" line.

---

Quote:

---

Complete logic fail. It's easy - just write a check. It's especially easy if you are a conman and have zero scruples like that fat, Lying-f*ck-in-chief.

---

Is it now?

I'll point you to the CINEMA board where you can see plenty examples of companies losing millions again and again and again and again and again but not learning their lesson and continuing to push an agenda that doesn't sell in the box office.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

I'll point you to the CINEMA board where you can see plenty examples of companies losing millions again and again and again and again and again but not learning their lesson and continuing to push an agenda that doesn't sell in the box office.

---

If Hollywood could tell ahead of time which movies would be losers or barely break even, Hollywood wouldn’t waste its time and money making about two out of every three movies. But nobody knows how to tell, except maybe Disney, and even they occasionally make a loser or break even movie.

Overall 51% of movies made a profit and 49% made a loss.

How does profitability change with budget level? The 50:50 rule loosely applies to movies on every budget scale.

The top 6% of movies (i.e. those which made the most profit) provided 49% of all the money made by the profitable films. And similarly, the bottom 6% of movies (i.e. those which individually lost the largest amounts of money) accounted for 53% of the money lost by unprofitable films.

For more details, the graphs are at https://stephenfollows.com/hollywood-movies-make-a-profit/



The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly

---

You already tried to make this point in the CINEMA board, which I thoroughly debunked, regarding the percentages with the Woke Factor, and you did not reply.



Would you like me to bring that conversation into this thread, or are you going to go back there and pick it back up. Your choice.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

---

If Hollywood could hand 6ixStringJack a screenplay and reliably know whether the finished movie will be profitable, Hollywood would hire 6ix to read all their screenplays since 6ix has the magic/wisdom (it's not luck) to find the one winner script out of every three prospects. 6ix has already applied magic/wisdom (again, it's not luck) to pick Trump as the one winner out of two (rather than 3) prospects. If Trump loses, 6ix does not have the magic/wisdom to pick winners. 6ix is only guessing or flipping a coin.

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly

---

Guess we'll have to wait until November, huh?

BTW, genius, I'm not the only one predicting these woke failures at the box office. It doesn't even take any work to predict them anyhow. They've become a meme at this point and they are expected to fail.



Which takes us all the way back to Captain's point about money.

Go back and read the thread since you are unable to keep two separate but related ideas in your head at one time just like Captain is.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

---