McCabe was officially fired for talking to the press when he ostensibly wasn’t supposed to (and not being clear enough about that during the investigation?), not because of corruption or being married to a Democrat. But Trump’s conspiracy theory base are who he’s really speaking to here.
So that means John Dowd, who spoke for the President, spoke for himself, and spoke as counsel to the President (I believe it was in that order), will get a pink slip too?
I mean, if there was a written directive, and not some "I hope you can see clear to letting him go not talking to the press" type suggestion, you'ld think that'd have been brought up in the release on the firing, for gross insubordination.
But that it seems to be suggestion and innuendo and Trumpian boardroom politic bullshit.
These f'n guys.
MorganV on
0
Options
HenroidMexican kicked from Immigration ThreadCentrism is Racism :3Registered Userregular
This is absolutely a weird moment. On the one hand the investigation is still going strong and getting stronger, but somehow the corrupt administration is getting bolder in its measures to obstruct. I'm hoping the contingency plan(s) Mueller has are strong.
+28
Options
augustwhere you come from is goneRegistered Userregular
McCabe was officially fired for talking to the press when he ostensibly wasn’t supposed to (and not being clear enough about that during the investigation?), not because of corruption or being married to a Democrat. But Trump’s conspiracy theory base are who he’s really speaking to here.
My understanding is that he was fired for "misleading" testimony about the press leaks, not even the leaks themselves.
So that tweet manages to miss every aspect of what he is officially accused of.
(Per McCabe's post termination statement, it seems that top FBI leadership apparently may comment on ongoing investigations; using their own discretion.)
ArbitraryDescriptor on
+1
Options
HenroidMexican kicked from Immigration ThreadCentrism is Racism :3Registered Userregular
We're kinda lucky that Trump suffers from diarrhea of the mouth, because it prevents him from really protecting himself.
+11
Options
FencingsaxIt is difficult to get a man to understand, when his salary depends upon his not understandingGNU Terry PratchettRegistered Userregular
McCabe was officially fired for talking to the press when he ostensibly wasn’t supposed to (and not being clear enough about that during the investigation?), not because of corruption or being married to a Democrat. But Trump’s conspiracy theory base are who he’s really speaking to here.
My understanding is that he was fired for "misleading" testimony about the press leaks, not even the leaks themselves.
So that tweet manages to miss every aspect of what he is officially accused of.
(Per McCabe's post termination statement, it seems that top FBI leadership apparently may comment on ongoing investigations; using their own discretion.)
Which is why what Comey did was utterly inappropriate and irregular, not actually illegal
The data analytics firm that worked with Donald Trump’s election team and the winning Brexit campaign harvested millions of Facebook profiles of US voters, in the tech giant’s biggest ever data breach, and used them to build a powerful software program to predict and influence choices at the ballot box.
A whistleblower has revealed to the Observer how Cambridge Analytica – a company owned by the hedge fund billionaire Robert Mercer, and headed at the time by Trump’s key adviser Steve Bannon – used personal information taken without authorisation in early 2014 to build a system that could profile individual US voters, in order to target them with personalised political advertisements.
Christopher Wylie, who worked with an academic at Cambridge University to obtain the data, told the Observer: “We exploited Facebook to harvest millions of people’s profiles. And built models to exploit what we knew about them and target their inner demons. That was the basis that the entire company was built on.”
Literally every academic from Russia is funded by the Russian government if that’s how you want to put it, and this venture that went sideways seem to have a commercial deal with Cambridge Analytica. Taking this and trying to imply that it’s a part of grand conspiracy is weak.
Kogan, who has previously unreported links to a Russian university and took Russian grants for research...
So do we actually have a recommendation of termination from the FBIs OBI? Because if true that seems like it would be legitimate justification for the firing.
So do we actually have a recommendation of termination from the FBIs OBI? Because if true wouldnt that be legitimate justification for the firing?
But it sounds like bullshit
I don’t think any OIG does recommendations about individual discipline. They just investigate and say what happened, and after that there’s a different process that determines disciplinary action.
Using real but trumped up charges against people disliked by a person while ignoring real and often much worse actions by people liked by a person is a common tactic for removing opposition.
Comey did make decisions in 2016 that went against protocol for poor reasons as Rosenstein's memo pointed out that a person can see being considered a problem for a noncorrupt administration. Nobody thinks being unfair to Clinton is why he was fired.
Literally every academic from Russia is funded by the Russian government if that’s how you want to put it, and this venture that went sideways seem to have a commercial deal with Cambridge Analytica. Taking this and trying to imply that it’s a part of grand conspiracy is weak.
Also in Guardian: documents show that Cambridge Analytica presentation to Russian oil/gas company Lukoil show a 2014 presentation "focused on election disruption techniques." Lukoil CEO Vagit Alekperov is Putin ally.
“It didn’t make any sense to me,” says (whistleblower Christopher) Wylie. “I didn’t understand either the email or the pitch presentation we did. Why would a Russian oil company want to target information on American voters?”
He initially told the news outlet that he was speaking in his official capacity as Trump’s lawyer. But he later retracted that statement, telling POLITICO he was commenting in his personal capacity.
Trump’s personal legal team declined to answer follow-up questions about Dowd’s remarks. White House lawyer Ty Cobb did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
life comes at you fast
edit: @Fawst is right, Dowd only recanted that he was speaking on behalf of Trump, claiming he was only making a personal statement.
Literally every academic from Russia is funded by the Russian government if that’s how you want to put it, and this venture that went sideways seem to have a commercial deal with Cambridge Analytica. Taking this and trying to imply that it’s a part of grand conspiracy is weak.
Also in Guardian: documents show that Cambridge Analytica presentation to Russian oil/gas company Lukoil show a 2014 presentation "focused on election disruption techniques." Lukoil CEO Vagit Alekperov is Putin ally.
“It didn’t make any sense to me,” says (whistleblower Christopher) Wylie. “I didn’t understand either the email or the pitch presentation we did. Why would a Russian oil company want to target information on American voters?”
Yeah, maybe it's time we start admitting that when all evidence points to a conspiracy, there is one.
Literally every academic from Russia is funded by the Russian government if that’s how you want to put it, and this venture that went sideways seem to have a commercial deal with Cambridge Analytica. Taking this and trying to imply that it’s a part of grand conspiracy is weak.
Also in Guardian: documents show that Cambridge Analytica presentation to Russian oil/gas company Lukoil show a 2014 presentation "focused on election disruption techniques." Lukoil CEO Vagit Alekperov is Putin ally.
“It didn’t make any sense to me,” says (whistleblower Christopher) Wylie. “I didn’t understand either the email or the pitch presentation we did. Why would a Russian oil company want to target information on American voters?”
There’s no evidence that Cambridge Analytica ever did any work for Lukoil. What these documents show, though, is that in 2014 one of Russia’s biggest companies was fully briefed on: Facebook, microtargeting, data, election disruption.
The idea it was the Russian government behind the data harvesting is a wild stretch. This is a shady American company, harvesting data for its own commercial purposes, and at some point did a presentation an Russian oil company.
+1
Options
HonkHonk is this poster.Registered User, __BANNED USERSregular
About McCabe memos, what is the deal with memos versus just testifying things? It’s still your word versus someone elses, yet it seems to be regarded as a much bigger thing as soon as the word memo is used. I don’t get it.
I guess you get around problems remembering things, which the other side could claim, but they were just gonna call it lies anyway.
About McCabe memos, what is the deal with memos versus just testifying things? It’s still your word versus someone elses, yet it seems to be regarded as a much bigger thing as soon as the word memo is used. I don’t get it.
I guess you get around problems remembering things, which the other side could claim, but they were just gonna call it lies anyway.
The thing with Memo is it means McCabe has been documenting this stuff long before the Eye of Trump fell upon him. This both helps add legitimacy to his claims, as well gives them a defense for when they suggest he's making shit up now because he's mad he got fired.
Undead Scottsman on
+8
Options
MeeqeLord of the pants most fancySomeplace amazingRegistered Userregular
My memory might be playing tricks on me, but I want to say that Cambridge Analytica was also involved in doing work during Brexit over in Britain. The idea that ethno-nationalists in various countries are working together isn't some kind of crazy conspiracy, Bannon just went over to France to talk to Le Pen and her folks.
About McCabe memos, what is the deal with memos versus just testifying things? It’s still your word versus someone elses, yet it seems to be regarded as a much bigger thing as soon as the word memo is used. I don’t get it.
I guess you get around problems remembering things, which the other side could claim, but they were just gonna call it lies anyway.
Notes from law enforcement are considered credible in courts and if McCabe was doing anything like Comey was (and I can't think why he wouldn't have been) he's had the timing of him writing those notes backed up somehow.
+8
Options
syndalisGetting ClassyOn the WallRegistered User, Loves Apple Productsregular
Them Russian Oil companies and their heavy dependence on American voter logistics.
I mean, yeah?
Influencing elections so they can get friendly faces on office for their business interests seems like a no brainer.
I strongly suspect similar presentations are given to Saudis.
Note that this doesn't forgive anything; just stating that this could just be unrelated Russian Industry meddling in our shit, or researching how to as a business opportunity.
SW-4158-3990-6116
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
About McCabe memos, what is the deal with memos versus just testifying things? It’s still your word versus someone elses, yet it seems to be regarded as a much bigger thing as soon as the word memo is used. I don’t get it.
I guess you get around problems remembering things, which the other side could claim, but they were just gonna call it lies anyway.
It’s a lot harder to say they planned out their lies months in advance.
These memos would have been written immediately or shortly after the events in question. Which means they’re either accurate or McCabe and Mr. Mueller have been plotting to underthrow the President since before Comey was fired.
About McCabe memos, what is the deal with memos versus just testifying things? It’s still your word versus someone elses, yet it seems to be regarded as a much bigger thing as soon as the word memo is used. I don’t get it.
I guess you get around problems remembering things, which the other side could claim, but they were just gonna call it lies anyway.
my knowledge of Federal Rules of Evidence is really rusty, but in general, memos like McCabe's and Comey's are not generally admissible in court as evidence, unless there's some event that permits such memos to be admitted, or there's an exception that allows them.
in this case McCabe can testify in court about what he knows regarding the investigation and the FBI's approach, and can refer to the memos to refresh his memory about those events. He can even testify that he made such memos contemporaneously.
if Trump's legal team has any ounce of sense (narrator: "they don't"), they would leave the memos alone and try to attack McCabe's credibility some other way, to try to convince a judge or jury that McCabe's testimony shouldn't be given much weight. what will probably happen is that the Trump legal team will attack McCabe's memos, probably allowing a theoretical prosecution to ask a court to allow the memos into evidence, to allow McCabe to rebut the attack.
in addition, even if the memos aren't admitted as actual evidence, they still give Mueller and others a damn reliable contemporaneous record of what went down behind the scenes at the FBI. that helps Mueller and his team further piece together what happened in conjunction with other evidence.
edit: there are also the "public records" exception, where stuff written in the course of a public officer's normal duties can be admitted as evidence, as well as the "present sense" exception which generally allows a "statement describing or explaining an event or condition, made while or immediately after the declarant perceived it." i don't know the rules well enough to say if McCabe's (or Comey's) memos would be allowable under these, but my guess is that they probably would not be.
AstaerethIn the belly of the beastRegistered Userregular
Also this isn’t about evidence, it’s about politics. When you take the same things Trump tweets and uncover them in a “secret email” it becomes that much damaging. Likewise, a “memo” has more weight because it sounds more weighty and official.
About McCabe memos, what is the deal with memos versus just testifying things? It’s still your word versus someone elses, yet it seems to be regarded as a much bigger thing as soon as the word memo is used. I don’t get it.
I guess you get around problems remembering things, which the other side could claim, but they were just gonna call it lies anyway.
Notes from law enforcement are considered credible in courts and if McCabe was doing anything like Comey was (and I can't think why he wouldn't have been) he's had the timing of him writing those notes backed up somehow.
Also memos are written shortly after what they're describing happened, so there's no saying "I can't recall."
About McCabe memos, what is the deal with memos versus just testifying things? It’s still your word versus someone elses, yet it seems to be regarded as a much bigger thing as soon as the word memo is used. I don’t get it.
I guess you get around problems remembering things, which the other side could claim, but they were just gonna call it lies anyway.
Notes from law enforcement are considered credible in courts and if McCabe was doing anything like Comey was (and I can't think why he wouldn't have been) he's had the timing of him writing those notes backed up somehow.
Also memos are written shortly after what they're describing happened, so there's no saying "I can't recall."
Yeah I was just about to mention this. If someone months later says "Oh yeah, he told me to personally sneak into Mueller's office and write "Trump rulez" on the binders" and the other person says "Well I don't recall, but I don't think I would've said those words" it's different than if someone says "I have a piece of paper coming directly from this meeting that I made as soon as I was out. I wrote down here "Wow, 5 seconds ago Trump just asked me to write "Trump Rulez" on Mueller's binders"".
0
Options
HonkHonk is this poster.Registered User, __BANNED USERSregular
Thanks for the detailed explanations, that’s something I had been wondering about for more than a bit.
Them Russian Oil companies and their heavy dependence on American voter logistics.
I mean, yeah?
Influencing elections so they can get friendly faces on office for their business interests seems like a no brainer.
I strongly suspect similar presentations are given to Saudis.
Note that this doesn't forgive anything; just stating that this could just be unrelated Russian Industry meddling in our shit, or researching how to as a business opportunity.
Except A) How independent of the Kremlin is Lukoil?
Which elections are they going to target with CambAn (I wanted a shorter thing to type then their title)? Specified house districts? Senatorial elections? There's a reason foreign countries usually engage lobbyists, not in election interference. Its so that you don't waste money helping someone who then loses or doesn't have the power to do what you want....
Yep, memos/notes/journals are fantastic for putting testimonials in context and reinforcing memory too. Instead of trying to remember if X happened before Y when Z was doing 1, 2, and 3, you have a clearly defined record of what happened at that time and place along with what follows.
Memory is too finicky over the long term. You can remember several events and even the exact time and place if it’s a significant event, but what happened the following days that may not have been significant at the time, but is in hindsight, is where the memos really come in to play.
Battlenet ID: MildC#11186 - If I'm in the game, send me an invite at anytime and I'll play.
Posts
He did.
Rebecca Ballhaus is a WSJ reporter.
I mean, if there was a written directive, and not some "I hope you can see clear to letting him go not talking to the press" type suggestion, you'ld think that'd have been brought up in the release on the firing, for gross insubordination.
But that it seems to be suggestion and innuendo and Trumpian boardroom politic bullshit.
These f'n guys.
My understanding is that he was fired for "misleading" testimony about the press leaks, not even the leaks themselves.
So that tweet manages to miss every aspect of what he is officially accused of.
(Per McCabe's post termination statement, it seems that top FBI leadership apparently may comment on ongoing investigations; using their own discretion.)
Which is why what Comey did was utterly inappropriate and irregular, not actually illegal
Literally every academic from Russia is funded by the Russian government if that’s how you want to put it, and this venture that went sideways seem to have a commercial deal with Cambridge Analytica. Taking this and trying to imply that it’s a part of grand conspiracy is weak.
But it sounds like bullshit
Nope
I don’t think any OIG does recommendations about individual discipline. They just investigate and say what happened, and after that there’s a different process that determines disciplinary action.
Comey did make decisions in 2016 that went against protocol for poor reasons as Rosenstein's memo pointed out that a person can see being considered a problem for a noncorrupt administration. Nobody thinks being unfair to Clinton is why he was fired.
if not this, i would imagine he's gotten Twitter themselves to archive Trump's tweets.
steam | Dokkan: 868846562
I disagree. Excerpts noted by Tapper,
life comes at you fast
edit: @Fawst is right, Dowd only recanted that he was speaking on behalf of Trump, claiming he was only making a personal statement.
steam | Dokkan: 868846562
you're right, corrected.
steam | Dokkan: 868846562
Yeah, maybe it's time we start admitting that when all evidence points to a conspiracy, there is one.
The idea it was the Russian government behind the data harvesting is a wild stretch. This is a shady American company, harvesting data for its own commercial purposes, and at some point did a presentation an Russian oil company.
I guess you get around problems remembering things, which the other side could claim, but they were just gonna call it lies anyway.
The thing with Memo is it means McCabe has been documenting this stuff long before the Eye of Trump fell upon him. This both helps add legitimacy to his claims, as well gives them a defense for when they suggest he's making shit up now because he's mad he got fired.
Notes from law enforcement are considered credible in courts and if McCabe was doing anything like Comey was (and I can't think why he wouldn't have been) he's had the timing of him writing those notes backed up somehow.
I mean, yeah?
Influencing elections so they can get friendly faces on office for their business interests seems like a no brainer.
I strongly suspect similar presentations are given to Saudis.
Note that this doesn't forgive anything; just stating that this could just be unrelated Russian Industry meddling in our shit, or researching how to as a business opportunity.
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
It’s a lot harder to say they planned out their lies months in advance.
These memos would have been written immediately or shortly after the events in question. Which means they’re either accurate or McCabe and Mr. Mueller have been plotting to underthrow the President since before Comey was fired.
twitch.tv/Taramoor
@TaramoorPlays
Taramoor on Youtube
Entirely different than Trump trashing his wife, firing him at the last minute and then he writes down some incriminating evidence.
my knowledge of Federal Rules of Evidence is really rusty, but in general, memos like McCabe's and Comey's are not generally admissible in court as evidence, unless there's some event that permits such memos to be admitted, or there's an exception that allows them.
in this case McCabe can testify in court about what he knows regarding the investigation and the FBI's approach, and can refer to the memos to refresh his memory about those events. He can even testify that he made such memos contemporaneously.
if Trump's legal team has any ounce of sense (narrator: "they don't"), they would leave the memos alone and try to attack McCabe's credibility some other way, to try to convince a judge or jury that McCabe's testimony shouldn't be given much weight. what will probably happen is that the Trump legal team will attack McCabe's memos, probably allowing a theoretical prosecution to ask a court to allow the memos into evidence, to allow McCabe to rebut the attack.
in addition, even if the memos aren't admitted as actual evidence, they still give Mueller and others a damn reliable contemporaneous record of what went down behind the scenes at the FBI. that helps Mueller and his team further piece together what happened in conjunction with other evidence.
edit: there are also the "public records" exception, where stuff written in the course of a public officer's normal duties can be admitted as evidence, as well as the "present sense" exception which generally allows a "statement describing or explaining an event or condition, made while or immediately after the declarant perceived it." i don't know the rules well enough to say if McCabe's (or Comey's) memos would be allowable under these, but my guess is that they probably would not be.
steam | Dokkan: 868846562
Also memos are written shortly after what they're describing happened, so there's no saying "I can't recall."
Yeah I was just about to mention this. If someone months later says "Oh yeah, he told me to personally sneak into Mueller's office and write "Trump rulez" on the binders" and the other person says "Well I don't recall, but I don't think I would've said those words" it's different than if someone says "I have a piece of paper coming directly from this meeting that I made as soon as I was out. I wrote down here "Wow, 5 seconds ago Trump just asked me to write "Trump Rulez" on Mueller's binders"".
Except A) How independent of the Kremlin is Lukoil?
Were the Saudis given similar presentations?
Memory is too finicky over the long term. You can remember several events and even the exact time and place if it’s a significant event, but what happened the following days that may not have been significant at the time, but is in hindsight, is where the memos really come in to play.
Battlenet ID: MildC#11186 - If I'm in the game, send me an invite at anytime and I'll play.