The Briefing Room
General Category => Politics/Government => Topic started by: mystery-ak on February 04, 2018, 03:50:49 pm
-
Chris Stewart: House Intel released memo to inform public on FBI abuses, not to exonerate Trump
by Kyle Feldscher | Feb 4, 2018, 10:18 AM
A Republican on the House Intelligence Committee wants President Trump to know the memo released by the committee Friday doesn’t mean he’s completely exonerated in special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation.
Rep. Chris Stewart, R-Utah, said on “Fox News Sunday†Trump was mistaken when he tweeted Saturday that the memo “totally vindicates ‘Trump’†in the Russia probe.
“It doesn't end that need [at] all. I think it would be a mistake for anyone to suggest that the special counsel shouldn't complete his work. I support his work,†Stewart said. "I want him to finish it. I hope he finishes it as quickly as possible. This memo has frankly nothing at all to do with a special counsel.â€
more
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/chris-stewart-house-intel-released-memo-to-inform-public-on-fbi-abuses-not-to-exonerate-trump/article/2648053 (http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/chris-stewart-house-intel-released-memo-to-inform-public-on-fbi-abuses-not-to-exonerate-trump/article/2648053)
-
Exactly
-
As I'd posted on another thread....
The last sentence in Section 4, page 5 says.....
Furthermore deputy director McCabe testified before the committee in December 2017 that no surveillance warrant would have been sought from the FISC without the Steele dossier information.
Chris Stewart, R-Utah, was on FNS and Wallace asked him specifically if this is what McCabe said. Stewart replied it may have not been the exact quote, but that's what he meant.
Nunes says there's a different process to release the actual quotes. We'll see if they ever do. Otherwise, that portion loses credibility.
-
As I'd posted on another thread....
The last sentence in Section 4, page 5 says.....
Furthermore deputy director McCabe testified before the committee in December 2017 that no surveillance warrant would have been sought from the FISC without the Steele dossier information.
Chris Stewart, R-Utah, was on FNS and Wallace asked him specifically if this is what McCabe said. Stewart replied it may have not been the exact quote, but that's what he meant.
Nunes says there's a different process to release the actual quotes. We'll see if they ever do. Otherwise, that portion loses credibility.
The memo still doesn’t exonerate Trump.
-
The memo still doesn’t exonerate Trump.
Of course it doesn't. My comment is from the other thread. The subject of it is Gowdy saying the investigation happens without the dossier because of other factors unrelated to FISA and the dossier. I agree, but since you're on that thread, too, you already know that.
-
Of course it doesn't. My comment from the other thread was about Gowdy saying the investigation happens without the dossier because of other factors unrelated to FISA and the dossier. I agree, but since you're on that thread, too, you already know that.
Then we agree that the investigation is not solely dependent on the memo or the Page FISA warrant?
-
Then we agree that the investigation is not solely dependent on the memo or the Page FISA warrant?
Yes, because you also have to factor the Trump Tower meeting, Cambridge Analytica, and Manafort's past associations.
-
Yes, because you also have to factor the Trump Tower meeting and Manafort's past associations.
Then I apologize for thinking that you were saying otherwise.
-
The memo still doesn’t exonerate Trump.
From what?
It does vindicate Trump.
-
Then I apologize for thinking that you were saying otherwise.
No problem. I still don't believe there was any actual collusion with Trump and Russia. At the worst, he hired the wrong people, relied on politically ignorant family members in the beginning, and it's come back to haunt him.
-
From what?
It does vindicate Trump.
I'm not sure if it vindicates him or not.
What would vindication here even look like? I'm unclear as to what Trump's supposed to be guilty of - collusion isn't a crime. Neither is having advisors and associates who've spoken with Russians.
-
No problem. I still don't believe there was any actual collusion with Trump and Russia. At the worst, he hired the wrong people, relied on politically ignorant family members in the beginning, and it's come back to haunt him.
I tend to agree.
-
I'm not sure if it vindicates him or not.
What would vindication here even look like? I'm unclear as to what Trump's supposed to be guilty of - collusion isn't a crime. Neither is having advisors and associates who've spoken with Russians.
I keep waiting for someone to tell me what crime Trump committed via vi Russia. I see lots of criminal
activity by Clinton, DOJ, FBI, IRS, CIA but thus far none by Trump.
-
I keep waiting for someone to tell me what crime Trump committed via vi Russia. I see lots of criminal
activity by Clinton, DOJ, FBI, IRS, CIA but thus far none by Trump.
I see that as well. I also see a concerted effort to look away from the crimes of the Dems (not just Clinton, but she seems to be the worst of them, even more-so than Bubba).
-
They both (DNC and RNC) colluded with foreign entities to help secure the election of their respective nominees. DNC in financing GPS for the dossier and Trump people meeting Russian agents in Trump Tower to get Hillary's emails.
Remember obummer interfering in the Israeli and Brexit vote and Manafort in the Ukrainian vote as recent examples of what is considered ethical behavior these days, doesn't make it right, just the way it is these days, geopolitically.
-
I keep waiting for someone to tell me what crime Trump committed via vi Russia. I see lots of criminal activity by Clinton, DOJ, FBI, IRS, CIA but thus far none by Trump.
So far he's guilty of hiring 30-something foreign policy advisors with no experience and shady connections. That itself is not a crime. However, if he's covering up for that by misleading and obstructing an investigation because he's embarrassed about it - that is a crime - and a really stupid one at that.
-
They both (DNC and RNC) colluded with foreign entities to help secure the election of their respective nominees. DNC in financing GPS for the dossier and Trump people meeting Russian agents in Trump Tower to get Hillary's emails.
Remember obummer interfering in the Israeli and Brexit vote and Manafort in the Ukrainian vote as recent examples of what is considered ethical behavior these days, doesn't make it right, just the way it is these days, geopolitically.
Meddling in foreign elections seems to be a universal past-time in DeeCee. Obastard practically made a career of trying to get rid of Netanyahu. People shouldn't be all that shocked some foreign people want to meddle in ours.
-
So far he's guilty of hiring 30-something foreign policy advisors with no experience and shady connections. That itself is not a crime. However, if he's covering up for that by misleading and obstructing an investigation because he's embarrassed about it - that is a crime - and a really stupid one at that.
Is there any real evidence - besides offhandedly expressing hope that investigators will go easy on good guys like Flynn - to suggest he's done anything of the sort?
Honest question - I really don't know.
-
Trump people meeting Russian agents in Trump Tower to get Hillary's emails.
Trump got Hillary's emails from Russian agents in the Trump Tower. Wow, that I did not know.
-
So far he's guilty of hiring 30-something foreign policy advisors with no experience and shady connections. That itself is not a crime. However, if he's covering up for that by misleading and obstructing an investigation because he's embarrassed about it - that is a crime - and a really stupid one at that.
You are correct: Hiring idiots is not a crime. And I don't see him trying to cover it up or obstruct justice either. He's fired a few and threw some to Mueller. It's early in the game, so we don't know. Just like with the original Trump War and the Roy Moore thing, I see people jumping in on all sides without knowing the facts yet.
-
Trump got Hillary's emails from Russian agents in the Trump Tower. Wow, that I did not know.
I don't think he got any from that meeting. If he really wanted Hillary's emails he would have been better off asking Julian Assange.
-
Is there any real evidence - besides offhandedly expressing hope that investigators will go easy on good guys like Flynn - to suggest he's done anything of the sort?
Honest question - I really don't know.
No and without him answering questions, we may never know. That is a process fraught with peril and you'd better have great lawyers. From what I've seen from Cohen, Dowd, and Sekulow....he doesn't.
-
I don't think he got any from that meeting. If he really wanted Hillary's emails he would have been better off asking Julian Assange.
That was the problem with Cambridge Analytics. They did contact Assange about the possibility. That's why the campaign ran from them so quickly.
-
I don't think he got any from that meeting. If he really wanted Hillary's emails he would have been better off asking Julian Assange.
No, it was a 15 minute meeting with a Russian lawyer set up by Fuson GS (the memo people) that went nowhere. If you want Hillary's emails ask the NSA, they likely have them. Almost two years of investigating Russia Russia Russia and not one piece of evidence that Trump did anything wrong. Witch hunt.
-
What would vindication here even look like?
That the Steele dossier is bunkum. That there was no collusion with Russians to influence the election.
-
That was the problem with Cambridge Analytics. They did contact Assange about the possibility. That's why the campaign ran from them so quickly.
No, it was a 15 minute meeting with a Russian lawyer set up by Fuson GS (the memo people) that went nowhere. If you want Hillary's emails ask the NSA, they likely have them. Almost two years of investigating Russia Russia Russia and not one piece of evident that Trump did anything wrong. Witch hunt.
I can't imagine that Trump would think having Hillary's emails would be a good thing anyway. If he used anything from them in the campaign he would have been viciously attacked for peeking at an old lady's emails about Wedding plans, Yoga lessons and possibly her under-drawers. The press had already laid out how they were going to treat that.
-
No and without him answering questions, we may never know. That is a process fraught with peril and you'd better have great lawyers. From what I've seen from Cohen, Dowd, and Sekulow....he doesn't.
Stating the obvious here, but with no evidence all we're left with is a politically motivated witch hunt.
-
I can't imagine that Trump would think having Hillary's emails would be a good thing anyway. If he used anything from them in the campaign he would have been viciously attacked for peeking at an old lady's emails about Wedding plans, Yoga lessons and possibly her under-drawers. The press had already laid out how they were going to treat that.
Yes, that's true, but Don Jr accepted the meeting Veselnitskaya under the pretense she had information the Clinton campaign was accepting laundered foreign contributions. There's no actual crime in getting the information, unless the admin later followed through on an agreement - lifting of sanctions, for example.
If they had gotten anything from the meeting without offering or providing something in return, it wouldn't be illegal, but the media and left would still complain about interference by foreign power. That is kind of silly, considering we often exchanged information on various topics. For instance, we gave them information on a terrorist plot in St Petersburg recently. Conversely, they had warned us years ago about the Tsarnaev brothers. Were they trying to interfere in our domestic tranquility by telling us about them?
-
That the Steele dossier is bunkum. That there was no collusion with Russians to influence the election.
Except that the invalidity of the Steele dossier does not vindicate Trump on the Russian issues.
-
Except that the invalidity of the Steele dossier does not vindicate Trump on the Russian issues.
Vindicate him from what?
-
Vindicate him from what?
It doesn’t prove that the Russian investigation is nothing more than a political witch hunt.
-
Except that the invalidity of the Steele dossier does not vindicate Trump on the Russian issues.
So if there is other, irrefutable evidence that was used to procure the FISA warrant, why was the steele dossier even used?
-
It doesn’t prove that the Russian investigation is nothing more than a political witch hunt.
Prove that it isn't.
-
Except that the invalidity of the Steele dossier does not vindicate Trump on the Russian issues.
That's 100% correct, which is Chris Stewart's point. They didn't release the memo with the objective of vindicating Trump (and it did not, in fact. Carter Page, on the other hand...), and I think they would have been seen as being blindly partisan if they did.
Trump will have to do a lot more than just deflect the "dossier." That's just a piece of it.
-
So if there is other, irrefutable evidence that was used to procure the FISA warrant, why was the steele dossier even used?
You are confusing, hopefully unintentionally, two separate things. The FISA warrant was with respect to one person. There is other evidence that suggests, albeit weakly (mostly because it’s more consistent with Trump being a negligent, disorganized idiot), the basis for the possibility of collusion. Including Papadopoulos, who in 2013 was investigated for possible connections with Russian agents.
-
Except that the invalidity of the Steele dossier does not vindicate Trump on the Russian issues.
What "Russian issues"?
Exactly what evidence do you have indicating that Trump committed a crime in collusion
with the Russian government? The investigation has been going on for almost 2 years. First
by the FBI and then Mueller. Where is the evidence of criminal activity by Trump?
-
Prove that it isn't.
Because Trump and his team did a lot of stupid things, including hiring people who had already been investigated for connections to Russian agents, ie, Papadopoulos, and that idiocy by Team Trump is the basis for the investigation.
Innocent stupidity is still stupidity, and when it’s the right kind of stupid, it invites investigations.
-
Stating the obvious here, but with no evidence all we're left with is a politically motivated witch hunt.
Not really. Taking that meeting and making some bad decisions on consultants and appointments invited the scrutiny. Sessions and Rosenstein are both Trump appointees. They can review the information and circumstances. Neither of them were obligated to appoint the special counsel.
-
What "Russian issues"?
Exactly what evidence do you have indicating that Trump committed a crime in collusion
with the Russian government? The investigation has been going on for almost 2 years. First
by the FBI and then Mueller. Where is the evidence of criminal activity by Trump?
I don’t have evidence and, generally speaking, the cops don’t have to have sufficient evidence that proves all the elements of a crime before they start investigating a crime. Duh.
What there is are some stupid moves by a disorganized idiot, namely Trump and his campaign, that gave rise to the appearance of possible criminal conduct. And all the cops need to investigate is that appearance.
If you’d stop worshipping Trump as an infallible saint, you might see just how large are his feet of clay, and just how they got him into this predicament.
-
You are confusing, hopefully unintentionally, two separate things. The FISA warrant was with respect to one person. There is other evidence that suggests, albeit weakly (mostly because it’s more consistent with Trump being a negligent, disorganized idiot), the basis for the possibility of collusion. Including Papadopoulos, who in 2013 was investigated for possible connections with Russian agents.
Papadop and Manaforte (and others) make me wonder if there was any vetting of potential employees of Trump? For a guy so famous for having a TV show to do just that in his business, it makes me wonder...
-
So if there is other, irrefutable evidence that was used to procure the FISA warrant, why was the steele dossier even used?
Steele had connections in Russia through his previous work in Brit intel. He'd been consulted by American intel prior to 2016 and deemed credible.
-
I don’t have evidence and, generally speaking, the cops don’t have to have sufficient evidence that proves all the elements of a crime before they start investigating a crime. Duh.
OK, so what crime did Trump commit that are they investigating?
-
Steele had connections in Russia through his previous work in Brit intel. He'd been consulted by American intel prior to 2016 and deemed credible.
That's true, Steele's blind hatred of Trump was only later found out. I suspect we'll hear more about that when the Schiff memo hits the fan, probably next week. If there was a stated motivation for that partisanship, Schiff will surely point it out, and it won't look so blind.
-
OK, so what crime did Trump commit that are they investigating?
Who knows? That’s why they’re investigating. Duh. If we knew what crimes he had committed, they’d be prosecuting, not investigating. Duh.
-
Papadop and Manaforte (and others) make me wonder if there was any vetting of potential employees of Trump? For a guy so famous for having a TV show to do just that in his business, it makes me wonder...
Probably not. Just look at his Cabinet. Rick Perry is Secretary of Energy. That is a department Perry wanted to eliminate, but couldn't remember in his famous 'oops' moment. Tom Price is now gone from Health and Human Services. Ben Carson, a brain surgeon, probably would have been better in that role but he is in charge of Housing and Urban Development - probably because Trump thought it should be a black guy.
-
OK, so what crime did Trump commit that are they investigating?
You missed his point: Investigators don't act on proven commissions of crime, they act on probable cause.
The correct question would be, "What's the probable cause here?"
-
Who knows? That’s why they’re investigating. Duh. If we knew what crimes he had committed, they’d be prosecuting, not investigating. Duh.
So you are ok with a Special Counsel with unlimited resources to investigate you? After all, who knows what crimes you have committed... that is why we need an investigation.
Just like in the old USSR comrade. :police:
-
Papadop and Manaforte (and others) make me wonder if there was any vetting of potential employees of Trump? For a guy so famous for having a TV show to do just that in his business, it makes me wonder...
Prior to being "interviewed" by the FBI what crime did Papadopoulos commit. Same with Gen Flynn
what crime did Flynn commit? All of these "crimes" are being manufactured by the FBI. This is
Martha Steward all over again. It is not justice, it is fascism.
-
So you are ok with a Special Counsel with unlimited resources to investigate you? After all, who knows what crimes you have committed... that is why we need an investigation.
Just like in the old USSR comrade. :police:
Whatever. You have your mind made up, and no amount of facts will ever change it, so please, enjoy playing with your strawmen and other little trinkets.
Carry on, child, carry on.
-
You missed his point: Investigators don't act on proven commissions of crime, they act on probable cause.
The correct question would be, "What's the probable cause here?"
More importantly, the Special Counsel doesn't even look into anything unless the AG or DAG (both appointed by the President) determines it's warranted. The SC also has to come back for approval to investigate matters outside the original scope.
-
Probably not. Just look at his Cabinet. Rick Perry is Secretary of Energy. That is a department Perry wanted to eliminate, but couldn't remember in his famous 'oops' moment. Tom Price is now gone from Health and Human Services. Ben Carson, a brain surgeon, probably would have been better in that role but he is in charge of Housing and Urban Development - probably because Trump thought it should be a black guy.
Meh. If I wanted to eliminate Energy, I'd probably have picked somebody who agrees with me (but Perry was not an inspired choice). As for Ben Carson, I totally agree, he would have been perfect for HHS. HUD is a throw-away Cabinet post, just about anybody could do it and I have no clue why Trump chose a literal Brain Surgeon for the job.
-
Who knows? That’s why they’re investigating. Duh. If we knew what crimes he had committed, they’d be prosecuting, not investigating. Duh.
Well there you have it.
We don't know that a crime has been committed, we have no evidence that a crime was
committed but need to investigate anyway. And this comes from a so called attorney? Rule
of law is dead in the USA if the new standard is I don't like your politics so I am going the
have the DOJ/FBI investigate you. And I am going to have them lie to the court to obtain a
warrant to spy on you.
"Show me the man and I'll find you the crime" is straight out of the USSR play book. I miss
America.
-
Prior to being "interviewed" by the FBI what crime did Papadopoulos commit. Same with Gen Flynn
what crime did Flynn commit? All of these "crimes" are being manufactured by the FBI. This is
Martha Steward all over again. It is not justice, it is fascism.
I agree that Papadop and Flynn were FBI "made-up crimes" (and I don't like that. Thought it was wrong in the Martha Stewart thing too), but Manafort got his trouble all on his own. Papadop was a lightning rod that was practically guaranteed to draw fire, and an avoidable error.
-
You missed his point: Investigators don't act on proven commissions of crime, they act on probable cause.
The correct question would be, "What's the probable cause here?"
Fine so what crime would "probable cause" indicate Trump committed? The FBI is suppose to
investigate crime. I just want to know what Trump crime it is that the FBI is investigating.
-
Prior to being "interviewed" by the FBI what crime did Papadopoulos commit. Same with Gen Flynn what crime did Flynn commit? All of these "crimes" are being manufactured by the FBI. This is Martha Steward all over again. It is not justice, it is fascism.
Popadopulous didn't necessarily do anything wrong by contacting foreign agents. However, he wasn't caught in some 'gotcha' game - he straight up lied in the interview. As far as Flynn goes, he and Manafort both failed to properly register under the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA) of 1938. Their activities related to it are not often prosecuted, but it is a violation of the law and occurred years ago.
-
Whatever. You have your mind made up, and no amount of facts will ever change it, so please, enjoy playing with your strawmen and other little trinkets.
Carry on, child, carry on.
LOL, trigger warning!
(http://alove4horses.com/wp-content/uploads/triggerx.jpg)
Someone cannot handle answering to their own idio......er logic it seems.
Pity @Oceander , I thought better of you.
The fact is, one does not have an investigation in search of a crime. That is how the Stassi do it. Given the events with the FBI, I now understand how the East Germans felt.
No Oceander, one investigates with the probable cause of a crime. When the very basis of ones "investigation" is shown to be based on false info..lies , then the investigation is stopped, and those who put forth the lies which started a false investigation are themselves investigated, charged, tried and hopefully jailed.
That is the thin line of rule by law, or a banana republic/Stassi State.
It would seem you are guilty of projecting your own failings onto others. Namely.... having one's mind made up.
Carry on. It is at least amusing to watch such a yoga lesson in logic. :silly:
-
I don’t have evidence and, generally speaking, the cops don’t have to have sufficient evidence that proves all the elements of a crime before they start investigating a crime. Duh.
What there is are some stupid moves by a disorganized idiot, namely Trump and his campaign, that gave rise to the appearance of possible criminal conduct. And all the cops need to investigate is that appearance.
If you’d stop worshipping Trump as an infallible saint, you might see just how large are his feet of clay, and just how they got him into this predicament.
So after more than a year of investigating and there's still no evidence a crime was committed but we need more time.
Meanwhile we have clear evidence of crimes by the FBI but we need to not jump to conclusions.
-
Well there you have it.
We don't know that a crime has been committed, we have no evidence that a crime was
committed but need to investigate anyway. And this comes from a so called attorney? Rule
of law is dead in the USA if the new standard is I don't like your politics so I am going the
have the DOJ/FBI investigate you. And I am going to have them lie to the court to obtain a
warrant to spy on you.
"Show me the man and I'll find you the crime" is straight out of the USSR play book. I miss
America.
We do have, amongst other things, an offer to provide hacked emails. How much cooperation was there on that? We don’t know yet. We have a guy who was already investigated once for being a Russian agent being hired as a campaign adviser and then trying to make connections with the Russians again.
None of that proves all the elements of a crime, but it does provide enough smoke to give some people the basis for wondering if there’s any fire there.
Probably there isn’t any fire there - Trump is too damned stupid in my opinion to have done something criminal that required guile and sophistication - but Trump did put out enough smoke, mostly through his own incompetence, that he brought this thing on himself.
-
Prior to being "interviewed" by the FBI what crime did Papadopoulos commit. Same with Gen Flynn
what crime did Flynn commit? All of these "crimes" are being manufactured by the FBI. This is
Martha Steward all over again. It is not justice, it is fascism.
On this point, you and I absolutely agree. So far Mueller has charged no one with a crime other than lying. If these gentlemen had been forthcoming, it is entirely possible that they would not have been charged at all. If Mueller had any evidence they had committed a real crime, it seems he would have charged them with that. Even if he had to wait a bit to get the goods on them.
I personally think there is nothing there.
-
Fine so what crime would "probable cause" indicate Trump committed? The FBI is suppose to
investigate crime. I just want to know what Trump crime it is that the FBI is investigating.
@jpsb
They let us know when they find something. They can't worry about all the details they have a presidency to bring down
-
So after more than a year of investigating and there's still no evidence a crime was committed but we need more time.
Meanwhile we have clear evidence of crimes by the FBI but we need to not jump to conclusions.
So if it’s so damned clear the DOJ and FBI were committing crimes, why hadn’t Trump at least made efforts to have another special counsel appointed to investigate all these crimes?
-
So if it’s so damned clear the DOJ and FBI were committing crimes, why hadn’t Trump at least made efforts to have another special counsel appointed to investigate all these crimes?
Perhaps the memo will be the impetus to appoint a special prosecutor. It certainly seems to be appropriate.
-
On this point, you and I absolutely agree. So far Mueller has charged no one with a crime other than lying. If these gentlemen had been forthcoming, it is entirely possible that they would not have been charged at all. If Mueller had any evidence they had committed a real crime, it seems he would have charged them with that. Even if he had to wait a bit to get the goods on them.
I personally think there is nothing there.
Ummmmm......no. This was fairly big news about Manafort just a few months ago.
The indictment contains 12 counts: conspiracy against the United States, conspiracy to launder money, unregistered agent of a foreign principal, false and misleading FARA statements, false statements, and seven counts of failure to file reports of foreign bank and financial accounts.
https://www.cnbc.com/2017/10/30/former-trump-campaign-chairman-paul-manafort-indicted-as-part-of-russia-election-probe-nyt.html (https://www.cnbc.com/2017/10/30/former-trump-campaign-chairman-paul-manafort-indicted-as-part-of-russia-election-probe-nyt.html)
-
So if it’s so damned clear the DOJ and FBI were committing crimes, why hadn’t Trump at least made efforts to have another special counsel appointed to investigate all these crimes?
Exactly right IMO. If someone was really interested in getting to the bottom of this and holding people accountable, I'd expect they'd be screaming at the top of their lungs: special counsel, special counsel, special counsel (or Congressional hearing, Congressional hearing, Congressional hearing). Instead, we've got public releases of partial classified information for clearly political reasons. Releasing the memo to the public doesn't do anything for getting on a path of truly finding the guilty and holding them accountable. JMO.
-
On this point, you and I absolutely agree. So far Mueller has charged no one with a crime other than lying. If these gentlemen had been forthcoming, it is entirely possible that they would not have been charged at all. If Mueller had any evidence they had committed a real crime, it seems he would have charged them with that. Even if he had to wait a bit to get the goods on them.
I personally think there is nothing there.
I don't know about Papadopoulos but I'd bet dollars to donuts that Gen Flynn did not lie to
FBI agent Peter Struck (sp). DOJ/FBI broke Mike Flynn, he could not afford fight them. He sold
his home everything he owned, bankrupted and broken he coped a plea. This is not justice it
is tyranny and it needs to stop.
-
On this point, you and I absolutely agree. So far Mueller has charged no one with a crime other than lying. If these gentlemen had been forthcoming, it is entirely possible that they would not have been charged at all. If Mueller had any evidence they had committed a real crime, it seems he would have charged them with that. Even if he had to wait a bit to get the goods on them.
I personally think there is nothing there.
@ConstitutionRose
From what I heard they asked Flynn about a call he made two years earlier. Flynn didn't remember the call accurately. Meanwhile they had the call recorded and knew what he said.
So he got charged with lying. How accurately do you remember calls you made two years ago. Seems to me he was too forthcoming. If he said 'I don't recall' they couldn't have trapped him.
-
LOL, trigger warning!
(http://alove4horses.com/wp-content/uploads/triggerx.jpg)
Someone cannot handle answering to their own idio......er logic it seems.
Pity @Oceander , I thought better of you.
The fact is, one does not have an investigation in search of a crime. That is how the Stassi do it. Given the events with the FBI, I now understand how the East Germans felt.
No Oceander, one investigates with the probable cause of a crime. When the very basis of ones "investigation" is shown to be based on false info..lies , then the investigation is stopped, and those who put forth the lies which started a false investigation are themselves investigated, charged, tried and hopefully jailed.
That is the thin line of rule by law, or a banana republic/Stassi State.
It would seem you are guilty of projecting your own failings onto others. Namely.... having one's mind made up.
Carry on. It is at least amusing to watch such a yoga lesson in logic. :silly:
Hiring someone who was trying to illegally hook up with Russian agents back in 2013 as a campaign adviser on foreign affairs, and then having this same moron start trying to get involved with the Russians again suggests that there is probable cause to believe the campaign might be illegally involved with Russian agents.
Meeting with Russians who are offering access to hacked emails and other information gives probable cause to believe that there might be a conspiracy to gain unlawful access to computer data, or possession of stolen computer data.
Probable cause deals in probsbilities, not certainties, so none of these possibilities has to be true.
Furthermore, the cops don’t even need probable cause to start an investigation; probable cause is generally the requirement for a warrant to issue of an arrest to be made.
A reasonable suspicion, which is less than probable cause, would almost certainly be enough to justify an investigation.
And Trump, through his own stupidity and incompetence, allowed his campaign staff to do things that gave rise to a basis for suspicion.
You want to point fingers? Point them and the incompetent boob sitting in the White House and his propensity for hiring idiots and rubes without adequate vetting. He finally seems to be learning from his mistakes, so he’s not irredeemable, but he is largely to blame for having given the democrats this opportunity.
-
Perhaps the memo will be the impetus to appoint a special prosecutor. It certainly seems to be appropriate.
There are two more reports due out by Spring. One by Sen Grassley and one by the DOJ
Inspector General. If they also allege basis or criminality by either the DOJ or the FBI Sessions
will have no choice but to appoint another SC. The American people will not trust DOJ/FBI
investigating themselves.
-
@ConstitutionRose
From what I heard they asked Flynn about a call he made two years earlier. Flynn didn't remember the call accurately. Meanwhile they had the call recorded and knew what he said.
So he got charged with lying. How accurately do you remember calls you made two years ago. Seems to me he was too forthcoming. If he said 'I don't recall' they couldn't have trapped him.
Flynn was ambushed, he did not even know he was being "interviewed" he thought FBI agent
Peter Struck (sp) just stopped by for a friendly chat.
-
There are two more reports due out by Spring. One by Sen Grassley and one by the DOJ
Inspector General. If they also allege basis or criminality by either the DOJ or the FBI Sessions
will have no choice but to appoint another SC. The American people will not trust DOJ/FBI
investigating themselves.
I hope you’re correct, and I look forward to these next reports.
-
Flynn was ambushed, he did not even know he was being "interviewed" he thought FBI agent
Peter Struck (sp) just stopped by for a friendly chat.
Yeah, because FBI agents who aren’t your personal friends for years always stop by for casual friendly chats.
-
Yeah, because FBI agents who aren’t your personal friends for years always stop by for casual friendly chats.
When you're a powerful general they do.
-
When you're a powerful general they do.
When you are the National Security Advisor to an incoming president, yes they do come by for
a chat. Gen Flynn was ambushed.
-
When you're a powerful general they do.
Baloney. Any idiot who thinks an FBI agent who isn’t a personal friend is not on the clock deserves what he gets.
-
When you are the National Security Advisor to an incoming president, yes they do come by for
a chat. Gen Flynn was ambushed.
He wasn’t ambushed. He set himself up. Why? Because like Trump he suffers from a certain degree of ego-driven stupidity.
-
Baloney. Any idiot who thinks an FBI agent who isn’t a personal friend is not on the clock deserves what he gets.
I am amazed at all the abuses by LE that you are OK with.
-
I am amazed at all the abuses by LE that you are OK with.
You clearly like putting words in other people’s mouths.
I did not say I’m ok with law enforcement abuse. I did say this looney toon wasn’t ambushed because he should have known full well that this wasn’t some friendly little chit-chat. He was just, like most criminals, too convinced of his own superiority to think he’d ever get caught.
-
They both (DNC and RNC) colluded with foreign entities to help secure the election of their respective nominees. DNC in financing GPS for the dossier and Trump people meeting Russian agents in Trump Tower to get Hillary's emails.
Remember obummer interfering in the Israeli and Brexit vote and Manafort in the Ukrainian vote as recent examples of what is considered ethical behavior these days, doesn't make it right, just the way it is these days, geopolitically.
Wow! I can see clearly now.
-
We do have, amongst other things, an offer to provide hacked emails. How much cooperation was there on that? We don’t know yet. We have a guy who was already investigated once for being a Russian agent being hired as a campaign adviser and then trying to make connections with the Russians again.
None of that proves all the elements of a crime, but it does provide enough smoke to give some people the basis for wondering if there’s any fire there.
Probably there isn’t any fire there - Trump is too damned stupid in my opinion to have done something criminal that required guile and sophistication - but Trump did put out enough smoke, mostly through his own incompetence, that he brought this thing on himself.
Too stupid.... and yet..... he seemingly has outsmarted all those that seek, 24/7, his destruction and downfall. How smart would he have to be for that to happen? Unless.... he has big-G on his side. Could it be? :shrug: :shrug: :shrug:
If you consider Trump as your opponent.... you obviously are ignoring Rule No. 1.
-
Too stupid.... and yet..... he seemingly has outsmarted all those that seek, 24/7, his destruction and downfall. How smart would he have to be for that to happen? Unless.... he has big-G on his side. Could it be? :shrug: :shrug: :shrug:
If you consider Trump as your opponent.... you obviously are ignoring Rule No. 1.
Yeah, pretty damned stupid. But smart enough to have bullshitted enough people like you to get elected. As they say, the sh** runs downhill, and Trumps standing uphill from you.
-
So you are ok with a Special Counsel with unlimited resources to investigate you? After all, who knows what crimes you have committed... that is why we need an investigation.
Just like in the old USSR comrade. :police:
Oleander, as I call him, is so consumed with hate for the person he calls "a negligent, disorganized idiot)," that he is terrified this investigation will totally exonerate said idiot for all the crimes the media has accused him of.
I can scarcely bear to read all the hateful comments above. Never mind that this "negligent, disorganized idiot" is the best President we've had for a long time and whose approval ratings continue to rise dramatically.
-
Yeah, pretty damned stupid. But smart enough to have bullshitted enough people like you to get elected. As they say, the sh** runs downhill, and Trumps standing uphill from you.
LMAO! Um... excuse me? I didn't vote for him. So there goes your line of BS (ooops!).
-
Oleander, as I call him, is so consumed with hate for the person he calls "a negligent, disorganized idiot)," that he is terrified this investigation will totally exonerate said idiot for all the crimes the media has accused him of.
I can scarcely bear to read all the hateful comments above. Never mind that this "negligent, disorganized idiot" is the best President we've had for a long time and whose approval ratings continue to rise dramatically.
:bigsilly:
I personally don’t think anything will result from Muellers investigation regarding Trump, no matter how badly the democrats want it, precisely because so far the evidence adduced only shows Trumps basic incompetence; but then, after the sideshows with people like Scaramucci, that’s hardly a secret.
I’m hardly afraid of what I view as the most likely outcome.
I just don’t have my ego and personality invested into Trump’s infallibility. Unlike you, I don’t worship him as a god; I see him as just another politician, another fallible human being. It’s too bad you can’t see the truth.
-
They both (DNC and RNC) colluded with foreign entities to help secure the election of their respective nominees. DNC in financing GPS for the dossier and Trump people meeting Russian agents in Trump Tower to get Hillary's emails.
Remember obummer interfering in the Israeli and Brexit vote and Manafort in the Ukrainian vote as recent examples of what is considered ethical behavior these days, doesn't make it right, just the way it is these days, geopolitically.
Yeah.... come to think of it.... ain't it funny.... how another nation tampering with OUR election is supposedly EEEEVIL.... but...
it is apparently A-OK for a USA leader to interfere with another nation's election ...
but only if/when that leader happens to be a DemocRat. Especially if/when a clean, articulate (lying) DemocRat that has Soros help.
The left's double standards are, per usual, the only standards they have.
-
:bigsilly:
I personally don’t think anything will result from Muellers investigation regarding Trump, no matter how badly the democrats want it, precisely because so far the evidence adduced only shows Trumps basic incompetence; but then, after the sideshows with people like Scaramucci, that’s hardly a secret.
I’m hardly afraid of what I view as the most likely outcome.
I just don’t have my ego and personality invested into Trump’s infallibility. Unlike you, I don’t worship him as a god; I see him as just another politician, another fallible human being. It’s too bad you can’t see the truth.
It's too bad you can't see the truth. I have posted at least 50 times full disclosure about my history with Trump as a politician. I was almost as mean as you about him in the primaries and I still don't care for him as a person.
I started supporting him the morning he was elected as he saved the country from the most vicious woman who has ever lived.
I continued to try to support him when he did things I like. He's done many, many things I like ... far more than I expected.
It's too bad you can't let go of your hate and contempt and give him a fair shake.
-
It's too bad you can't see the truth. I have posted at least 50 times full disclosure about my history with Trump as a politician. I was almost as mean as you about him in the primaries and I still don't care for him as a person.
I started supporting him the morning he was elected as he saved the country from the most vicious woman who has ever lived.
I continued to try to support him when he did things I like. He's done many, many things I like ... far more than I expected.
It's too bad you can't let go of your hate and contempt and give him a fair shake.
So you turned off your ability to think critically in order to support the president of your political party. What makes you any different from the typical liberal who does the same thing to support their guy? Answer: nothing.
Turning off your brain doesn’t excuse you, it implicates you. And sorry, you can delude yourself all you want, but your posts pretty much demonstrate worship of Trump. He can do no wrong as far as you’re concerned.
-
Is anybody as tired as I am about all the NT's immediately making stupid statements when a poster defends Trump about anything?
I am very tired of it. It's old and it's wrong and it's mean. Supporting trump on a particular issue is not Mad Idolatry.
There may be a Trump worshipper on this forum but I doubt that. There are a couple of people who really admire him a LOT, but I wouldn't even call that worship.
What there really are a lot of here are Trump haters who cannot put it down for a minute.
-
Is anybody as tired as I am about all the NT's immediately making stupid statements when a poster defends Trump about anything?
I am very tired of it. It's old and it's wrong and it's mean. Supporting trump on a particular issue is not Mad Idolatry.
There may be a Trump worshipper on this forum but I doubt that. There are a couple of people who really admire him a LOT, but I wouldn't even call that worship.
What there really are a lot of here are Trump haters who cannot put it down for a minute.
No, what there is are a lot of people who refuse to believe that Trump can do anything wrong. Not only will they not voice a single criticism, no matter how well deserved, they try to shut down anyone who does criticize Trump with imprecations of being a butt-hurt never-Trumper.
You have not expressed any legitimate criticism of Trump since he was elected, and, as you’ve just proven, you try to shut down anyone who does criticize him by labeling us as hateful never-Trumpers.
If you don’t like Trump being criticized, why don’t you go post at FR? Otherwise, you’ll have to put your big-boy pants on and accept that some of us see Trump differently than you and choose to criticize his mistakes, even if you do not or cannot bring yourself to do likewise.
-
Hiring someone who was trying to illegally hook up with Russian agents back in 2013 as a campaign adviser on foreign affairs, and then having this same moron start trying to get involved with the Russians again suggests that there is probable cause to believe the campaign might be illegally involved with Russian agents.
Meeting with Russians who are offering access to hacked emails and other information gives probable cause to believe that there might be a conspiracy to gain unlawful access to computer data, or possession of stolen computer data.
Probable cause deals in probsbilities, not certainties, so none of these possibilities has to be true.
Furthermore, the cops don’t even need probable cause to start an investigation; probable cause is generally the requirement for a warrant to issue of an arrest to be made.
A reasonable suspicion, which is less than probable cause, would almost certainly be enough to justify an investigation.
And Trump, through his own stupidity and incompetence, allowed his campaign staff to do things that gave rise to a basis for suspicion.
You want to point fingers? Point them and the incompetent boob sitting in the White House and his propensity for hiring idiots and rubes without adequate vetting. He finally seems to be learning from his mistakes, so he’s not irredeemable, but he is largely to blame for having given the democrats this opportunity.
Hiring someone who is alleged to have committed an illegality, notice "alleged", years before and never charged or prosecuted. Well, now that would eliminate almost anyone in DC. I also note that there is no illegality in meeting with Russians..obama too, did it.
Where is the underlying crime? There is none. This is a political "investigation" from the start.
And when that comes from the highest levels of government, the obama regime using its corrupt levers of power...DOJ, FBI, IRS to investigate damage and destroy its political opponents... as we are seeing actual pruff of.... that is truly the real danger here.
Banana republic/Stassi State.
Far more "probable cause"..... which by the way is not that something is possible.... but rather you have actual tangible evidence of something. Not a fabricated DNC/Hilary , delivered by a worm called McCain to an FBI which new it was a political fabrication, produced in part by real substantiated collusion with the 'Russians".
My God man, I know you hate Trump. But wake up, the ground you stand on is the shifting sands of leftist despotism and corruption. Not a place a sound mind should place itself willingly.
-
Exactly right IMO. If someone was really interested in getting to the bottom of this and holding people accountable, I'd expect they'd be screaming at the top of their lungs: special counsel, special counsel, special counsel (or Congressional hearing, Congressional hearing, Congressional hearing). Instead, we've got public releases of partial classified information for clearly political reasons. Releasing the memo to the public doesn't do anything for getting on a path of truly finding the guilty and holding them accountable. JMO.
Peoe are screaming but then there's people running interference for the criminals. Telling us it's no big deal.
Besides we don't need another special counsel. Those are dangerous and IMO unconstitutional. No we need to use the prosecutors we already have.
Maybe if so many people didn't care more about attacking Trump then stopping this threat to our Republic we'd get a prosecutor.
-
Hiring someone who is alleged to have committed an illegality, notice "alleged", years before and never charged or prosecuted. Well, now that would eliminate almost anyone in DC. I also note that there is no illegality in meeting with Russians..obama too, did it.
Where is the underlying crime? There is none. This is a political "investigation" from the start.
And when that comes from the highest levels of government, the obama regime using its corrupt levers of power...DOJ, FBI, IRS to investigate damage and destroy its political opponents... as we are seeing actual pruff of.... that is truly the real danger here.
Banana republic/Stassi State.
Far more "probable cause"..... which by the way is not that something is possible.... but rather you have actual tangible evidence of something. Not a fabricated DNC/Hilary , delivered by a worm called McCain to an FBI which new it was a political fabrication, produced in part by real substantiated collusion with the 'Russians".
My God man, I know you hate Trump. But wake up, the ground you stand on is the shifting sands of leftist despotism and corruption. Not a place a sound mind should place itself willingly.
Conspiring with hackers to obtain emails illegally is a crime, and by talking with Russians offering to provide the same, without turning the matter over to the police, the Trump administration raised enough of a basis for a suspicion that there might be something illegal going on.
My God man, can you stop worshipping another living human being as a saint long enough to realize that he did this to himself? I know you have your entire ego bound up in the rightness of Donald Trump, but please, have some self-respect.
-
Is anybody as tired as I am about all the NT's immediately making stupid statements when a poster defends Trump about anything?
I am very tired of it. It's old and it's wrong and it's mean. Supporting trump on a particular issue is not Mad Idolatry.
There may be a Trump worshipper on this forum but I doubt that. There are a couple of people who really admire him a LOT, but I wouldn't even call that worship.
What there really are a lot of here are Trump haters who cannot put it down for a minute.
@Emjay
Yes very tired. It just shows they don't have an intelligent argument and have to strike out emotionally like a toddler who lost his toy.
-
Peoe are screaming but then there's people running interference for the criminals. Telling us it's no big deal.
Besides we don't need another special counsel. Those are dangerous and IMO unconstitutional. No we need to use the prosecutors we already have.
Maybe if so many people didn't care more about attacking Trump then stopping this threat to our Republic we'd get a prosecutor.
@driftdiver
Perhaps I missed all that screaming, but who in the Administration or Congress is talking about taking specific actions (and what action is that) to truly investigate these allegations and to hold people accountable judicially? The fact that some people think this is "no big deal" is precisely why I think we need an independent investigation to get to the bottom of it in a non-partisan way (if you don't like a special counsel then perhaps the IG), but I haven't heard much screaming for that from official channels, and I certainly haven't heard who specifically they think should conduct this independent investigation.
-
Baloney. Any idiot who thinks an FBI agent who isn’t a personal friend is not on the clock deserves what he gets.
Your ignorance is like one of those big flares on a dark night.
Generals have a lot of people wanting their attention all the time. A single word from them can move mountains.
-
@driftdiver
Perhaps I missed all that screaming, but who in the Administration or Congress is talking about taking specific actions (and what action is that) to truly investigate these allegations and to hold people accountable judicially? The fact that some people think this is "no big deal" is precisely why I think we need an independent investigation to get to the bottom of it in a non-partisan way (if you don't like a special counsel then perhaps the IG), but I haven't heard much screaming for that from official channels, and I certainly haven't heard who specifically they think should conduct this independent investigation.
If Trump does or says anything then you'll be crying obstruction or unlawful influence. Give it a rest.
-
Is anybody as tired as I am about all the NT's immediately making stupid statements when a poster defends Trump about anything?
I am very tired of it. It's old and it's wrong and it's mean. Supporting trump on a particular issue is not Mad Idolatry.
There may be a Trump worshipper on this forum but I doubt that. There are a couple of people who really admire him a LOT, but I wouldn't even call that worship.
What there really are a lot of here are Trump haters who cannot put it down for a minute.
I don't mind hearing an alternative point of view. Its the nastiness and projection that gets tiresome.
Ironically its the kind of gratuitous bile that apparently first turned them off to hardcore Trump supporters.
-
@Emjay
Yes very tired. It just shows they don't have an intelligent argument and have to strike out emotionally like a toddler who lost his toy.
Because after the umpteenth time of being ridiculed as a never-trumper simply because one criticized Trump, it becomes evident that not even God himself could cause someone like you to acknowledge even the slightest flaw in Mr. Trump, and so what’s the point of presenting an argument to someone who will not only not consider it, but simply treat it as another reason for denigrating one as a butt-hurt never-trumper.
It’s impossible to have a discussion with someone who believes Trump is infallible and that any criticism of him is just political skullduggery.
You made that bed, stop complaining about having to sleep in it.
-
Your ignorance is like one of those big flares on a dark night.
Generals have a lot of people wanting their attention all the time. A single word from them can move mountains.
/snicker
Your comment only reveals your ignorance. A general of that stature would realize that someone who is not already a personal friend wants something from him, and would handle it accordingly.
-
/snicker
Your comment only reveals your ignorance. A general of that stature would realize that someone who is not already a personal friend wants something from him, and would handle it accordingly.
Uh nope. You don't lie to a general if you ever want help from any general ever again. Not unless you're someone like Lockheed or General Dynamics and then they just buy the general.....i mean hire em.
-
If Trump does or says anything then you'll be crying obstruction or unlawful influence. Give it a rest.
No thanks on giving it a rest. I won't be silenced, and my apologies if I wasn't clear. My point is that I want to get to the bottom of this. I hope everyone does, but how do we get to the bottom of this in a non-partisan way? I want to get on with doing that, and I think the first step is a truly independent non-partisan review which looks at the facts (e.g., actual FISA application): summaries available to the public won’t cut it so I say let’s get on with it.
There are a plethora of folks who could be calling for that besides the President: Sessions and members of Congress (probably the adults in the Senate) come to mind. Why aren't they screaming for this? I think because they are too focused on making political hay out of this and not focused on actual justice and fact. Sad.
-
Because after the umpteenth time of being ridiculed as a never-trumper simply because one criticized Trump, it becomes evident that not even God himself could cause someone like you to acknowledge even the slightest flaw in Mr. Trump, and so what’s the point of presenting an argument to someone who will not only not consider it, but simply treat it as another reason for denigrating one as a butt-hurt never-trumper.
It’s impossible to have a discussion with someone who believes Trump is infallible and that any criticism of him is just political skullduggery.
You made that bed, stop complaining about having to sleep in it.
I've never said he's infallible. I've actually stated the opposite numerous times. I'm sure you've seen the posts.
I'd say nice try but it wasnt.
-
No thanks on giving it a rest. I won't be silenced, and my apologies if I wasn't clear. My point is that I want to get to the bottom of this. I hope everyone does, but how do we get to the bottom of this in a non-partisan way? I want to get on with doing that, and I think the first step is a truly independent non-partisan review which looks at the facts (e.g., actual FISA application): summaries available to the public won’t cut it so I say let’s get on with it.
There are a plethora of folks who could be calling for that besides the President: Sessions and members of Congress (probably the adults in the Senate) come to mind. Why aren't they screaming for this? I think because they are too focused on making political hay out of this and not focused on actual justice and fact. Sad.
Our nation needs justice. Our Republic is starving for it. We've already waited years, that's long enough. Time for a prosecutor and criminal charges.
The charge the dems who knew what was happening and did everything to block it with obstruction and conspiracy in many cases.
A Dem congressman from CA stated Tucker Carlson was commuting treason by talking about the memo. That's a big deal on many levels.
-
Our nation needs justice. Our Republic is starving for it. We've already waited years, that's long enough. Time for a prosecutor and criminal charges.
The charge the dems who knew what was happening and did everything to block it with obstruction and conspiracy in many cases.
A Dem congressman from CA stated Tucker Carlson was commuting treason by talking about the memo. That's a big deal on many levels.
So why isn’t Trump taking any of these steps?
-
Our nation needs justice. Our Republic is starving for it. We've already waited years, that's long enough. Time for a prosecutor and criminal charges.
The charge the dems who knew what was happening and did everything to block it with obstruction and conspiracy in many cases.
A Dem congressman from CA stated Tucker Carlson was commuting treason by talking about the memo. That's a big deal on many levels.
:thumbsup:
We're in complete agreement, but who's going to fully investigate and prosecute? If you believe those on the right, much of the DOJ and FBI are corrupt so they can't do it.
-
No thanks on giving it a rest. I won't be silenced, and my apologies if I wasn't clear. My point is that I want to get to the bottom of this. I hope everyone does, but how do we get to the bottom of this in a non-partisan way? I want to get on with doing that, and I think the first step is a truly independent non-partisan review which looks at the facts (e.g., actual FISA application): summaries available to the public won’t cut it so I say let’s get on with it.
There are a plethora of folks who could be calling for that besides the President: Sessions and members of Congress (probably the adults in the Senate) come to mind. Why aren't they screaming for this? I think because they are too focused on making political hay out of this and not focused on actual justice and fact. Sad.
hear! hear!
WE THE PEOPLE.
Grand juries formed in every region, or every state. Given all the salient documents in full.
There is no one in DC, or implicitly connected, that wants justice to be done here. It is ALL political hay. Aggrandizement. He she it are more corrupt and meaner that I we.
What we really need here is a "mass killing" or "terrorist" attack to make your average joe fear for their personal safety and leave all this same old s poltical hit same old shit be sooo yesterday.
-
So why isn’t Trump taking any of these steps?
Maybe because people like you would attack him viciously.
-
Maybe because people like you would attack him viciously.
And that proves my point precisely. Thanks for demonstrating why you don’t deserve reasoned argument; because all you can do is insult.
-
Conspiring with hackers to obtain emails illegally is a crime, and by talking with Russians offering to provide the same, without turning the matter over to the police, the Trump administration raised enough of a basis for a suspicion that there might be something illegal going on.
My God man, can you stop worshipping another living human being as a saint long enough to realize that he did this to himself? I know you have your entire ego bound up in the rightness of Donald Trump, but please, have some self-respect.
Last first as is my won't.
You are talking to a Cruz man. Hardly a Trump worshiper ,I have though, come to greatly admire him. His deeds and , quite frankly honoring his promises more than any other Pol in my lifetime have won the man that respect.
So can we lay that false canard...that Trump worship straw man aside?
There has been no proof of what you alleged... in over a year. Even with the cooperation from the Trump Administration. Do you wish to know how crooks act, they "Don't remember... 100's of times over and over", they obstruct and delay like the obama regime.
They get FISA warrants based on fictitious accounts from a Brit spy in conjunction with Russian spys, paid for by DNC/Hillary campaign and used by the obama regime to attack his political opposition with the apparatus of the State.
This is what the real threat is... the real crimes.
And sounding like Dick Durban is not going to change those facts.
-
hear! hear!
WE THE PEOPLE.
Grand juries formed in every region, or every state. Given all the salient documents in full.
There is no one in DC, or implicitly connected, that wants justice to be done here. It is ALL political hay. Aggrandizement. He she it are more corrupt and meaner that I we.
What we really need here is a "mass killing" or "terrorist" attack to make your average joe fear for their personal safety and leave all this same old s poltical hit same old shit be sooo yesterday.
@bigheadfred
:beer:
-
Rep. Chris Stewart, R-Utah, said on “Fox News Sunday†Trump was mistaken when he tweeted Saturday that the memo “totally vindicates ‘Trump’†in the Russia probe.
This memo has frankly nothing at all to do with a special counsel.â€
more
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/chris-stewart-house-intel-released-memo-to-inform-public-on-fbi-abuses-not-to-exonerate-trump/article/2648053 (http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/chris-stewart-house-intel-released-memo-to-inform-public-on-fbi-abuses-not-to-exonerate-trump/article/2648053)
@mystery-ak
NONSENSE!
First: Why does Gowdy think that directly contradicting what Trump said (memo discredits the investigation) a good thing?
Can anyone remember a time when Obama said something and any Democrat contradicted what he said?
There are seven or eight so called republicans who side with Gowdy such as Lindsey Graham .. why is that?
Two: Tom Fitton
â€Verified account @TomFitton
3h3 hours ago
Mueller using Clinton/DNC dossier, which is the fraudulent center of the Russia collusion allegations against @realDonaldTrump. Don't be fooled by the spin the Memo has nothing to do with Mueller investigation. Shut it down!
Tom Fitton is the head guy from Judicial Watch!
The guy who has been doing the job Congress (Republicans) should have been doing for years!
-
NONSENSE![/size]
First: Why does Gowdy think that directly contradicting what Trump said (memo discredits the investigation) a good thing?
Can anyone remember a time when Obama said something and any Democrat contradicted what he said?
There are seven or eight so called republicans who side with Gowdy such as Lindsey Graham .. why is that?
Two:
Tom Fitton is the head guy from Judicial Watch!
The guy who has been doing the job Congress (Republicans) should have been doing for years!
Gowdy’s contradicting Trump is neither here nor there and certainly doesn’t prove Trump was correct. And the Steele dossier is not the sole basis on which Mueller’s investigation was started, so undercutting the dossier does not delegitimize the investigation.
-
A Dem congressman from CA stated Tucker Carlson was commuting treason by talking about the memo. That's a big deal on many levels.
It's a big deal if you really hate when people abuse definitions, like when people use Hitler and Nazi as references to anything they don't like. Other than that, it's just typical of leftists saying dumb things, like when Chris Cuomo said the state tax deduction elimination was modern day treason.
-
If you don’t like Trump being criticized, why don’t you go post at FR?
I got zotted there for being anti-Trump, lol.
-
Because after the umpteenth time of being ridiculed as a never-trumper simply because one criticized Trump, it becomes evident that not even God himself could cause someone like you to acknowledge even the slightest flaw in Mr. Trump, and so what’s the point of presenting an argument to someone who will not only not consider it, but simply treat it as another reason for denigrating one as a butt-hurt never-trumper.
It’s impossible to have a discussion with someone who believes Trump is infallible and that any criticism of him is just political skullduggery.
You made that bed, stop complaining about having to sleep in it.
Wow. A lawyer who cannot read nor comprehend. I always suspected something like that.
You are a person who cannot allow reason to seep into your brain because it would destroy your meme of accusing every person who defends or agrees with Trump on any issue as being a worshipper.
I'm tired of you, and I'm tired of trying to explain things to you because I've told you at least 3 times on this very thread that I'm not a Trump worshipper.
I am, however, a sane person in contrast with you.
-
Gowdy’s contradicting Trump is neither here nor there and certainly doesn’t prove Trump was correct. And the Steele dossier is not the sole basis on which Mueller’s investigation was started, so undercutting the dossier does not delegitimize the investigation.
Sorry, I think that I will go along with Fitton on this plus as any honest person would admit ... the Dossier was The Driving Force behind opening the investigation!
If you don't believe it ... Go and argue the case with Fitton, Jonathan Turley and Alan Dershowitz!
I'm sure that they will argue laws and procedures with someone such as yourself!
-
Sorry, I think that I will go along with Fitton on this plus as any honest person would admit ... the Dossier was The Driving Force behind opening the investigation!
If you don't believe it ... Go and argue the case with Fitton, Jonathan Turley and Alan Dershowitz!
I'm sure that they will argue laws and procedures with someone such as yourself!
Believe what you want; that doesn’t change the fact that there were other things going on with the Trump campaign that suffice to form a basis for the investigation, and these facts are independent of that dossier.
-
And that proves my point precisely. Thanks for demonstrating why you don’t deserve reasoned argument; because all you can do is insult.
After you've thrown insult after insult now you run away?
What a piker
-
Wow. A lawyer who cannot read nor comprehend. I always suspected something like that.
You are a person who cannot allow reason to seep into your brain because it would destroy your meme of accusing every person who defends or agrees with Trump on any issue as being a worshipper.
I'm tired of you, and I'm tired of trying to explain things to you because I've told you at least 3 times on this very thread that I'm not a Trump worshipper.
I am, however, a sane person in contrast with you.
And yet, somehow, you simply cannot bring yourself to ever criticize Trump, and you hound anyone else who does as a never-Trumper.
Whatever. Your sense of sanity is highly overrated.
-
After you've thrown insult after insult now you run away?
What a piker
Nobody’s running away. I’m simply pointing out that all you do is insult, so you have no ground for being surprised that we’ve given up on you and simply feed back to you what you sling out.
And here’s the stupidest thing of all: I agree with you inasmuch as I don’t think Trump broke the law, and I do think the investigation is politically motivated, and I do think that what the DOJ and FBI did was wrong and politically motivated; all I really differ with you on is that I think that Trump and his campaign did some stupid albeit innocent things that laid the groundwork that made it possible for the democrats to get their special counsel and their investigation. You simply won’t brook the idea that Trump could ever do anything wrong, whether criminal or not.
-
On this point, you and I absolutely agree. So far Mueller has charged no one with a crime other than lying. If these gentlemen had been forthcoming, it is entirely possible that they would not have been charged at all. If Mueller had any evidence they had committed a real crime, it seems he would have charged them with that. Even if he had to wait a bit to get the goods on them.
I personally think there is nothing there.
Thanks for the info on Manafort. I missed or forgot all of that. Took them a long time to go after him.
-
Who knows? That’s why they’re investigating. Duh. If we knew what crimes he had committed, they’d be prosecuting, not investigating. Duh.
@Oceander
So fishing expeditions are ok with you?
-
Nobody’s running away. I’m simply pointing out that all you do is insult, so you have no ground for being surprised that we’ve given up on you and simply feed back to you what you sling out.
Funny coming from a guy who throws insults with every post.
Btw nothing in my post was an insult. If the truth hurts maybe you should look at your behavior.
-
Believe what you want; that doesn’t change the fact that there were other things going on with the Trump campaign that suffice to form a basis for the investigation, and these facts are independent of that dossier.
You want to show us all the other things that happened during the campaign and .... before you spew the Democrats talking points ... show us the other things that were uncovered without the use of the Phony Dossier, FISA wire-tapping warrant!?
-
@Oceander
So fishing expeditions are ok with you?
When you’ve seeded the water with fish, what else would you expect? Trump and his campaign did some rather stupid things that laid the basis for the investigation. They have no one to blame but themselves. Nobody tricked them into talking to a Russian claiming he had illicit emails from Clinton and the DNC? Why didn’t the campaign simply turn that contact over to the police the first chance they got? You meet in secret with people peddling stolen goods, and you can’t be too surprised if your political opponents use that as the basis for convincing the cops to investigate you for possession of stolen property.
-
You want to show us all the other things that happened during the campaign and .... before you spew the Democrats talking points ... show us the other things that were uncovered without the use of the Phony Dossier, FISA wire-tapping warrant!?
Papadopoulos being investigated in 2013 for possibly trying to become a Russian agent, and then hiring him as an adviser and having him get back in touch with dodgy Russian contacts.
None of that is a fabrication from the Steele dossier.
-
Funny coming from a guy who throws insults with every post.
Btw nothing in my post was an insult. If the truth hurts maybe you should look at your behavior.
You can go back and assign blame if you want to; the fact is, you consistently accuse anyone who is in the least bit critical of Trump of having nefarious purposes or being a never-Trumper, and cannot accept that Trump might have done something that deserved criticism. Never-Trump is just the least of the insults you have thrown around for more time than I care to count.
-
Papadopoulos being investigated in 2013 for possibly trying to become a Russian agent, and then hiring him as an adviser and having him get back in touch with dodgy Russian contacts.
None of that is a fabrication from the Steele dossier.
He was simply an excuse to tap the Trump campaign. If not him they would have found someone else.
-
No thanks on giving it a rest. I won't be silenced, and my apologies if I wasn't clear. My point is that I want to get to the bottom of this. I hope everyone does, but how do we get to the bottom of this in a non-partisan way? I want to get on with doing that, and I think the first step is a truly independent non-partisan review which looks at the facts (e.g., actual FISA application): summaries available to the public won’t cut it so I say let’s get on with it.
There are a plethora of folks who could be calling for that besides the President: Sessions and members of Congress (probably the adults in the Senate) come to mind. Why aren't they screaming for this? I think because they are too focused on making political hay out of this and not focused on actual justice and fact. Sad.
There are quite a few calling for a Special Counsel (SC). And as more info is released I think the
pressure on Sessions to appoint one will be immense. Either we get a SC or we get a new
AG and then we get a SC.
-
The FISA process was intended for counter terrorism. Yet here they are monitoring a citizen for alleged spying.
Then they use the same process to monitor a campaign and then an incoming administration.
How can anyone not see the issues here?
-
You can go back and assign blame if you want to; the fact is, you consistently accuse anyone who is in the least bit critical of Trump of having nefarious purposes or being a never-Trumper, and cannot accept that Trump might have done something that deserved criticism. Never-Trump is just the least of the insults you have thrown around for more time than I care to count.
I hope you use better arguments in court
-
He was simply an excuse to tap the Trump campaign. If not him they would have found someone else.
They did find a couple of someone elses. Page and Manafort both had previous dealings with foreign agents with Russian connections. Now, tell us what brilliant Deep State/Clinton/Obama/Soros conspirators made Trump hire at least three questionable people with Russian ties.
-
When you’ve seeded the water with fish, what else would you expect? Trump and his campaign did some rather stupid things that laid the basis for the investigation. They have no one to blame but themselves. Nobody tricked them into talking to a Russian claiming he had illicit emails from Clinton and the DNC? Why didn’t the campaign simply turn that contact over to the police the first chance they got? You meet in secret with people peddling stolen goods, and you can’t be too surprised if your political opponents use that as the basis for convincing the cops to investigate you for possession of stolen property.
Do you have any idea what the LAW is with regard to the appointment of a Special Prosecutor? Doesn't sound like it to me!
-
I hope you use better arguments in court
Again, all you can do is cast irrelevant insults and aspersions.
-
Do you have any idea what the LAW is with regard to the appointment of a Special Prosecutor? Doesn't sound like it to me!
That has no bearing on whether or not the Trump campaign seeded the fish. You’re dodging the issue.
-
The FISA process was intended for counter terrorism. Yet here they are monitoring a citizen for alleged spying.
Then they use the same process to monitor a campaign and then an incoming administration.
How can anyone not see the issues here?
Are you saying that a citizen could never be the subject of a proper FISA warrant under any circumstances?
-
Papadopoulos being investigated in 2013 for possibly trying to become a Russian agent, and then hiring him as an adviser and having him get back in touch with dodgy Russian contacts.
None of that is a fabrication from the Steele dossier.
As I suspected .. you have nothing!
He worked in HRC’s state dept, then attached himself briefly to Ben Carson’s campaign before suddenly claiming to be Trump’s right hand man
Some guy heard a drunk (Papadopoulos) in a bar in Australia claim that Trump was working with the Russians.
Based on that, the FISA court allowed Obama to spy on Trump's campaign.
As I said .. Democrats talking point .. #1
-
As I suspected .. you have nothing!
He worked in HRC’s state dept, then attached himself briefly to Ben Carson’s campaign before suddenly claiming to be Trump’s right hand man
Some guy heard a drunk (Papadopoulos) in a bar in Australia claim that Trump was working with the Russians.
Based on that, the FISA court allowed Obama to spy on Trump's campaign.
As I said .. Democrats talking point .. #1
He was sufficiently associated with Trump’s campaign that he forms a basis for the investigation. The fact that you don’t like the implications is neither here nor there.
Trump did stupid things and he created the pretext the democrats needed to get the ball rolling for a special prosecutor. It’s too bad, but it’s a fact.
-
That has no bearing on whether or not the Trump campaign seeded the fish. You’re dodging the issue.
NO I'm not! That would be YOU! Doesn't matter how many fish are in the water, they are SUPPOSED to have some actual PROOF of a violation of law(s) in order to name a special prosecutor. WHERE is that?
-
Believe what you want; that doesn’t change the fact that there were other things going on with the Trump campaign that suffice to form a basis for the investigation, and these facts are independent of that dossier.
If Mueller were running a real investigation into Russia meddling in our election he would be
investigating how Wikileaks came into procession of the DNC emails. That is at the very center
of any Russia investigation. But Mueller is not looking at that. Why? Why isn't Mueller looking
at the most important fact of this whole case? Witch hunt, that's why.
-
NO I'm not! That would be YOU! Doesn't matter how many fish are in the water, they are SUPPOSED to have some actual PROOF of a violation of law(s) in order to name a special prosecutor. WHERE is that?
Not according to the relevant regulations. 28 CFR 600.1. The only basis is that the AG has determined that “criminal investigation of a person is warrantedâ€. Nothing in there about proof of a crime having to be there first.
-
The FBI reportedly decided to open its investigation into the Trump campaign after George Papadopoulos, a foreign policy adviser for the Trump team, drunkenly admitted to an Australian diplomat the Russians had damaging information on Hillary Clinton, an admission that came weeks before WikiLeaks began publishing its tranche of hacked emails.
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/george-papadopoulos-told-australian-diplomat-russians-had-dirt-on-hillary-clinton-before-wikileaks-published-hacked-emails-report/article/2644636 (http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/george-papadopoulos-told-australian-diplomat-russians-had-dirt-on-hillary-clinton-before-wikileaks-published-hacked-emails-report/article/2644636)
“I have dirt on Clinton,â€
FBI: “We better spy on Trump†:silly:
-
They did find a couple of someone elses. Page and Manafort both had previous dealings with foreign agents with Russian connections. Now, tell us what brilliant Deep State/Clinton/Obama/Soros conspirators made Trump hire at least three questionable people with Russian ties.
@edpc
They applied? A new administration hires thousands of people in a very short time.
-
Papadopoulos being investigated in 2013 for possibly trying to become a Russian agent, and then hiring him as an adviser and having him get back in touch with dodgy Russian contacts.
None of that is a fabrication from the Steele dossier.
Not Papadopoulos, it was the other guy who's name I forget.
-
If Mueller were running a real investigation into Russia meddling in our election he would be
investigating how Wikileaks came into procession of the DNC emails. That is at the very center
of any Russia investigation. But Mueller is not looking at that. Why? Why isn't Mueller looking
at the most important fact of this whole case? Witch hunt, that's why.
Why do the cops pull over a guy for doing 15 over the limit and ignore the guy going 20 over?
I agree that there are lots of other things that should be investigated, but the problem is that Trump and his campaign did enough stupid things that they gave the democrats the pretext for the investigation.
-
Again, all you can do is cast irrelevant insults and aspersions.
Again not agreeing with you is not an insult. Now if I were to call you a snowflake it would be an insult.
-
Again not agreeing with you is not an insult. Now if I were to call you a snowflake it would be an insult.
Snarking that I hope you use better arguments in court is not disagreeing with me, it’s insulting me.
-
As I suspected .. you have nothing!
He worked in HRC’s state dept, then attached himself briefly to Ben Carson’s campaign before suddenly claiming to be Trump’s right hand man
Some guy heard a drunk (Papadopoulos) in a bar in Australia claim that Trump was working with the Russians.
Based on that, the FISA court allowed Obama to spy on Trump's campaign.
As I said .. Democrats talking point .. #1
There's so much wrong with what you said. First, it wasn't 'some guy.' Second, they were in London. Popadopulous was on Trump's foreign policy advisory team at the time. He was speaking to Australia's top diplomat in Britain, Alexander Downer. He told Downer the Russians 'had dirt' on Clinton.
How would you expect that NOT to get relayed and who the f*** wants a foreign policy advisor who drinks and runs his mouth in public?
-
Snarking that I hope you use better arguments in court is not disagreeing with me, it’s insulting me.
Give it up. You've thrown insults all day and now try to act like the wronged party. Grow up
-
@edpc
They applied? A new administration hires thousands of people in a very short time.
This was during the campaign. You pick your team, often on the recommendations of your campaign manager that you specifically chose. It's not a process done through monster.com. Come on.
-
Not according to the relevant regulations. 28 CFR 600.1. The only basis is that the AG has determined that “criminal investigation of a person is warrantedâ€. Nothing in there about proof of a crime having to be there first.
You seem to have overlooked a few things my friend! The Act was triggered when the AG received "information sufficient to constitute grounds to investigate" whether a covered person had committed a serious federal crime. Upon receipt of such information, the AG was required to consider (1] the specificity of the information and (2) the credibility of its source. If the information was either not specific or not credible, the AG was required to close the matter.]
Bolding added by me.
http://www.lecs-center.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=230%3Aon-special-prosecutors-usa&catid=44%3Aevents&lang=en (http://www.lecs-center.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=230%3Aon-special-prosecutors-usa&catid=44%3Aevents&lang=en)
-
Why do the cops pull over a guy for doing 15 over the limit and ignore the guy going 20 over?
I agree that there are lots of other things that should be investigated, but the problem is that Trump and his campaign did enough stupid things that they gave the democrats the pretext for the investigation.
Did Trump and his campaign do stupid things? Yes, Trump is not a proffesional pol so he made
mistakes (appointing gutless Sessions being his biggest) and now Rats are going to try to run
him out of town for it. I am happy to see you realize this is a political witch hunt not an
"investigation". Because a real investigation would be centered on how Wikileaks got the DNC
emails. Nothing can be ascertained until that question is answered.
-
Are you saying that a citizen could never be the subject of a proper FISA warrant under any circumstances?
Somewhere up thread there was a stat, or maybe another thread, of what exactly, makes for a "proper" FISA warrant. There was a huge disparity of the use of the word "proper".
What I am saying is that FISA warrants should only be issued on truth and fact. Apparently, neither truth or fact matter.
-
Another Excellent Thread on TBR.
H/T to @Oceander, for riding this long!
(http://riverstylemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/bull-riding.jpg)
-
Did Trump and his campaign do stupid things? Yes, Trump is not a proffesional pol so he made
mistakes (appointing gutless Sessions being his biggest) and now Rats are going to try to run
him out of town for it. I am happy to see you realize this is a political witch hunt not an
"investigation". Because a real investigation would be centered on how Wikileaks got the DNC
emails. Nothing can be ascertained until that question is answered.
Since Trump gave them the pretext, what else would you have expected them to do? Ignore a gift he gave them?
The problem is not that the investigation is not politically motivated, the problem is that Trump and his campaign created the slender basis that supports it.
-
There's so much wrong with what you said. First, it wasn't 'some guy.' Second, they were in London. Popadopulous was on Trump's foreign policy advisory team at the time. He was speaking to Australia's top diplomat in Britain, Alexander Downer. He told Downer the Russians 'had dirt' on Clinton.
How would you expect that NOT to get relayed and who the f*** wants a foreign policy advisor who drinks and runs his mouth?
You got me!
Yep ... London. :silly:
What is not known is whether the FBI knew about Papadopoulos' activities as they happened, or whether the bureau found out about them later, and in any event whether or not the Papadopoulos matter was, along with the dossier, part of the FBI's decision to start a counterintelligence investigation. It does seem clear that the Papadopoulos affair did not prompt the FBI to start a counterintelligence probe in March, or April, or May, or June of 2016.
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/byron-york-did-dossier-trigger-the-trump-russia-probe/article/2640470 (http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/byron-york-did-dossier-trigger-the-trump-russia-probe/article/2640470)
The story says that Papadopoulos "drunkenly admitted" to Australian diplomat Downer in May that The Russians told him they had Hillary emails. The story also says that Downer did not report this to officials until after the WikiLeaks emails were released. So the FBI opened the investigation only after the emails were released, not when Papadopoulos heard the story.
5 minutes of googling reveals ties for papadopoulus to fusion
gps and the dossier.
-
Since Trump gave them the pretext, what else would you have expected them to do? Ignore a gift he gave them?
The problem is not that the investigation is not politically motivated, the problem is that Trump and his campaign created the slender basis that supports it.
The Rats are excellent at manufacturing crimes/abuses to go after political opponents. It's
what they do best. So if it wasn't Russia it would be something else. You can blame Trump
all you want for not knowing how to play the DC gotta game, but out here in fly over country
we view that as being a good, honest man.
-
Did Trump and his campaign do stupid things? Yes, Trump is not a proffesional pol so he made
mistakes (appointing gutless Sessions being his biggest) and now Rats are going to try to run
him out of town for it. I am happy to see you realize this is a political witch hunt not an
"investigation". Because a real investigation would be centered on how Wikileaks got the DNC
emails. Nothing can be ascertained until that question is answered.
Funny thing about how the DNC emails were stolen - the FBI (yes, the same FBI under Comey, McCabe, Strzok, Page, et al) - offered to help and asked to look at the server. The DNC refused to cooperate.
You're also forgetting the current crop, Sessions, Rosenstein, and Wray are all Trump appointees. So, I guess this political witch hunt must be orchestrated by Republican insiders on the President's team.
-
Are you saying that a citizen could never be the subject of a proper FISA warrant under any circumstances?
I would think, that when the objective is to undermine the campaign and Presidency of your political opposition. Then the FISA court should double down on their scrutiny for granting such.
Even you have to admit that the obama/clinton regime is rife with corruption and use of State powers for their own gain and against their political opponents.
Anyways @Oceander , as we both have said what we care to on this. And too avoid risk of falling into meaningless rote repetition. Reply as you will. I bid you a good night, and hope all is well with you and yours.
-
There are quite a few calling for a Special Counsel (SC). And as more info is released I think the
pressure on Sessions to appoint one will be immense. Either we get a SC or we get a new
AG and then we get a SC.
Good to know. Got any names and quotes because I’m not seeing “quite a few†who have actually publicly called for a SC (which does seem like the logical independent investigory body to really dig into this)?
-
Funny thing about how the DNC emails were stolen - the FBI (yes, the same FBI under Comey, McCabe, Strzok, Page, et al) - offered to help and asked to look at the server. The DNC refused to cooperate.
You're also forgetting the current crop, Sessions, Rosenstein, and Wray are all Trump appointees. So, I guess this political witch hunt must be orchestrated by Republican insiders on the President's team.
I am not following you. What is your point?
-
I would think, that when the objective is to undermine the campaign and Presidency of your political opposition. Then the FISA court should double down on their scrutiny for granting such.
Even you have to admit that the obama/clinton regime is rife with corruption and use of State powers for their own gain and against their political opponents.
Anyways @Oceander , as we both have said what we care to on this. And too avoid risk of falling into meaningless rote repetition. Reply as you will. I bid you a good night, and hope all is well with you and yours.
I agree that the court should have exercised more oversight on this FISA application and when it got wind that there was some sort of political connection, it should have pushed very, very hard to extract all of the information. It clearly did not.
Thank you for the well wishes; I hope you and yours have a good evening as well.
-
Good to know. Got any names and quotes because I’m not seeing “quite a few†who have actually publicly called for a SC (which does seem like the logical independent investigory body to really dig into this)?
Google is your friend (not really). Here is one
! No longer available (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pCfElc_IPa4#)
and
http://www.cnbc.com/2017/07/27/house-republicans-call-for-a-second-special-counsel--to-investigate-clinton-comey-and-lynch.html (http://www.cnbc.com/2017/07/27/house-republicans-call-for-a-second-special-counsel--to-investigate-clinton-comey-and-lynch.html)
-
I am not following you. What is your point?
My point is that all the supposed deep staters so invested and colluding with Democrats were rebuffed by the DNC when they offered to assist with the email leak.
Also, it's tough to say it's a politically motivated witch hunt when the people responsible for Meuller's position are Trump appointees. Additionally, the pushback at the FBI is coming from another Trump appointee, who he highly praised prior to confirmation.
-
Google is your friend (not really). Here is one
! No longer available (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pCfElc_IPa4#)
and
http://www.cnbc.com/2017/07/27/house-republicans-call-for-a-second-special-counsel--to-investigate-clinton-comey-and-lynch.html (http://www.cnbc.com/2017/07/27/house-republicans-call-for-a-second-special-counsel--to-investigate-clinton-comey-and-lynch.html)
That CNBC article is from last summer. I'm talking calls for the SC about the memo and calls since the information in the memo's been made public. Sounds like I haven't missed them after all.
-
We have the Special Counselor because the idiot Jeff Sessions recused himself and that left
NeverTrumper Bush/Obama appointee in charge of DOJ. Appointing Session was a big mistake
and so was appointing Rosenstein. Wray might be a mistake, time will tell.
My only point was any investigation into RussiaGate begins and ends with how did Wikileaks get
the DNC emails? And no one is investigating that. Which makes Mueller's investigation a witch hunt.
-
In order for Trump to be exonerated, they would first have to come up with a crime.
-
That CNBC article is from last summer. I'm talking calls for the SC about the memo and calls since the information in the memo's been made public. Sounds like I haven't missed them after all.
Your just not paying any attention. House GOP members have been and continue to call for
a SP to look into abuses at DOJ. Google investigate the investigators.
-
The story says that Papadopoulos "drunkenly admitted" to Australian diplomat Downer in May that The Russians told him they had Hillary emails.
If it is proven that the Russians have Hillary's emails, then the person signing this document below should go to prison for committing a felony.
(https://i.pinimg.com/736x/4b/b2/14/4bb21470ce7c2361b21837ec2f7b444f--non-disclosure-agreement-public.jpg)
http://freebeacon.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/HRC-classified-NDA1.pdf (http://freebeacon.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/HRC-classified-NDA1.pdf)
-
Your just not paying any attention. House GOP members have been and continue to call for
a SP to look into abuses at DOJ. Google investigate the investigators.
I think this is the classic case of the boy who cried wolf. Yes, I heard the near-constant drumbeat last summer about another special counsel. They were largely general and non-descript, about wanting yet another investigation Hillary and Lynn. I ignored them because there was nothing "real" that I heard. Now they have something tangible and real yet I've heard no drumbeat since the memo was released. I don't think that's an accident or a mistake. I'm not sure they want a real, independent investigation into the memo, and it sounds like there aren't a lot of calls for a SC on it since it's release. That's my point.
-
My only point was any investigation into RussiaGate begins and ends with how did Wikileaks get the DNC emails? And no one is investigating that. Which makes Mueller's investigation a witch hunt.
It's certainly a part of the investigation that is very important and the DNC refused to allow access to their server by anyone except Crowd Strike. However, the investigation still would have continued due to the Russian connections with Page, Papadopoulos, and Manafort.
-
If it is proven that the Russians have Hillary's emails, then the person signing this document below should go to prison for committing a felony.
(https://i.pinimg.com/736x/4b/b2/14/4bb21470ce7c2361b21837ec2f7b444f--non-disclosure-agreement-public.jpg)
http://freebeacon.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/HRC-classified-NDA1.pdf (http://freebeacon.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/HRC-classified-NDA1.pdf)
Just because the Russians have her emails? Without regard to whether they were stolen?
-
I think this is the classic case of the boy who cried wolf. Yes, I heard the near-constant drumbeat last summer about another special counsel. They were largely general and non-descript, about wanting yet another investigation Hillary and Lynn. I ignored them because there was nothing "real" that I heard. Now they have something tangible and real yet I've heard no drumbeat since the memo was released. I don't think that's an accident or a mistake. I'm not sure they want a real, independent investigation into the memo, and it sounds like there aren't a lot of calls for a SC on it since it's release. That's my point.
Well there are plenty of calls for a SC, even NeverTrump national review is calling for one. But what
everyone is really waiting for is the report by the DOJ Inspector General on how DOJ/FBI
handled the Clinton email investigation. If that report indicates criminal behavior by DOJ/FBI
Sessions will have no choice.
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/454649/investigate-fbi-justice-department-investigators-public-needs-accountability (http://www.nationalreview.com/article/454649/investigate-fbi-justice-department-investigators-public-needs-accountability)
-
It's certainly a part of the investigation that is very important and the DNC refused to allow access to their server by anyone except Crowd Strike. However, the investigation still would have continued due to the Russian connections with Page, Papadopoulos, and Manafort.
If you don't know how Wikileaks got the DNC emails then just what are you investigating?
-
You got me!
Yep ... London. :silly:
The story says that Papadopoulos "drunkenly admitted" to Australian diplomat Downer in May that The Russians told him they had Hillary emails. The story also says that Downer did not report this to officials until after the WikiLeaks emails were released. So the FBI opened the investigation only after the emails were released, not when Papadopoulos heard the story.
5 minutes of googling reveals ties for papadopoulus to fusion
gps and the dossier.
The story also says this.......
Still, there's one more important factor to be considered in assessing the dossier's role in the FBI investigation. According to papers released as part of his plea of guilty to lying to investigators, Trump volunteer advisor George Papadopoulos admitted having contacts with possible intermediaries to high-ranked Russians who are said to have offered assistance to the Trump campaign. That happened beginning in March, 2016 and continued for a few months. What is not known is whether the FBI knew about Papadopoulos' activities as they happened, or whether the bureau found out about them later, and in any event whether or not the Papadopoulos matter was, along with the dossier, part of the FBI's decision to start a counterintelligence investigation. It does seem clear that the Papadopoulos affair did not prompt the FBI to start a counterintelligence probe in March, or April, or May, or June of 2016.
Anyone who knows how intelligence gathering works understands the importance of cross-referencing information from unrelated sources. For all we know, the FBI was getting information about the communications between Papadopoulos and intermediaries, but could not verify it until Downer came along with his direct interaction. They would not just initiate the investigation on the Australian diplomat's say so. It would have to validate something they already knew.
Any supposed implications or collusion between Papadopoulos and Fusion GPS to infiltrate and frame the Trump campaign is so far-fetched. He was initially on the Ben Carson team and was recommended to Trump by Sam Clovis. The number of dominoes that would have to fall for everything to get him into place is ridiculous.
-
Well there are plenty of calls for a SC, even NeverTrump national review is calling for one. But what
everyone is really waiting for is the report by the DOJ Inspector General on how DOJ/FBI
handled the Clinton email investigation. If that report indicates criminal behavior by DOJ/FBI
Sessions will have no choice.
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/454649/investigate-fbi-justice-department-investigators-public-needs-accountability (http://www.nationalreview.com/article/454649/investigate-fbi-justice-department-investigators-public-needs-accountability)
Look, I’m asking for a very simple thing: SINCE THE MEMO WAS RELEASED PUBLICLY, which Republicans have called for a special counsel to independently investigate the matters in the memo? So far, I’ve heard none.
-
Look, I’m asking for a very simple thing: SINCE THE MEMO WAS RELEASED PUBLICLY, which Republicans have called for a special counsel to independently investigate the matters in the memo? So far, I’ve heard none.
Only because you are not paying attention
http://video.foxbusiness.com/v/5725134600001/?#sp=show-clips (http://video.foxbusiness.com/v/5725134600001/?#sp=show-clips)
! No longer available (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BnidTB683FM#)
This is the last time I do your research for you.
-
Only because you are not paying attention
http://video.foxbusiness.com/v/5725134600001/?#sp=show-clips (http://video.foxbusiness.com/v/5725134600001/?#sp=show-clips)
! No longer available (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BnidTB683FM#)
This is the last time I do your research for you.
OK, so the answer to my question is apparently one Republican Senator and one Republican House member. Got it. Thanks. I appreciate it.
-
There are others, you can find them but it means to have to look. Rep Jordan even names names (2:55) in the video I posted to you.
-
There are others, you can find them but it means to have to look. Rep Jordan even names names (2:55) in the video I posted to you.
Yeah that 2:55 references the calls last summer. I was specifically looking for who called for it since the memo was out. I did a number of different Bing searches looking for calls for a special counsel from Congressmen since the memo, and I came up dry. I figured the calls would be loud and often and would have been all over the Sunday shows today. I watched Fox News Sunday, Meet the Press, and MediaBuzz and didn’t see anyone particularly vocal about a special counsel. Having said that, I assumed someone here probably saw or heard of some congressmen who called for a special counsel so I asked the question. You either knew yourself or were able to research what I didn’t find. That’s what so good about a community like this. Again, thanks and I appreciate it.
:thumbsup:
-
No problem, I saw a couple to reps call for SC after the memo but they'd been calling for a SC
for a while now. I think Grody also wants a SC but I could be wrong about that. Wait for the IG
report. The IG report will be the real driver.
-
No problem, I saw a couple to reps call for SC after the memo but they'd been calling for a SC
for a while now. I think Grody also wants a SC but I could be wrong about that. Wait for the IG
report. The IG report will be the real driver.
Do you think we'll get to see the IG report? It's not a sure thing.
-
Do you think we'll get to see the IG report? It's not a sure thing.
No, we will see a summery and maybe a watered down redacted copy. But the House/Senate intel/judiciary committees will see it. And word will get out about what is in it. Hell it might even be leaked.
Remember when we had real journalists?
! No longer available (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nrXlY6gzTTM#)
-
No, we will see a summery and maybe a watered down redacted copy. But the House/Senate intel/judiciary committees will see it. And word will get out about what is in it. Hell it might even be leaked.
Remember when we had real journalists?
! No longer available (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nrXlY6gzTTM#)
As long as the least little bit gets redacted, there will be fights and arguments over what was in there and left out, and the "meanings" thereof. We can already see this with the pages and pages of circular arguments here at TBR, just since Friday.
-
@Concerned
another one
http://www.breitbart.com/video/2018/02/10/gop-rep-gaetz-calls-appointment-second-special-counsel-fbi-doj-cannot-investigate/ (http://www.breitbart.com/video/2018/02/10/gop-rep-gaetz-calls-appointment-second-special-counsel-fbi-doj-cannot-investigate/)
-
@Concerned
another one
http://www.breitbart.com/video/2018/02/10/gop-rep-gaetz-calls-appointment-second-special-counsel-fbi-doj-cannot-investigate/ (http://www.breitbart.com/video/2018/02/10/gop-rep-gaetz-calls-appointment-second-special-counsel-fbi-doj-cannot-investigate/)
Well, a new one. Better late than never, I guess.