Russia probes kick into high gear

[ExpandMyMind]

3 hours ago, Tiggs said:

In the weeks after he became the Republican nominee on July 19, 2016, Donald Trump was warned that foreign adversaries, including Russia, would probably try to spy on and infiltrate his campaign, according to multiple government officials familiar with the matter.

The warning came in the form of a high-level counterintelligence briefing by senior FBI officials, the officials said. A similar briefing was given to Hillary Clinton, they added. They said the briefings, which are commonly provided to presidential nominees, were designed to educate the candidates and their top aides about potential threats from foreign spies.

The candidates were urged to alert the FBI about any suspicious overtures to their campaigns, the officials said.

Source: NBC

This means that when the Russians contacted them they knew that they should have contacted the FBI immediately and didn't. Shocking. 

[Tiggs]

14 minutes ago, ExpandMyMind said:

It doesn't have to have been incriminating. It would just have to be a lie that can be shown as such and they'd have incriminated themselves. 

To be a lie, it has to be a deliberate misrepresentation. People don't usually lie unless they have something to hide, or they've been instructed to.
 

14 minutes ago, ExpandMyMind said:

I thought that when they released this statement:

That it was basically a nod to them having received some of those emails voluntarily. I know it relates to all emails, but - and maybe I'm reading too much into it - they could have just said 'we followed the law' or 'we did so legally'. The specific mention of securing the owner's consent and then Trump's reaction makes me think otherwise.

I believe they have received other emails voluntarily. I'm still not sure they've asked for ones from the transition period, however.



 

[Tiggs]

7 minutes ago, Tiggs said:

An FBI agent’s reference to “an insurance policy” in a much-debated text message was meant to convey that the bureau needed to aggressively investigate allegations of collusion between Donald Trump’s campaign and Russia, according to people familiar with his account.

The agent didn’t intend to suggest a secret plan to harm the candidate but rather address a colleague who believed the Federal Bureau of Investigation could take it's time because Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton was certain to win the election.

Source: WSJ (paywalled).

The Hill has a non-paywalled summary version, here.

[ExpandMyMind]

6 minutes ago, Tiggs said:

To be a lie, it has to be a deliberate misrepresentation. People don't usually lie unless they have something to hide, or they've been instructed to.

It could just have been as simple as lying about contact with the Russians (or anything really), not an illegal act. Just something they didn't want known.

My point might be, well, pointless anyway, if your second sentence is the truth of it.

 

Edited December 18, 2017 by ExpandMyMind

[.ZZ.]

9 minutes ago, Tiggs said:

To be a lie, it has to be a deliberate misrepresentation. People don't usually lie unless they have something to hide, or they've been instructed to.

"I did not send or receive anything that was classified on my personal server"

[F3SS]

3 minutes ago, .ZZ. said:

"I did not send or receive anything that was classified on my personal server"

Let’s not bring Hillary into this. We’re discussing people who are accountable to the law, not above it.

[Tiggs]

8 minutes ago, .ZZ. said:

"I did not send or receive anything that was classified on my personal server"

Yep. That was a lie.

[Tiggs]

31 minutes ago, ExpandMyMind said:

It could just have been as simple as lying about contact with the Russians (or anything really), not an illegal act. Just something they didn't want known.

My point might be, well, pointless anyway, if your second sentence is the truth of it.

From the Axios article that broke the story:

The sources say that transition officials assumed that Mueller would come calling, and had sifted through the emails and separated the ones they considered privileged. But the sources said that was for naught, since Mueller has the complete cache from the dozen accounts.

Which suggests to me, no-one was asked to give them to Mueller.

[AnchorSteam]

1 hour ago, F3SS said:

Let’s not bring Hillary into this. We’re discussing people who are accountable to the law, not above it.

 

 

FBI-Mueller probe on Russia collusion is rotten to the core

Quote

Whatever faith the American people have had in the fairness of the special counsel investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election is rapidly evaporating, as it should.

We now have strong indicators that the special counsel is at its core an anti-Trump effort, if not to undo the results of the last presidential election, then to exact some form of vengeance against the victors. Everything about the Robert Mueller-led probe — from the choice of investigators to their conduct and motivations — is suspect.

The latest blow to Mueller’s team’s credibility came in the form of DOJ-released text messages between two senior FBI officials formerly involved with the Russia collusion investigation, Peter Strzok and Lisa Page. Strzok, a senior counterintelligence agent in the bureau, referred to Trump in an August 2016 text to Page as a “loathsome human” and wrote “F Trump” in another message.
The anti-Trump media’s response to unveiled texts has focused on the obvious fact that everyone has opinions, even FBI agents. This is manifestly true, but still a disingenuous defense under the circumstances. The Mueller probe is not a standard criminal justice investigation. Partisan politics don’t matter much if at all when prosecuting drug kingpins or human traffickers.

 

http://thehill.com/opinion/white-hou...-rotten-beyond

Edited December 18, 2017 by AnchorSteam

[Tiggs]

The top congressional committee investigating Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election has set its sights on the Green Party and its nominee, Jill Stein, according to a former campaign employee.

Source: Buzzfeed

[Paranormal Panther]

18 hours ago, Tiggs said:

With regards to her old mobile phones -- what evidence, exactly, do you believe she hid?
 

My guess is that it's old family recipes. She has to protect those secret ingredients, especially from the Chinese.

[Paranormal Panther]

18 hours ago, Tiggs said:

Separate topic from the destruction of her old mobile phones -- which is what I was talking about -- and for which I've been called both a hack and Satan's spokesman.

I never said that you were a hack. I said that some people sounded like Satan's spokesman.

[Tiggs]

White House lawyers are expected to meet with special counsel Robert S. Mueller III’s office late this week seeking good news: that his sprawling investigation’s focus on President Trump will soon end and their client will be cleared.

But people familiar with the probe say that such assurances are unlikely and that the meeting could trigger a new, more contentious phase between the special counsel and a frustrated president, according to administration officials and advisers close to Trump.

People with knowledge of the investigation said it could last at least another year — pointing to ongoing cooperation from witnesses such as former Trump campaign adviser George Papadopoulos and former national security adviser Michael Flynn, as well as a possible trial of two former Trump campaign officials. The special counsel’s office has continued to request new documents related to the campaign, and members of Mueller’s team have told others they expect to be working through much of 2018, at a minimum. 

Source: Washington Post

[ian hacktorp]

1 hour ago, Tiggs said:

But people familiar with the probe say that such assurances are unlikely and that the meeting could trigger a new, more contentious phase between the special counsel and a frustrated president, according to administration officials and advisers close to Trump.

These breathless 'updates' by Washington Post have all the impact of an ad for the next thrilling episode of "The Curse of Oak Island".

And the public yawns.

[.ZZ.]

If there actually was "any there, there" does anyone really think that the iconic pillars of Liberalism like the WaPo and the NYT would not have been recipients of "smoking gun" leaks long, long ago?

The Washington Post, like CNN are dedicated to 24/7/365 #nevertrumpism.

Russia meddling....give it up, it's a waste of time and money.

*snore* wake me up when some real news breaks.

[RAyMO]

15 minutes ago, hacktorp said:

And the public yawns.

I think the time will come very soon when it will drop of the media radar. When it does, it will be no bad thing and allow the investigation to take its natural course. It would be somewhat refreshing if the next thing we heard was the charges - or no charges.

[ExpandMyMind]

18 minutes ago, .ZZ. said:

If there actually was "any there, there" does anyone really think that the iconic pillars of Liberalism like the WaPo and the NYT would not have been recipients of "smoking gun" leaks long, long ago?

What makes you think the investigation would leak such a thing before they were ready to proceed with criminal charges? I would imagine that this sort of thing would happen at the end of the investigation, not the half-way mark.

[.ZZ.]

5 minutes ago, ExpandMyMind said:

What makes you think the investigation would leak such a thing before they were ready to proceed with criminal charges? I would imagine that this sort of thing would happen at the end of the investigation, not the half-way mark.

Because DC leaks like a sieve and always has?

About the bolded: Makes a person feel all warm and fuzzy inside, doesn't it?

[ExpandMyMind]

16 minutes ago, .ZZ. said:

Because DC leaks like a sieve and always has?

About the bolded: Makes a person feel all warm and fuzzy inside, doesn't it?

Sure, but the Special Counsel isn't DC (though Mueller does seem to have the investigative powers of Batman. Wait.. wrong DC). I have a feeling anything that has been leaked from them has been part of the game.

He's guilty of, at the very least, obstruction. That's a slam dunk, whichever way you look at it. Trump has admitted to it on multiple occasions. Remember, Republicans took down Clinton for lying under oath (perjury). You think Trump can't be charged for something that's far worse?

[Lilly]

1 hour ago, ExpandMyMind said:

 

He's guilty of, at the very least, obstruction. That's a slam dunk, whichever way you look at it. Trump has admitted to it on multiple occasions. Remember, Republicans took down Clinton for lying under oath (perjury). You think Trump can't be charged for something that's far worse?

No, President Clinton was not taken down for perjury. Clinton was impeached then acquitted and remained in office.  

[.ZZ.]

1 hour ago, ExpandMyMind said:

Sure, but the Special Counsel isn't DC (though Mueller does seem to have the investigative powers of Batman. Wait.. wrong DC). I have a feeling anything that has been leaked from them has been part of the game.

He's guilty of, at the very least, obstruction. That's a slam dunk, whichever way you look at it. Trump has admitted to it on multiple occasions. Remember, Republicans took down Clinton for lying under oath (perjury). You think Trump can't be charged for something that's far worse?

I would say that the Special Counsel is the epitome of what is wrong with DC, but I do like the Batman quip, and keeping in that vein, I think there will be a letter of personal exoneration (T*ump) forthcoming from the Bat cave. Same Bat time, same Bat channel.

Edited December 19, 2017 by .ZZ.

[ExpandMyMind]

14 minutes ago, Lilly said:

No, President Clinton was not taken down for perjury. Clinton was impeached then acquitted and remained in office.  

Why did this happen?

[preacherman76]

4 hours ago, Tiggs said:

White House lawyers are expected to meet with special counsel Robert S. Mueller III’s office late this week seeking good news: that his sprawling investigation’s focus on President Trump will soon end and their client will be cleared.

But people familiar with the probe say that such assurances are unlikely and that the meeting could trigger a new, more contentious phase between the special counsel and a frustrated president, according to administration officials and advisers close to Trump.

People with knowledge of the investigation said it could last at least another year — pointing to ongoing cooperation from witnesses such as former Trump campaign adviser George Papadopoulos and former national security adviser Michael Flynn, as well as a possible trial of two former Trump campaign officials. The special counsel’s office has continued to request new documents related to the campaign, and members of Mueller’s team have told others they expect to be working through much of 2018, at a minimum. 

Source: Washington Post

I wonder if this comes from the same source that said Wikileaks was emailing Trump lol. 

[Tiggs]

20 minutes ago, ExpandMyMind said:

Why did this happen?

I believe that impeachment is a two-stage process in Congress.

It starts in the house. A simple majority vote in the house will impeach the President -- which is basically just levelling a set of charges against him -- and then it moves to the Senate, where the charges are considered, and a 2/3rds majority is needed to convict.

Clinton was impeached by the House, but the Senate didn't vote to convict with the required 2/3rds majority.

Since he wasn't convicted -- he remained President.

[Lilly]

Tiggs is correct.

In Clinton's case the issue had to do with real estate dealings, Whitewater: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whitewater_controversy