Mueller dismisses top FBI agent in Russia probe for anti-Trump texts

7,777,915 Views | 49468 Replies | Last: 35 min ago by Ulysses90
will25u
How long do you want to ignore this user?
aggiehawg said:

Jabin said:

Thanks, hawg & sicandtired, but I was hoping for something a bit shorter, perhaps 1 page. It is impossible to get someone to actually read through and digest websites as lengthy as those. Great resources, but not great summaries.

Like all events/scandals/conspiracies, there have to be 3-5 events that are critical, that cannot be explained away. Then, there are another 20 or so events that are important to providing background and color to the 3-5 key events.

If there is no such summary, I may take the time and effort to prepare one. What's retirement for, anyway?
What is and what isn't important varies between people. Being a retired attorney, the legal issues were always the ones that got my attention. But having suffered throughout the last years, in hindsight what started out as a way to get Hillary's emails off of the front page news and slam her opponent with a phony story about Russian collusion morphed into a specific plan to impeach Trump in any way possible and to hide their misdeeds.

The Mueller investigation was designed to accomplish three things:

1) Appropriate singular control of the matters under investigation to forestall any Congressional investigations. That's the reason Rosenstein had to change the scope twice after the initial appointment. Mueller had control of the narrative. And he could also cover up or memory hole any fingerprints on the malfeasance occurring at the FBI with the FISA warrants.

2) use grand juries to harass the Trump administration endlessly with subpoenas and distract the WH from implementing Trump's agenda. It was also a perjury trap and attempts to bait Trump into an obstruction charge. Failing that, they had the final plan to get to impeachment;

3) Use the grand jury materials to draft articles of impeachment against Trump after the 2018 midterms and the Dems retook the House. Although it did not get much attention at the time, the second Pelosi took the gavel she implemented sweeping changes to the House Rules all designed solely for impeaching Trump. The Mueller Report was seen as the crown jewel they would use.

But then a weird thing happened, the DC Circuit Court of Appeals issued a decision about the use of grand jury materials. They held that federal judges did not have inherent authority to release grand jury materials outside of the specific exceptions written in the federal Rules of Criminal Procedures. Meaning Nadler and Schiff could not get their hands on all of the grand jury material Mueller had accrued.

Then a second unexpected thing happened, Bill Barr was confirmed as AG before Mueller could get his report out. Before he was confirmed, Barr had Rosenstein pass along to Mueller that he expected the report to protect grand jury materials and have them segregated so he would be able to release the report without having to redact a lot under the new holding of the DC Circuit. But Team Mueller defied that order and put a ton of grand jury materials throughout the report. That caused a delay as Barr and Rosenstein then had to redact those materials, making it look as if Barr was covering up for Trump.
Thank you Hawg, for that brief synopsis.

The Democrats hinged EVERYTHING on getting Trump out of office. The democrats had an agenda that started during Obama, and Hilary was supposed to continue on that agenda unabated.

But Donald Trump threw a wrench in their machinery. So they HAD to get him.

Now that they control all levers of government, I think they are trying to make up for lost time. And are destroying the United States.
will25u
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Interesting Thread... Seems a bit... out there?

Sarge 91
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
will25u said:

Interesting Thread... Seems a bit... out there?


All of the news reports I have seen describe Deripaska as being tied to Manafort. I have seen no MSM reports of his connection to Steele.

Willful. Ignorance.
MarkTwain
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Sarge 91 said:

will25u said:

Interesting Thread... Seems a bit... out there?


All of the news reports I have seen describe Deripaska as being tied to Manafort. I have seen no MSM reports of his connection to Steele.

Willful. Ignorance.
That was the entire premise for the Clinton's mouthpiece to trot out his interview with Steele to turn the focus back on Trump and the MSM is complying.
People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because hard men stand ready to do violence on their behalf.
aggiehawg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
That is pretty out there. I completely fail to see how a Hillary administration would depose Putin, if that is what Deripaska was after.
MarkTwain
How long do you want to ignore this user?
aggiehawg said:

That is pretty out there. I completely fail to see how a Hillary administration would depose Putin, if that is what Deripaska was after.
Yeah this Dawson guy is always out there, he's still defending Comey and and McCabe to this day as part of Trump's sting to expose the swamp, and has made claims in the past that Trump and his father were FBI informants for decades.
People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because hard men stand ready to do violence on their behalf.
aggiehawg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I would also add that Deripaska's choices in friends is pretty questionable between Manafort and that dumb dweeb Steele. Manafort was practically embedded with the Party of Regions between 2005 and even after Yanukovych was deposed in 2014. Guess he was wired in during that time but I still fail to see what good he'd be to Deripaska, if getting rid of Putin was the goal.
will25u
How long do you want to ignore this user?
will25u
How long do you want to ignore this user?
will25u
How long do you want to ignore this user?
will25u
How long do you want to ignore this user?
will25u
How long do you want to ignore this user?
will25u
How long do you want to ignore this user?
MarkTwain
How long do you want to ignore this user?
oops
People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because hard men stand ready to do violence on their behalf.
will25u
How long do you want to ignore this user?
will25u said:


Fiscal year started Oct. 1.
whatthehey78
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Interesting! Wonder whether Durham's budget was increased??
Alexander, Caesar, Charlemagne, and myself founded empires; but upon what foundation did we rest the creations of our genius? Upon force! But Jesus Christ founded His upon love; and at this hour millions of men would die for Him. - Napoleon Bonaparte
will25u
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Great read...

fasthorse05
How long do you want to ignore this user?
whatthehey78 said:

Interesting! Wonder whether Durham's budget was increased??
Better yet, I wonder if Durham and all of his attorneys will scrub their phones of any texts and calls at the end of this investigation?
will25u
How long do you want to ignore this user?
MarkTwain
How long do you want to ignore this user?
will25u said:


F*** Peter Strzok and the entire Lawfare bunch
People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because hard men stand ready to do violence on their behalf.
aggiehawg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Quote:

F*** Peter Strzok and the entire Lawfare bunch
Yeah. Lawfare bunch are led by a Comey bestie. They are mostly FOS, legally speaking.
MarkTwain
How long do you want to ignore this user?
aggiehawg said:

Quote:

F*** Peter Strzok and the entire Lawfare bunch
Yeah. Lawfare bunch are led by a Comey bestie. They are mostly FOS, legally speaking.
As I'm sure you well know Wittes isn't even an attorney and people consider him as some kind of legal expert and he's nothing more than a propagandist attached to Comey's taint.
People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because hard men stand ready to do violence on their behalf.
will25u
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Quote:

First, where, as here, you see a prosecutor bury the defense in discovery, that is a sign that he has great confidence in his case and nothing to hide. In the old Justice Department, we compared this type of eager and unbridled document production to happily using a salad shooter to spray the defense head-to-toe with incriminating evidence. As in "read it and weep."

Second, the breadth and depth of the discovery as well as the obviously extensive and intensive efforts of the investigators to gather it indicate that there is far more to this matter than just the presently charged single count of making a false statement. Accordingly, we should expect an indictment or indictments commensurate with the scope of the present and promised discovery.

What will those charges entail? Based on what we know so far, they will most likely aver, among other crimes, a conspiracy to defraud the United States.


richardag
How long do you want to ignore this user?
will25u

Thanks for the post.
Quote:

He has provided Michael Sussmann w/ 81K pages of document
81,000 pages, YIKES, that's a lot. Hope Durham gets more indictments and eventually convictions.
Among the latter, under pretence of governing they have divided their nations into two classes, wolves and sheep.”
Thomas Jefferson, Letter to Edward Carrington, January 16, 1787
txags92
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
richardag said:

will25u

Thanks for the post.
Quote:

He has provided Michael Sussmann w/ 81K pages of document
81,000 pages, YIKES, that's a lot. Hope Durham gets more indictments and eventually convictions.
Probably enough to make his lawyers push for a plea deal and full cooperation just so they don't have to read all 81k pages.
KingofHazor
How long do you want to ignore this user?
txags92 said:

richardag said:

will25u

Thanks for the post.
Quote:

He has provided Michael Sussmann w/ 81K pages of document
81,000 pages, YIKES, that's a lot. Hope Durham gets more indictments and eventually convictions.
Probably enough to make his lawyers push for a plea deal and full cooperation just so they don't have to read all 81k pages.
But only after they bill him for reading, annotating, and indexing all 81k pages!
captkirk
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
will25u said:

Quote:

First, where, as here, you see a prosecutor bury the defense in discovery, that is a sign that he has great confidence in his case and nothing to hide. In the old Justice Department, we compared this type of eager and unbridled document production to happily using a salad shooter to spray the defense head-to-toe with incriminating evidence. As in "read it and weep."

Second, the breadth and depth of the discovery as well as the obviously extensive and intensive efforts of the investigators to gather it indicate that there is far more to this matter than just the presently charged single count of making a false statement. Accordingly, we should expect an indictment or indictments commensurate with the scope of the present and promised discovery.

What will those charges entail? Based on what we know so far, they will most likely aver, among other crimes, a conspiracy to defraud the United States.



Great article. Really lays out how the whole thing was concocted and they have all the emails with marching orders, doubts about how tenuous their ginned up connections were and strategizing how to create a half-baked white paper to fool the FBI into investigating. Sounds like Sussman lying to the FBI about not working for Clinton is only the tip of a very large iceberg. Hope some people pay for this
fasthorse05
How long do you want to ignore this user?
richardag said:

will25u

Thanks for the post.
Quote:

He has provided Michael Sussmann w/ 81K pages of document
81,000 pages, YIKES, that's a lot. Hope Durham gets more indictments and eventually con
Three more zeros and Sussman would have the amount of voters he helped acquire for Biden.

I really don't know if Sussman had anything to do with acquiring some of the corrupt Dem voting,but why not, he was running a conspiracy out of the doj.
will25u
How long do you want to ignore this user?
will25u
How long do you want to ignore this user?

will25u
How long do you want to ignore this user?
benchmark
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Link: The National Spectator: John Durham's Salad Shooter
Quote:

And, given the locations where the various conspirators allegedly committed overt acts, Durham has his choice of venues in which charges can be brought. The CIA headquarters are located in the Eastern District of Virginia. Georgia Tech is in the Northern District of Georgia. The email traffic passed through facilities all over the United States. In short, the conspiracy charges can be brought in any number of locations which will be far more receptive to the prosecution's case than the District of Columbia where persons affiliated with the Democrat party are a seemingly protected species.
This is why Durham went nuclear on the Alfa-Bank case. Other crimes may have been more egregious - but were not pursued if restricted to the DC venue.
will25u
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Durham to call former FBI general counsel James Baker to testify in case of former Clinton campaign attorney

Quote:

Special Counsel John Durham plans to call former FBI General Counsel James Baker to testify in the case against former Clinton campaign attorney Michael Sussmann, who was recently indicted for making false statements to the FBI.

During a virtual status hearing Tuesday, government prosecutors on Durham's team signaled their intention to call Baker to testify as part of the Sussmann case. Sussmann has pleaded not guilty to one count of making a false statement to a federal agent.
oysterbayAG
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
It seems that the people involved at the top of this " conspiracy to defraud the United States " probably killed Seth Rich !
will25u
How long do you want to ignore this user?
First Page Last Page
Page 1308 of 1414
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.