RoscoePColtrane said:

---

...................

So the Russians obviously violated this statute, by the wording later in the indictment itself. It implies they spent millions of dollars to promote the candidacies of Bernie Sanders, Donald Trump and Jill Stein, and to oppose the candidacies of Hillary Clinton, Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio. As well as stage rallies both for and against Trump after he was elected. So why weren't they charged with the most pertinent crime they committed? Perhaps because Christopher Steele arguably violated the same law? He is a foreign national, and he contributed a "thing of value" to the Hillary Clinton campaign, namely the fake dossier. Sounds like ll hat and no cattle if you ask me. This indictment isn't worth the paper it's printed on, namely because none of the Russians will ever see a US courtroom. Mueller will never have to present a real case, it's just a bunch of words.

Also WTF look at Section 2 of 52 U.S.C. 30121 Section 2 states it is a crime to "solicit, accept, or receive" such a contribution from a foreign national. Isn't that what the Perkins, Coie law firm, the Clinton campaign, the DNC, and probably Hillary herself, did? That's a little gray to me, so I need a better legal eye to explain that perhaps. Because I doubt that any election lawyer could come up with a defense for Christopher Steele, were he to be charged with violating 30121. AND THAT is a can of worms that Mueller didn't want to open. Too many people know the facts behind the Steele dossier, and if he had charged the Russians with meddling in the presidential election under 30121, he would have faced questions about why he didn't indict Steele and Glenn Simpson, Perkins, Coie, and any Clinton campaign officials, and perhaps Clinton herself for the same offenses.

This window dressing of an indictment is purposely worded this way in order to avoid that pitfall, I suspect, that Mueller overlooked the most relevant federal offense that the Russians committed, and instead charged them with a vague "conspiracy to defraud," along with wire fraud, bank fraud and identity theft. The first charge is entirely discretionary by Mueller and done purposely. And besides Steele didn't commit wire fraud, bank fraud or identity theft that we know of. Once again it appears Mueller is all hat and no cattle, and he's just like was said before by myself and Ms Hawg, Mueller is trying to save face and justify his invoice. I think that is why Mueller chose not to actually indict the Russians for meddling in a U.S. presidential election, and indict them for basically BS crimes. And that this wording in this indictment is purposely misleading to give the appearance of more than it really is.

---

http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2018/02/why-mueller-didnt-indict-the-russians-for-meddling-in-the-presidential-election.php

Quote:

---

Why Mueller Didn't Indict the Russians For Meddling In the Presidential Election [Updated]

.........the question remains: why did Mueller recite in the indictment's first paragraph that it is against the law for foreign nationals to spend money to influence U. S. elections, implicitly recognizing that that was the essence of what the Russians did, and then not charge them with that crime?

---

This article agrees with your hypothesis above.

oysterbayAG said:

---

OK, so say you are a Prosecutor in the US Attorney's Office in DC and went to your boss Jessie K Liu and told her that you could get an indictment against against 13 criminals, but it would take over a year, cost millions of dollars, and there was zero chance of obtaining a conviction. What do you think she would say : " Your Fired " ?

---

well they really can't terminate government functionaries for being terrible at their jobs but they can make sure that you're dumped deep into the administrative bowels of an HR function.

original article here:
http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-na-pol-rick-gates-plea-deal-20180218-story.html

Quote:

---

Former Trump aide Rick Gates to plead guilty; agrees to testify against Manafort, sources say

A former top aide to Donald Trump's presidential campaign will plead guilty to fraud-related charges within days and has made clear to prosecutors that he would testify against Paul J. Manafort Jr., the lawyer-lobbyist who once managed the campaign.

The change of heart by Trump's former deputy campaign manager, Richard W. Gates III, who had pleaded not guilty after being indicted in October on charges similar to Manafort's, was described in interviews by people familiar with the case....

Gates, 45, who is married with four children, does not appear to be well positioned financially to sustain a high-powered legal defense.

"He can't afford to pay it,'' said one lawyer who is involved with the investigation. "If you go to trial on this, that's $1 million to $1.5 million. Maybe more, if you need experts'' to appear as witnesses....

If Manafort maintains his not-guilty plea and fights the charges at a trial, the testimony from Gates could provide Mueller's team with first-person descriptions of much of the allegedly illegal conduct. Gates' testimony, said a person familiar with the pending guilty plea, would place a "cherry on top'' of the government's already-formidable case against Manafort.

The same individual said he did not believe Gates has information to offer Mueller's team that would "turn the screws on Trump.'' ...

---

Nothing to see here.

If he can't afford the cost of a defense that is actually worth a ****, how is that considered a fair trial? I ask this in general, I haven't been following the details with Gates or Manafort.

chach said:

---

If he can't afford the cost of a defense that is actually worth a ****, how is that considered a fair trial? I ask this in general, I haven't been following the details with Gates or Manafort.

---

In one of the most perverse realities of our criminal justice system, you have to bankrupt yourself before you can get a court appointed lawyer.

These are sophisticated money laundering charges against Manafort. Very few Legal Aid lawyers would even be close to handling that type of case.

Mueller's playing the game hard ball style. Which can definitely come back to bite him in the butt, if he isn't careful.

Interesting read for perspective reasons regarding what's going on.

stetson said:

---

BernArnold said:

---

OPAG said:

---

So basically we spent a year of time thousands of man hours and bunch of money to uncovering a few MFBarnes , Professional trolls. Really,!??! I mean really!>

---

And failed to follow up on leads that would have stopped a mass shooting of kids.

Don't forget that part.

---

I sincerely hope Trump is investigating how this tip was handled by the FBI and why it was not followed up on. Given the corruption within the FBI that we are all now aware of and the allegations being made by Q, the seriousness of this issue warrants investigation.

---

It's almost as if the FBI wants this stuff to happen. The FBI has tips from Russia that could have prevented the Boston Bombing.

Within the link below shows an undercover FBI agent FILMING at the Mohammed cartoon contest in Garland when 2 terrrorist he was tracking pulled up and opened fire.

I can't understand why he did nothing to try and prevent this???

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/terrorism-in-garland-texas-what-the-fbi-knew-before-the-2015-attack/

Rapier108 said:

---

Quote:

---

It's almost as if the FBI wants this stuff to happen. The FBI has tips from Russia that could have prevented the Boston Bombing.

Within the link below shows an undercover FBI agent FILMING at the Mohammed cartoon contest in Garland when 2 terrrorist he was tracking pulled up and opened fire.

I can't understand why he did nothing to try and prevent this???

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/terrorism-in-garland-texas-what-the-fbi-knew-before-the-2015-attack/

---

Think about who was President back then. They only gave as much lip service as necessary to the dangers of Islamic terrorism. Obama and his ilk said white supremacists, returning veterans, gun owners, and "right wing militias" were the greatest danger to the US, not Islamic terrorists.

Obama fully politicized and weaponized the FBI. Obama wouldn't have had any problem with a bunch of people at the draw Mohammad contest gunned down.

---

Truth, good insight!

Ellis Wyatt said:

---

For crying out loud: obama and Holder ran guns into Mexico to undermine the 2nd Amendment. They couldn't give a crap less about American lives being jeopardized. In fact, I have no doubt they loved the "right" kind of people being killed.

---

In my heart, based on the actions and behaviors of those within that administration, I came to believe what you just said.

The nail in the coffin, was Obama's speech in Dallas, after the five were murdered. He used "I" so many times, and even brought up standard civil rights issues, with five dead cops he apparently forgot about.

But, I was kind of in the minority on this. I apologize for the derail, and it's a pretty strong charge, but that exact behavior was very Leninesque. "You gotta break a few eggs to make an omelotte".

This whole thread is evidence that it's true, though. People like obama surround themselves with like thinkers. There is nothing they won't do to use the power of the state, legally or illegally, to crush their enemies.

It is amazing how close we were to the point of no return. I just pray that Trump and the men who work for him can undo much of the damage and begin the housecleaning. America deserves better.

Only problem is they will eventually get back into power. Corruption is business as usual for them and the infestation will start all over. At least maybe it can be delayed a few years.

Rockdoc said:

---

Only problem is they will eventually get back into power. Corruption is business as usual for them and the infestation will start all over. At least maybe it can be delayed a few years.

---

Agreed. It's why we need to see lives destroyed over this. Executions would not be too strong of a response. People should never think this is all ok ever again.

http://fullmeasure.news/news/politics/russia-probe

Sharyl Attkisson interview with Nunes.

Two points of importance I picked out:
1) Nunes doesn't believe Samatha Power regarding her claim that someone was using her name to unmask people in the intel reports. Nunes doesn't see how that would be possible.
2) Nunes said that FISA Court abuse has nothing to do with the Mueller investigation, and if people abused the FISA Court to get warrants on Americans, they they are going to go to trial.


So if FISA Court abuse doesn't fall under the prerogative of Mueller, then does it follow that the Trump dossier doesn't fall under Muller's jurisdiction as well???

Thanks Hawg. Getting tangled in up in a situation like that is deterrent enough to stay out of politics. Sickening.

Ellis Wyatt said:

---

Rockdoc said:

---

Only problem is they will eventually get back into power. Corruption is business as usual for them and the infestation will start all over. At least maybe it can be delayed a few years.

---

Agreed. It's why we need to see lives destroyed over this. Executions would not be too strong of a response. People should never think this is all ok ever again.

---

Ellis, my thoughts and opinions on this topic are actually quite a bit stronger based on the history of watching how easy it is to lose a country's freedom and liberty. However, I'm not interested in one of our Dem posters coming by to say how paranoid I am, since they see nothing wrong with ANY of the actions of Obama, and wouldn't know the difference between confiscation of their freedom and feeding the dog, as long as it happens to someone they don't like!

As long as their is an indictment against Gates, Manafort, and Flynn, they've won and believe the case has been made, just based on the comments made on this thread alone. Candidly, the seem to sacrifice all of their principles to to make sure the Reps are out of power. They just don't seem to care how many minorities, females, gays, etc. are out of work, or suffer, as long as they are in power. The stats back that up since 1965. Did any of "their" groups prosper during Obama's time?

This will be my last comment on this, since we have five tangential posts from the best political thread on Texags.

Never bought Power's excuse for a second. It definitely had a "someone hacked my twitter account" feel to it.

Quote:

---

Snowden was not being traitorous. He was pointing out the defects in the existing system. And I am not confident in the slightest that had he tried to go the whistle-blower route, he had been successful. He would be dead. Killed on Obama's order. That's how high the stakes were when Obama decided to weaponize the NSA meta data operation, not for national security threats (which I could almost stomach if it prevented another 9/11 or larger attack)...no no no. Obama weaponized it for an agenda...one world order.

---

Tin foil hat time:

I'm not entirely sure that Snowden was a whistleblower as much as a controlled leak (think Lernher admitting that the IRS targeted conservatives in 2013). I believe that a lot of information intentionally leaked after the 2012 election so that the public would be desensitized to it by 2016. It seems far fetched that Snowden could just walk out of the NSA with all this classified information and make it to Russia without someone catching him.

All "excellent" points. Scary to think how close this nation is to losing its way. It's frustrating to think what is being taught daily in our schools/academia, not to mention the message espoused by the MSM and Hollywood.

For us 'old poors', it's hard to imagine how we've arrived at this juncture. This country has truly 'slid' across the political spectrum and I am amazed how most never seemed to notice...worse, no voice rose to sound an alarm, i.e., the likes of Wm. F. Buckley. But I suppose, he too would have been ignored or shouted down.

What's really sad (to me) is how our Govt. has moved from being a true symbol of good 'for the masses' to become good only 'for the politically elite'. The young have real problems facing them if Trump and or sufficient number of qualified patriots are unable to bar the flood gates. I think we're 'neck deep' now.

friscodick said:

---

Never bought Power's excuse for a second. It definitely had a "someone hacked my twitter account" feel to it.

---

I just watched the Barry movie and Powers being a victim is complete BS. She's no wallflower, she thinks she smarter than anyone in the room. She led Kerry around like the idiot he is. I will bet hard cash that she was directly responsible for all 283 unmaskings accredited to her in 2016. Once Trump got the nomination she was in a full court press with Rhodes and Jarrett to save the world from any possibility of Trump winning. The looks on every one of their faces when he won tells volumes, there was fear and panic set in quickly and the entire mission shifted in 24 hrs. They were careful not to show anything that looked like they were doing anything wrong, but you can just see it in the people and all their idiosyncrasies that they cannot hide, especially Jarrett, that is pure evil right there.

https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/02/russia-launches-information-war-us-responds-with-lawsuit/

Quote:

---

Russia Launches 'Information' War, U.S. Responds with Lawsuit and Self-Destruction

Mueller's indictment is an ineffectual response to a provocation by Russia.

The Russians are engaged in "information warfare" against the United States. That was the big soundbite at Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein's press conference Friday afternoon, announcing Special Counsel Robert Mueller's election-meddling indictment against 13 Russians and three Russian businesses.

That is certainly a fair assessment of what the indictment alleges. The account is disturbing, but its form leaves many of us underwhelmed. Our government says Russia is levying war. It is attacking a foundational institution the electoral system of our democratic society and, more basically, our society's cohesion as such. Our response should not be, nor appear to be, the filing of a lawsuit. That is provocatively weak.

The Russia probe has been a counterintelligence investigation, as it should be. That is why I've complained from the first that it was inappropriate to put a prosecutor in charge of it. This contention is reiterated in my weekend column. The main thrust of this complaint has been that a prosecutor should not be assigned unless there is first strong evidence of a crime. But that is not the half of it.

A government lawyer is a hammer who sees every problem as the nail of a lawsuit. As we saw in the Clinton and Obama years (and will tend to see in transnational-progressive governments that prize legal processes over the pursuit of national interests by the most effective means available), administrations dominated by government lawyers find even belligerent provocations by a foreign power to be fit for judicial resolution.

To the contrary, we use counterintelligence rather than criminal investigation to thwart foreign adversaries because prosecution is a woefully inadequate response. The point of counterintelligence is to gather information so we can stop our enemies, through meaningful retaliation and discouragement. Generally, that means diplomatic, economic, intelligence, and, in extreme cases, military means. It could mean deploying our own cyber capabilities. The idea is not to invade every rogue nation. It is to respond to provocations in a manner that hurts our rivals conveying that the prohibitive cost we will exact makes attacking us against their interests.

That cannot be accomplished by a mere indictment on which no one will be tried....

---

If you read the entire article by Andrew McCarthy, perhaps you will come away with my impression: The Russians accomplished far more than they could ever have imagined during the 2016 Presidential Election Campaign. Their goal was to create division & discord regarding our election process. The latter definitely occurred, but it wasn't the Russians who effected the result...rather it was via the efforts of the losing political party & its candidate, bolstered by a partisan MSM, which resulted in a SC being appointed to investigate Russian collusion.

VaultingChemist said:

---

In light of all the illegal spying by Obama's administration, this picture takes on a deeper meaning.

---

No *****... thought it was bizarre when it came out, even more sinister now

I just now realized Susan Rice's dumb mug is in this picture. I guess since her eyes were closed and she doesn't have a scowl like the others I missed it before.

Or maybe she's asleep...she seems like one that needs to be told not only what to say but also when to breathe.

friscodick said:

---

I just now realized Susan Rice's dumb mug is in this picture. I guess since her eyes were closed and she doesn't have a scowl like the others I missed it before.

Or maybe she's asleep...she seems like on that needs to be told not only what to say but also when to breathe.

---

Susan Rice is literally a box of rocks. She's a placeholder. Does what she's told and make zero decisions, all throughout their BS fictional documentary, she's just as big an idiot as Kerry. Barry had two journalists running his foreign policy in Rhodes and Powers. Rhodes brags about his 30 person echo chamber of writers he put together to shape the foreign policy of the US and by extension a huge part of the world. Their objective was to rule the world with words, with their teleprompter stage actor, and out think the media and leave them no room to speculate.

Powers, Rhodes and Kerry are neck deep in the Iran deal, and they purposely mislead everyone to keep the cash a secret and if not for a leak by a ground crew member we would have never known what went down that night. Then they went on full damage control and just stonewalled any direct questioning on the deal

In the film when Trump won they purposely shifted into obstruction and openly admitted it on camera that they had to lay a minefield to preserve all that they had done, but framed it to sound like they were saving the world. I was so pissed by the end of watching it, I was ready shoot the place up. A bunch of condescending arrogant academics that think they know more than the entire world. I hope they lock every one of those sum*****es up for life.

friscodick said:

---

I just now realized Susan Rice's dumb mug is in this picture. I guess since her eyes were closed and she doesn't have a scowl like the others I missed it before.

Or maybe she's asleep...she seems like one that needs to be told not only what to say but also when to breathe.

---

She looks like a mummy. Must be all that spirit cooking

Here is another picture. Zoom in on Rice. If looks could kill, the photographer would be dead.

This always sets them off but McCarthy was pretty much right.

This was literally the end of the world for them