Wray may be smart and knowledgeable, but he appears to be not tough enough ! A college professor type is not going to cut it as FBI Director ( See Comey ) When the time is politically safe, I think Trump will say " Your Fired "
Mueller dismisses top FBI agent in Russia probe for anti-Trump texts
7,545,173 Views |
49289 Replies |
Last: 9 hrs ago by VegasAg86
But but but!
http://dailycaller.com/2018/02/17/federal-judge-fusion-gps-lawsuit/
Quote:
Federal Judge Deals Heavy Blow To Fusion GPS In Dossier-Related Lawsuit
A Trump-appointed federal judge said Friday that he will not recuse himself from a lawsuit related to the Steele dossier.
Trevor McFadden, a judge in Washington, D.C., issued the ruling in response to a recusal request submitted last month by Fusion GPS, the opposition research firm that commissioned the dossier.
Fusion sought McFadden's recusal as part of an attempt to avoid complying with a subpoena issued by a Russian businessman who is suing BuzzFeed News for publishing the unverified dossier. The businessman, Aleksej Gubarev, seeks depositions and documents from Fusion GPS as part of the lawsuit....
McFadden, a former Justice Department official, asserted on Friday that Fusion GPS's argument for his recusal was "factually misinformed and legally unpersuasive."
He said that his work on the Trump campaign was "sporadic," and involved him working "four hours every few weeks for two to three months" to help vet potential Cabinet nominees.
"I did not come into contact with Mr. Trump or any of the senior members of his campaign team. In fact, I do not know the President and have not met him in any capacity," McFadden said in his ruling....
Perhaps Senator Warner might want to see if his Russian lobbyist friend Waldman could set up a meeting between Warner & Yevgeny Prigozhin the next time he plans on scheduling a meeting with Oleg Deripaska. Prigozhin isn't exactly an American household name even after he was named as one of the 13 Russians indicted in ElectionGate, but if the public was made aware that he is known as 'Putin's Cook', just maybe...
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/02/16/world/europe/prigozhin-russia-indictment-mueller.html
Edit: Warner is a snake IMO.
chach
Joined:
May 8, 2007
Posts:
1,627
How long do you want to ignore this user?
This should be looked at a little further...drcrinum said:
Perhaps Senator Warner might want to see if his Russian lobbyist friend Waldman could set up a meeting between Warner & Yevgeny Prigozhin the next time he plans on scheduling a meeting with Oleg Deripaska. Prigozhin isn't exactly an American household name even after he was named as one of the 13 Russians indicted in ElectionGate, but if the public was made aware that he is known as 'Putin's Cook', just maybe...
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/02/16/world/europe/prigozhin-russia-indictment-mueller.html
Edit: Warner is a snake IMO.
Never take a hostage you aren't willing to shoot,
Remember, America doesn’t negotiate with terrorists.
Code 7 10-42
Remember, America doesn’t negotiate with terrorists.
Code 7 10-42
original source article:
https://conservativetribune.com/obama-may-have-been-asking-fbi/
Quote:
DNC Letter Uncovered, Obama May Have Been Asking FBI About Trump Frame-Up
The contents of a newly uncovered letter sent in 2016 to then-FBI Director James Comey by House Democrats is raising questions whether both the Democrats and then-President Barack Obama tried to use a frame-up to prevent then-GOP presidential nominee Donald Trump from becoming president.
In the letter to Comey dated Aug. 30, Reps. Elijah Cummings, John Conyers, Elliot L. Engel, Bennie Thompson requested "that the FBI assess whether connections between Trump campaign officials and Russian interests may have contributed" to the now-infamous hacking of the Democrat National Committee's servers.
"Serious questions have been raised about overt and covert actions by Trump campaign officials on behalf of Russian interests," they wrote. "It is critical for the American public to know whether those actions may have directly caused or indirectly motivated attacks against Democratic institutions and our fundamental election process."...
According to CNS News, three days after House Democrats submitted this letter to Comey, FBI counterintelligence agent Peter Strzok and FBI attorney Lisa Page exchanged text messages in which Page mentioned prepping Comey because "potus wants to know everything we're doing."...
When the new texts between Strzok and Page were originally published Wednesday, some assumed Obama had been seeking information on the FBI's investigation into Clinton, who the evidence suggested had recklessly used a personal email server to transmit classified information as secretary of state.
But the newly unveiled letter from House Democrats sent only three days before Page mentioned that "potus wants to know everything we're doing" suggests something worse...
In fact, statements from Strzok and Page's associates made later Wednesday to The Wall Street Journal seem to confirm this.
Vox notes that the associates told the Journal "the texts were actually about Obama wanting to learn more about Russia's meddling in the 2016 presidential election."
Though Vox and other dubious left-wing outlets subsequently used this information to downplay the relevance of Page's text, they neglected to mention that Obama's alleged interest in "Russia's meddling in the 2016 presidential election" could very well include interest in the Trump campaign operation as well....
I fear there is something more sinister here than what the above article is suggesting. I believe it means that knowledge of the Trump Russian dossier was already circulating among top Dems before the end of August 2016. Remember, the FBI had opened a formal investigation into Trump Russian collusion the end of July 2016, and who was in charge of that investigation? Strzok. Was Strzok communicating & sharing info with the DNC/HRC/Fusion GPS prior to August 30, 2016?
Strzok may or may not have been but you can bet your ass Weissmann was. That little group of snakes are deathly loyal to the left.drcrinum said:
original source article:
https://conservativetribune.com/obama-may-have-been-asking-fbi/Quote:
DNC Letter Uncovered, Obama May Have Been Asking FBI About Trump Frame-Up
The contents of a newly uncovered letter sent in 2016 to then-FBI Director James Comey by House Democrats is raising questions whether both the Democrats and then-President Barack Obama tried to use a frame-up to prevent then-GOP presidential nominee Donald Trump from becoming president.
In the letter to Comey dated Aug. 30, Reps. Elijah Cummings, John Conyers, Elliot L. Engel, Bennie Thompson requested "that the FBI assess whether connections between Trump campaign officials and Russian interests may have contributed" to the now-infamous hacking of the Democrat National Committee's servers.
"Serious questions have been raised about overt and covert actions by Trump campaign officials on behalf of Russian interests," they wrote. "It is critical for the American public to know whether those actions may have directly caused or indirectly motivated attacks against Democratic institutions and our fundamental election process."...
According to CNS News, three days after House Democrats submitted this letter to Comey, FBI counterintelligence agent Peter Strzok and FBI attorney Lisa Page exchanged text messages in which Page mentioned prepping Comey because "potus wants to know everything we're doing."...
When the new texts between Strzok and Page were originally published Wednesday, some assumed Obama had been seeking information on the FBI's investigation into Clinton, who the evidence suggested had recklessly used a personal email server to transmit classified information as secretary of state.
But the newly unveiled letter from House Democrats sent only three days before Page mentioned that "potus wants to know everything we're doing" suggests something worse...
In fact, statements from Strzok and Page's associates made later Wednesday to The Wall Street Journal seem to confirm this.
Vox notes that the associates told the Journal "the texts were actually about Obama wanting to learn more about Russia's meddling in the 2016 presidential election."
Though Vox and other dubious left-wing outlets subsequently used this information to downplay the relevance of Page's text, they neglected to mention that Obama's alleged interest in "Russia's meddling in the 2016 presidential election" could very well include interest in the Trump campaign operation as well....
I fear there is something more sinister here than what the above article is suggesting. I believe it means that knowledge of the Trump Russian dossier was already circulating among top Dems before the end of August 2016. Remember, the FBI had opened a formal investigation into Trump Russian collusion the end of July 2016, and who was in charge of that investigation? Strzok. Was Strzok communicating & sharing info with the DNC/HRC/Fusion GPS prior to August 30, 2016?
Never take a hostage you aren't willing to shoot,
Remember, America doesn’t negotiate with terrorists.
Code 7 10-42
Remember, America doesn’t negotiate with terrorists.
Code 7 10-42
Wow the comments from the left towards Rob Goldman are insane. The man is literally getting death threats. Now the left thinks FaceBook is in the tank for the POTUS. Screaming for proof from FB of what he's claiming, all citing Mueller's indictment, yet not one asking for proof from Mueller that this very weakly worded indictment is worth the paper it's printed on.drcrinum said:
Never take a hostage you aren't willing to shoot,
Remember, America doesn’t negotiate with terrorists.
Code 7 10-42
Remember, America doesn’t negotiate with terrorists.
Code 7 10-42
I briefly went thru some of the comments -- lots of angry people. Just imagine what it is going to be like when Mueller closes down and reports he found nothing on Trump -- massive violent protests in coastal cities IMO.RoscoePColtrane said:Wow the comments from the left towards Rob Goldman are insane. The man is literally getting death threats. Now the left thinks FaceBook is in the tank for the POTUS. Screaming for proof from FB of what he's claiming, all citing Mueller's indictment, yet not one asking for proof from Mueller that this very weakly worded indictment is worth the paper it's printed on.drcrinum said:
Civil unrest occurs only if Obama is jailed. Other than that, the paid agitators will move on to the next gotcha story.
Resistance to tyranny is obedience to God.
RoscoePColtrane said:Wow the comments from the left towards Rob Goldman are insane. The man is literally getting death threats. Now the left thinks FaceBook is in the tank for the POTUS. Screaming for proof from FB of what he's claiming, all citing Mueller's indictment, yet not one asking for proof from Mueller that this very weakly worded indictment is worth the paper it's printed on.drcrinum said:
This awesome...it's a panicked frenzy. They cannot handle this and are turning rabid.
They 100% believe everything they hear from the left MSM and cannot even process what this means.
No corruption
Nothing illegal
No impeachment
All a fallacy
plus
Everything points back at Dem corruption if anything.
They have no choice but quadrupling down....which continues to alienate them from reasonable middle of the road types and independents.
Keep it up Libs. It's working perfectly.
When is Goodlatte putting something out from his committee? I thought he was next after Nunez then Grassley. I'm ready for the next shoe to drop. Looking forward to the IG report most of all.
Progressive liberal triggered snowflakes are having a difficult time coping with reality. The worst is yet to come.
Progressive liberal triggered snowflakes are having a difficult time coping with reality. The worst is yet to come.
My guess is he's waiting for the DOJ response to the request or the FISA applications, it's the small slot he has left to fill in his investigation that is very key and a pivotal point in the series of events. Not having that hole filled leaves open a lot of speculation. Filling that blank in sews it up nice and tight. I'm certain he knows what it says before even seeing it, he just wants the evidense in hand. Can't have a hole in this net or a few fish get away. ANY lack of DOJ response to the Judges letter putting the ball in their court, could be catastrophic for a lot at the top of the DOJ, and I think the judge knows it and I'm certain Goodlatte knows it. The DOJ is pinned down now and cannot hide behind the guise of national security, because the judge specifically said that the court approves the release, and in fact requests it. She just gave them the option to release it first, and if they balk it gives her political cover if she crosses swords with the executive branch, she gave them a chance to respond and if they don't the hammer will drop twice as hard. Everything Goodlatte wants to know from the warrant, I'm most certain was contained in her 99 page ruling behind the redacted sections, and Gowdy has seen the warrant as has Ratcliffe and the investigator from the IG, which is possibly Horowitz himself. DOJ has really no where to hide on this, and the sand is running out of the hourglass.ccatag said:
When is Goodlatte putting something out from his committee? I thought he was next after Nunez then Grassley. I'm ready for the next shoe to drop. Looking forward to the IG report most of all.
Progressive liberal triggered snowflakes are having a difficult time coping with reality. The worst is yet to come.
Never take a hostage you aren't willing to shoot,
Remember, America doesn’t negotiate with terrorists.
Code 7 10-42
Remember, America doesn’t negotiate with terrorists.
Code 7 10-42
Gig'em ****'em
The one-two punches by drcrinum & RoscoePColtrane and the uppercuts by aggiehawg are priceless ! Keep up the great work !
Okay back to this indictment, going to need Ms Hawg or BMX to weigh in if this is being interpreted right or just an old fool getting caught up in the words
In the very first paragraph it says that "it is against the law for foreign nationals to spend money to influence US elections, or for agents of foreign countries to engage in political activities without registering." But no one is charged with these crimes. Instead, the indictment is devoted mostly to charging a "conspiracy to defraud the United States." Normally, that would refer to defrauding the U.S. out of, say, $10,000 in Medicare benefits. Its application to the 2016 election seems non existent. Beyond that, the indictment charges relatively minor offenses: bank fraud (opening accounts in false names) and identity theft. Why is that?
I've stated it many times in the past, and I'll say it again, when have you ever really seen the feds go after FARA violations? They charge people with it and bang the pots and pans about it, but when do they actually convict anyone of consequence with a FARA violation? Is it because they'd have to lock up half of DC and 90% of the K street crowd? Because how many times have we seen in this very investigation, people like the Podesta's filing after they are caught? It happens a lot. I have continue to puzzle over why Mueller chose not to indict the Russians for their most obvious offenses. I think the answer lies in the fact he's have to indict the Clinton Campaign for Chris Steele? The law is very sketchy on that, and I just heard Ratcliffe on Fox News say it's not illegal to what Clinton did as far as opposition research in using Steele, but the real issue is the FISA warrant and how that Steele paper was used there. I fully understand that collusion isn't a crime unless it involves FEC violations, so I get that. Maybe I'm just reading the wording wrong.
But reading this indictment the way it is worded gives the guise that it's doing a lot more than it really is. Reading that first paragraph like a preamble, it immediately gives you the impression it's going after FARA and foreign nationals for spending money to influence the election, but it doesn't. Actually, Mueller indicted the Russians only for violating 18 U.S.C. 371 (conspiracy to defraud the United States), 1343 and 1344 (wire fraud and bank fraud), and 1082(A) (identity theft). And he did not indict them for violating 52 U.S.C. 30121 (contributions and donations by foreign nationals).
Now according to Cornell Law this is the relevant language of 52 U.S.C. 30121, which covers "meddling" in U.S. elections by foreign nationals:
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.
In the very first paragraph it says that "it is against the law for foreign nationals to spend money to influence US elections, or for agents of foreign countries to engage in political activities without registering." But no one is charged with these crimes. Instead, the indictment is devoted mostly to charging a "conspiracy to defraud the United States." Normally, that would refer to defrauding the U.S. out of, say, $10,000 in Medicare benefits. Its application to the 2016 election seems non existent. Beyond that, the indictment charges relatively minor offenses: bank fraud (opening accounts in false names) and identity theft. Why is that?
I've stated it many times in the past, and I'll say it again, when have you ever really seen the feds go after FARA violations? They charge people with it and bang the pots and pans about it, but when do they actually convict anyone of consequence with a FARA violation? Is it because they'd have to lock up half of DC and 90% of the K street crowd? Because how many times have we seen in this very investigation, people like the Podesta's filing after they are caught? It happens a lot. I have continue to puzzle over why Mueller chose not to indict the Russians for their most obvious offenses. I think the answer lies in the fact he's have to indict the Clinton Campaign for Chris Steele? The law is very sketchy on that, and I just heard Ratcliffe on Fox News say it's not illegal to what Clinton did as far as opposition research in using Steele, but the real issue is the FISA warrant and how that Steele paper was used there. I fully understand that collusion isn't a crime unless it involves FEC violations, so I get that. Maybe I'm just reading the wording wrong.
But reading this indictment the way it is worded gives the guise that it's doing a lot more than it really is. Reading that first paragraph like a preamble, it immediately gives you the impression it's going after FARA and foreign nationals for spending money to influence the election, but it doesn't. Actually, Mueller indicted the Russians only for violating 18 U.S.C. 371 (conspiracy to defraud the United States), 1343 and 1344 (wire fraud and bank fraud), and 1082(A) (identity theft). And he did not indict them for violating 52 U.S.C. 30121 (contributions and donations by foreign nationals).
Now according to Cornell Law this is the relevant language of 52 U.S.C. 30121, which covers "meddling" in U.S. elections by foreign nationals:
Quote:
(a) Prohibition: It shall be unlawful for
(1) a foreign national, directly or indirectly, to make
(A) a contribution or donation of money or other thing of value, or to make an express or implied promise to make a contribution or donation, in connection with a Federal, State, or local election;
(B) a contribution or donation to a committee of a political party; or
(C) an expenditure, independent expenditure, or disbursement for an electioneering communication (within the meaning of section 30104(f)(3) of this title); or
(2) a person to solicit, accept, or receive a contribution or donation described in subparagraph (A) or (B) of paragraph (1) from a foreign national.
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.
Never take a hostage you aren't willing to shoot,
Remember, America doesn’t negotiate with terrorists.
Code 7 10-42
Remember, America doesn’t negotiate with terrorists.
Code 7 10-42
Fantastic work Roscoe.
The greatest argument ever made against democracy is a 5 minute conversation with the average voter.
Don't forget that the HRC used the Perkins Coie law firm to claim client-attorney privilege to hide their involvement with Fusion-GPS.
I think Mueller and his team knew they were running out of time with respect to the IG report and hurriedly cobbled the indictments together. It seems to be a PR ploy, except for the Friday news release date; which might mean they did not want the indictments to be scrutinized like you just did.
VaultingChemist said:
I think Mueller and his team knew they were running out of time with respect to the IG report and hurriedly cobbled the indictments together. It seems to be a PR ploy, except for the Friday news release date; which might mean they did not want the indictments to be scrutinized like you just did.
I agree with this. It's a PR battle and if you listen to the headlines and not dig into the story you hear the Russians interfered with the election. No matter that their ads were stupid and had no impact and it went on for 2 years under Obama/ Comey watch and they did nothing about it.
And in fact Obama mocked the entire notionCepe said:VaultingChemist said:
I think Mueller and his team knew they were running out of time with respect to the IG report and hurriedly cobbled the indictments together. It seems to be a PR ploy, except for the Friday news release date; which might mean they did not want the indictments to be scrutinized like you just did.
I agree with this. It's a PR battle and if you listen to the headlines and not dig into the story you hear the Russians interfered with the election. No matter that their ads were stupid and had no impact and it went on for 2 years under Obama/ Comey watch and they did nothing about it.
Never take a hostage you aren't willing to shoot,
Remember, America doesn’t negotiate with terrorists.
Code 7 10-42
Remember, America doesn’t negotiate with terrorists.
Code 7 10-42
http://thegatewaypundit.com/2018/02/stunning-mueller-patched-together-much-indictment-2015-radio-free-europe-article/
Quote:
The indictment named 13 Russian operatives from the internet Research Center LLC. in St. Petersburg who attempted to "interfere" with the 2016 US presidential election.
But this information is nothing new.
It appears Mueller and his team of far left attorneys copied much of their report from an earlier RFE article.
4chan has a thread alleging Robert Mueller and his high-priced sham investigators got all the names and the idea for his Russian indictment from a 2015 Radio Free Europe article.
We plugged the article into Google translate (It's in Ukrainian), and the article reads like the Mueller indictment.
Here is the Mueller indictment describing the Internet Research Agency LLC:
Quote:
And here is the RFE article from 2015:The article even has a photo of the Ministry of Justice headquarters on Savushkin Street in St. PetersburgQuote:
For the third year, first in St. Petersburg, in the village of Ol'hina, and then in the city itself, on the street Savushkina, in the building number 55 there is a mysterious organization, which is officially called the Limited Liability Company Internet Research, and unofficially nicknamed by its employees, the so-called "Kremlin trolls", "the Ministry of Truth" .
The official founder and director general of this organization is the retired militia colonel Mikhail Bystrov , and is funded by the Concord holding, headed by friend and chef of President Vladimir Putin Yevgeny Prigozhin . Since 2000, this holding organizes banquets in the Kremlin, as well as cooperates with "Vointorg" and the Ministry of Defense.
In the "Trust Ministry", approximately 400 people, who change one at a time for 12 hours, sit around the computer around the clock and write in blogs mostly in "Live Journal" or "VKontakte". There are several departments. In one they are engaged in the blogosphere, in another they are preparing TK technical tasks, in the third one they comment on the news in Russian and foreign media , in the fourth mount photos in the photoshop, forcing, say, heads of Navalny and Obama to the bodies of animals, and so on.
It appears the hotshot liberal Mueller team produced their report with the help of a report written back in 2015.
And there's this
The Russian ads mentioned in Mueller's indictment were already released by the House Intelligence Committee in November 2017.
Facebook previously announced the Russian ads comprised .004% of their advertising during the election.
As previously reported
The House Intelligence Committee released a sampling of Facebook ads linked to Russia. One of the ads released was a sponsored post for the Nov. 12 anti-Trump march at Union Square against Trump in New York City after the election.
Mueller's Friday indictment was a nothing-burger that contained information previously reported.
Uh-oh!
Jesus I spent all night going over that pile of crap and didn't miss it by much.
Never take a hostage you aren't willing to shoot,
Remember, America doesn’t negotiate with terrorists.
Code 7 10-42
Remember, America doesn’t negotiate with terrorists.
Code 7 10-42
Holy sheet. What a clown show.
Well, I wouldn't call them BS crimes because if someone subject to jurisdiction of the American Courts committed mail, wire, and bank fraud, they'd be facing serious fines and prison time.Quote:
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.
But on the crucial crime, interference in our electoral process, the indictment falls silent. And that wasn't by some accidental omission. Mueller's team has shown come creativity in the past with bootstrapping crimes on top of each other (Manafort's indictment comes to mind) yet shows no such creativity here.
But riddle me this: Seems to me that the prime example of actual interference with the election under that statute was the hacking of the DNC computers and release of the material on WikiLeaks. Maybe that was a separate operation from the one identified here but common sense would indicate that the disinformation operation would have been all over those hacked emails, if the Russians had them, right?? Why use Wikileaks?
Then there are the Russian "sources" for the Steele dossier. Again, why not utilize the existing disinformation operation to trumpet that story? Let's go back and revisit the Steele dossier's history for a moment. The golden showers stories were percolating around social media by late summer 2016, yet no media outlet would run with it, including the British press with much stricter libel laws.
Obviously, the Clinton campaign had to appear hands off and apparently that hampered the efforts to get it out into the MSM. As an oppo research firm, Fusion's credibility would of course be questioned so they needed a better shill, like a retired British intelligence agent in Steele to sell the major media on the story. Steele was dispatched to do just that.
Yet very few of those outlets bit hard on the story, even when Isikoff at Yahoo picked part of it up, other media outlets didn't follow up in the normal feeding frenzy a story like that generates in an election year. Why? They didn't want to get their asses sued into bankruptcy. (As Buzzfeed is facing now.)
So where do we stand now? In the normal scheme of things the underlings indicted by Mueller would be leaned on to flip and get the goods on their superiors. Going up the food chain, so to speak. But that isn't possible here since they are in Russia and extradition is highly unlikely, so no leverage here for Mueller. This indictment is not of a "building block" to provide the foundation for other indictments.
It is a nice piece of counter-intel work but that's not what a Special Counsel is supposed to do. They aren't appointed to do intelligence work. Does Mueller have any other arrows in his quiver?? Or was the sign that he's winding down?
ETA: In light of drcrinum's post, Mueller's got nothing more.
No, that indictment was not hastily put together. That was a polished draft, unlike the Manafort indictment which was a hot mess.VaultingChemist said:
I think Mueller and his team knew they were running out of time with respect to the IG report and hurriedly cobbled the indictments together. It seems to be a PR ploy, except for the Friday news release date; which might mean they did not want the indictments to be scrutinized like you just did.
It was likely ready months ago and they just chose Friday to roll it out for some reason.
Well, to my totally unlegal mind, it looks like Mueller is looking for a gentle and face saving way out of all this crap. I think he tried his best but it's hard to flip underlings if there's nothing to flip on. Now if he's trying to fabricate a few lies, we'll he has the team for it. I really don't think this is the case as he has too many very smart legal minds watching him. I don't think he wants to bring charges on something he knows won't stand up in the sunlight.
drcrinum said:
http://dailycaller.com/2018/02/17/federal-judge-fusion-gps-lawsuit/Quote:
Federal Judge Deals Heavy Blow To Fusion GPS In Dossier-Related Lawsuit
A Trump-appointed federal judge said Friday that he will not recuse himself from a lawsuit related to the Steele dossier.
Trevor McFadden, a judge in Washington, D.C., issued the ruling in response to a recusal request submitted last month by Fusion GPS, the opposition research firm that commissioned the dossier.
Fusion sought McFadden's recusal as part of an attempt to avoid complying with a subpoena issued by a Russian businessman who is suing BuzzFeed News for publishing the unverified dossier. The businessman, Aleksej Gubarev, seeks depositions and documents from Fusion GPS as part of the lawsuit....
McFadden, a former Justice Department official, asserted on Friday that Fusion GPS's argument for his recusal was "factually misinformed and legally unpersuasive."
He said that his work on the Trump campaign was "sporadic," and involved him working "four hours every few weeks for two to three months" to help vet potential Cabinet nominees.
"I did not come into contact with Mr. Trump or any of the senior members of his campaign team. In fact, I do not know the President and have not met him in any capacity," McFadden said in his ruling....
The recusal request was pathetic. They were hoping to get an Obama appointed judge in there who would let them off the hook.
He already has, albeit it may have been done unwittingly. Not sure Mueller would be aware that the 302s supporting the Flynn indictment may have been altered. Nor would he necessarily have reason to review the Carter Page FISA application.Rockdoc said:
Well, to my totally unlegal mind, it looks like Mueller is looking for a gentle and face saving way out of all this crap. I think he tried his best but it's hard to flip underlings if there's nothing to flip on. Now if he's trying to fabricate a few lies, we'll he has the team for it. I really don't think this is the case as he has too many very smart legal minds watching him. I don't think he wants to bring charges on something he knows won't stand up in the sunlight.
However, Mueller had already kicked Strzok and Page off of his team by July 2017. And Strzok was one of the two interviewers of Flynn. If the IG, Horowitz, had shown Mueller the text messages about the alteration of 302s, Mueller's in a world of trouble. Judge Sullivan will not countenance that.
All this time the DNC and the MSM were yelling "Russia, Russia, Russia", and Mueller's team had to find Russian influence, no matter how insignificant.Quote:
No, that indictment was not hastily put together. That was a polished draft
Do you think that they were keeping these indictments as a fall-back option? Why release them on a Friday?
ThunderCougarFalconBird
Joined:
Oct 10, 2006
Posts:
49,078
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
its pretty much the, "well....we've billed the US Government $20,000,000 in legal fees. Better give them something" moment.VaultingChemist said:All this time the DNC and the MSM were yelling "Russia, Russia, Russia", and Mueller's team had to find Russian influence, no matter how insignificant.Quote:
No, that indictment was not hastily put together. That was a polished draft
Do you think that they were keeping these indictments as a fall-back option? Why release them on a Friday?
I don't know how much $ Mueller and his team will ultimately make, but I have the feeling I'm not gonna like it. I wonder how much Ken Starr made.
Right after a mass shooting at a school you mean? So the story will be dropped very quickly, is my guess. There will be no perp walks, no court appearances going forward. Nothing to keep it in the news.VaultingChemist said:All this time the DNC and the MSM were yelling "Russia, Russia, Russia", and Mueller's team had to find Russian influence, no matter how insignificant.Quote:
No, that indictment was not hastily put together. That was a polished draft
Do you think that they were keeping these indictments as a fall-back option? Why release them on a Friday?
Maybe something is about to drop next week?? He has Judge Sullivan breathing down his neck over the Flynn case.
Featured Stories
See All
38:43
34m ago
435
22:43
10h ago
3.6k
SEC Round-Up: League's 'elimination weekend' arrives in Week 11
by Olin Buchanan
9:17
4h ago
1.8k
26:01
5h ago
514
Pick 'Em & Rip 'Em sponsored by PrizePicks: Week 11
by Matthew Dawson