- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Horowitz has 104 criminal or administrative investigations of alleged misconduct
Posted on 12/5/19 at 11:27 am to YankeeBama
Posted on 12/5/19 at 11:27 am to YankeeBama
0
Posted on 12/5/19 at 11:29 am to VoxDawg
quote:
but a hundred for criminal referrals is a lot more likely than the zero that some of the boo birds have been predicting.
To be fair, I'm not predicting zero criminal referrals. I'm predicting zero of whatever he produces are actually going to be acted on. It's like that scene in Hidden Figures where the blank lady kills herself validating the math, and then the supervisor thanks her and tells her to just throw it all in the trash.
Great work Horowitz, you got to the bottom of it. Now throw it in the trash.
See Andrew McCabe.
Posted on 12/5/19 at 11:43 am to TigerFanatic99
I’m going to go on record and predict 8 referrals from Horowitz. I think Barr will prosecute all 8 and others that Durham has found that contradict the OIG.
Posted on 12/5/19 at 12:04 pm to YankeeBama
quote:Horowitz cites the FBI only (out of his purview?) So I am wondering if Durham went after the DOJ and tied it all together?
Addition to my dream: all disbarred and indicted.
Posted on 12/5/19 at 2:16 pm to cajunangelle
This would be awesome
This post was edited on 12/5/19 at 2:16 pm
Posted on 12/5/19 at 2:42 pm to TigerFanatic99
quote:
Great work Horowitz, you got to the bottom of it. Now throw it in the trash.
Pretty much that, imo.
Posted on 12/5/19 at 2:53 pm to cajunangelle
I read an article this morning that the NYT is reporting that Horowitz has contacted Durham to see if Durham has found any evidence that goes against Horowitz’s report.
The question being if Durham found evidence that the Russia investigation was political or improper.
Durham reportedly said no, he has not found evidence it was politically motivated or improper.
The question being if Durham found evidence that the Russia investigation was political or improper.
Durham reportedly said no, he has not found evidence it was politically motivated or improper.
This post was edited on 12/5/19 at 2:58 pm
Posted on 12/5/19 at 3:00 pm to BobBoucher
Unnamed sources.
Posted on 12/5/19 at 3:23 pm to cajunangelle
Is allowing the individuals to read the portion about themselves just a trap to see who leaks?
If everyone who “sees” the report is only allowed to see unique information, then if info gets leaked it will be obvious who is leaking.
If everyone who “sees” the report is only allowed to see unique information, then if info gets leaked it will be obvious who is leaking.
Posted on 12/5/19 at 3:37 pm to cajunangelle
quote:
cajunangelle
Are you still laughing at at the idea of coming indictments? You were laughing as recently as mid-September when you trolled a thread where I predicted that Comey and others would be indicted.
Just wondering how the winds are blowing for you TODAY.
This post was edited on 12/5/19 at 3:38 pm
Posted on 12/5/19 at 3:45 pm to BobBoucher
quote:Did anybody read the entire article to see one of the last paragraphs? Got a link with it reprinted on MSN to avoid the NYTimes paywall?
I read an article this morning that the NYT is reporting that Horowitz has contacted Durham to see if Durham has found any evidence that goes against Horowitz’s report.
The question being if Durham found evidence that the Russia investigation was political or improper.
Durham reportedly said no, he has not found evidence it was politically motivated or improper.
Posted on 12/5/19 at 3:46 pm to DthVllyDud
quote:Makes perfect sense but they never (so far) go after anybody for leaking or breaking NDA's.
Is allowing the individuals to read the portion about themselves just a trap to see who leaks?
If everyone who “sees” the report is only allowed to see unique information, then if info gets leaked it will be obvious who is leaking.
Posted on 12/5/19 at 3:47 pm to YankeeBama
A girl can hope, aye?
Posted on 12/5/19 at 3:50 pm to YankeeBama
Posted on 12/5/19 at 3:52 pm to cajunangelle
"Are"...not "Is"
Good journalism
Good journalism
Posted on 12/5/19 at 3:52 pm to Possumslayer
quote:
Horowitz has 104 criminal or administrative investigations of alleged misconduct
Too much wiggle room with that headline, imo.
criminal or "alleged administrative misconduct".
* I hope I'm wrong, but..again..the swamp will not allow itself to be taken down in anything but a cosmetic way.
A few nobodies singed a bit...some "Harrumphs" and policies put in place to make sure this doesn't happen again!!
Posted on 12/5/19 at 4:01 pm to YankeeBama
Posted on 12/5/19 at 4:09 pm to cajunangelle
Need to find a similar report from last year and see if this is a typical year or not. I have no idea how many investigations are average.
Posted on 12/5/19 at 6:06 pm to SquatchDawg
I don't think it was 100.
I have been checking Sperry today. He is always 2-3 days ahead of the news.
I have been checking Sperry today. He is always 2-3 days ahead of the news.
This post was edited on 12/5/19 at 6:10 pm
Page 2 of 2
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News