Russia probes II -- The Mueller Report

[Merc14]

18 minutes ago, Einsteinium said:

You are wrong and history will show it. There was good reason for a special counsel. Trump brought it upon the country himself when he fired Comey over 'this Russia thing'. Once he did that he put Rod Rosenstein in a very difficult position and really the only legal/ethical/politiically sane thing to do was to appoint a special counsel at that point. Trumps stupidity and shortsightedness drug our country through the mud in this, if he really is as smart as he claims, he would have realized what the outcome of his action was likely to be and he would have been more strategic in how he handled things. This is all his doing, though he will never admit it.

This "Russia thing" was based on the frauduklent, unverifed, Steele dossier. which they knew i was fraudulent when they presented it to the FISA judges.  How did they know?  Ohr TOLD them so.  There was nothing there, as admitted by Strozk to his girlfriend.  

2 minutes ago, hacktorp said:

Could be.  But then again, I've been told that many times in this thread.  And I would gladly admit being wrong.

Just haven't had to, so far.

He is incapable of doing so but does make a good foil for presenting the facts, which he ignores.  

 

Edited April 19, 2019 by Merc14

[Einsteinium]

11 minutes ago, Merc14 said:

This "Russia thing" was based on the frauduklent, unverifed, Steele dossier. which they knew i was fraudulent when they presented it to the FISA judges.  How did they know?  Ohr TOLD them so.  There was nothing there, as admitted by Strozk to his girlfriend.  

He is incapable of doing so but does make a good foil for presenting the facts, which he ignores.  

 

Merc, the Russia investigation was NOT based on the Steele dossier. This has been known for a long time, why do you keep lying about this? The Mueller report clearly puts this to bed once and for all (though we already knew this)

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/30/us/politics/how-fbi-russia-investigation-began-george-papadopoulos.html

https://www.thedailybeast.com/fox-news-chris-wallace-muellers-russia-investigation-did-not-start-with-steele-dossier-on-trump

So will you now please stop falsely claiming that this investigation was started because of the dossier?

[ian hacktorp]

1 minute ago, Einsteinium said:

Merc, the Russia investigation was NOT based on the Steele dossier.

The FISA spying warrants WERE based on the fraudulent Steele dossier...and no amount of revisionist history can wish that fact away.

This is the questionable "predicate" Barr refers to.  Expect to hear MUCH more about this in the very near future.

[Einsteinium]

4 minutes ago, hacktorp said:

The FISA spying warrants WERE based on the fraudulent Steele dossier...and no amount of revisionist history can wish that fact away.

This is the questionable "predicate" Barr refers to.  Expect to hear MUCH more about this in the very near future.

They were based in part on the dossier, but not only on the dossier. Barr is doing some questionable things in his quest to protect Trump. We will see what happens, but I will be surprised if this amounts to anything more than rhetoric at the end of the day.

[ian hacktorp]

9 hours ago, acidhead said:

 

I'm looking forward to Comey's future tweet:

"So many cellmates"

[Gromdor]

21 minutes ago, Einsteinium said:

Merc, the Russia investigation was NOT based on the Steele dossier. This has been known for a long time, why do you keep lying about this? The Mueller report clearly puts this to bed once and for all (though we already knew this)

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/30/us/politics/how-fbi-russia-investigation-began-george-papadopoulos.html

https://www.thedailybeast.com/fox-news-chris-wallace-muellers-russia-investigation-did-not-start-with-steele-dossier-on-trump

So will you now please stop falsely claiming that this investigation was started because of the dossier?

Yeah, Page 1 of the Mueller report states why the investigations happened and didn't even mention the Steele Dossier. 

[Einsteinium]

2 minutes ago, hacktorp said:

I'm looking forward to Comey's future tweet:

"So many cellmates"

What criminal activity was Comey engaged in that warrants him going to jail?

Are you not assuming he is guilty of something, just as the left assumes Trump must be guilty of something?

 

Oh the  hypocrisy!

[ian hacktorp]

3 minutes ago, Einsteinium said:

What criminal activity was Comey engaged in that warrants him going to jail?

Most of America is now aware that Comey was a key player in an illegal attempt to take down a presidential candidate and, later, a sitting president.  A 'coup', if you will.

Comey will be lucky to get prison instead of a bullet.

I understand that some will never accept the truth about these events, and that's okay with me.  But friendly advice suggests that you warm yourself to the idea that some of these people are going to go down hard for what amounts to conspiracy to commit treason.

[Merc14]

25 minutes ago, Einsteinium said:

They were based in part on the dossier, but not only on the dossier. Barr is doing some questionable things in his quest to protect Trump. We will see what happens, but I will be surprised if this amounts to anything more than rhetoric at the end of the day.

The Steele dossier was the foundation of teh evidence, without it there would've been no FISA surveillance.  No debate, it is in the evidence and was stated by a principle.

Edited April 19, 2019 by Merc14

[Gromdor]

3 minutes ago, hacktorp said:

Most of America is now aware that Comey was a key player in an illegal attempt to take down a presidential candidate and, later, a sitting president.  A 'coup', if you will.

Comey will be lucky to get prison instead of a bullet.

I understand that some will never accept the truth about these events, and that's okay with me.  But friendly advice suggests that you warm yourself to the idea that some of these people are going to go down hard for what amounts to conspiracy to commit treason.

I wouldn't worry too much about that.

Mueller's report showed that Russia interfered. It showed that the Trump campaign knew about it.  It showed that they encouraged it.  And it showed how they benefited.  Then on page 180 Section C Paragraphs 1-3, it went to show how they couldn't charge for conspiracy because they couldn't prove cooperation or willful intent.

With that legal logic applied to Comey and the Dems, I never see them being jailed for conspiracy. 

[Einsteinium]

7 minutes ago, hacktorp said:

Most of America is now aware that Comey was a key player in an illegal attempt to take down a presidential candidate and, later, a sitting president.  A 'coup', if you will.

Comey will be lucky to get prison instead of a bullet.

I understand that some will never accept the truth about these events, and that's okay with me.  But friendly advice suggests that you warm yourself to the idea that some of these people are going to go down hard for what amounts to conspiracy to commit treason.

So you DO want a different standard applied to the left than was applied to Trump. Sad.

There is no way Comey will be charged with anything if we apply the law equally to him as it was applied to the Trump campaign. Barring some bombshell revelation, Comey is in the clear.

[ian hacktorp]

10 minutes ago, Gromdor said:

Yeah, Page 1 of the Mueller report states why the investigations happened and didn't even mention the Steele Dossier. 

Mueller's glaring omission of the Steele Dossier and Fusion GPS is front and center in the post-release debate of his report.

Not to worry, though.  The OIG report will circle back to it and lay waste to the credibility of Mueller and his report.

Heck, even I might begin to tire of Trump's preening and endless victory laps.  But make no mistake...he will slay them all.

[Einsteinium]

2 minutes ago, hacktorp said:

Mueller's glaring omission of the Steele Dossier and Fusion GPS is front and center in the post-release debate of his report.

Not to worry, though.  The OIG report will circle back to it and lay waste to the credibility of Mueller and his report.

Heck, even I might begin to tire of Trump's preening and endless victory laps.  But make no mistake...he will slay them all.

For shame. The ignorance in this post is astounding.

[ian hacktorp]

Just now, Einsteinium said:

For shame. The ignorance in this post is astounding.

Haha...so, in other words, you got nothing.

[Gromdor]

4 minutes ago, hacktorp said:

Mueller's glaring omission of the Steele Dossier and Fusion GPS is front and center in the post-release debate of his report.

Not to worry, though.  The OIG report will circle back to it and lay waste to the credibility of Mueller and his report.

Heck, even I might begin to tire of Trump's preening and endless victory laps.  But make no mistake...he will slay them all.

What's your thoughts about page 48 and Seth Rich?

[Einsteinium]

Just now, hacktorp said:

Haha...so, in other words, you got nothing.

I don't know what to say. You apparently have not read Muellers report and are still regurgitating the same old tired worn out narrative that the likes of Hannity and Limbaugh have been peddling. We now know a lot more, your narrative is simply just not true. I should not need to spell it all out for you, if you don't want to read the report, then why are you commenting on it?

[ian hacktorp]

Just now, Gromdor said:

What's your thoughts about page 48 and Seth Rich?

I think that the spiriting out of Julian Assange from the Ecuador embassy in London has much to do with all of this and the fact it happened immediately after Mueller's report dropped is no coincidence.

If Assange lives long enough to testify about where the leaks came from, Mueller's report will take another, likely fatal, shot to its credibility.

[+Hammerclaw]

2 hours ago, Einsteinium said:

I guess you must have missed the part where there are 12 other criminal investigations going on in addition to the 2 we know about that started from things Mueller uncovered not related to his original mandate. If you think Trump is in the clear, you are woefully mistaken. Trumps corruption is now clear as day, why you continue to support such a corrupt man as our leader is beyond me. Muellers report is extremely damning for Trump, I know you guys will refuse to see it for what it is and continue to claim 'witch hunt' and continue to claim the dossier was the reason for this all starting (we now know conclusively that it was not), but your lies and hypocrisy will be logged in the history books and future generations will know.

Even were all that true--which it isn't--it's too late, now. When your side lowered the bar for Bill Clinton when it comes to honesty and integrity, it's stays down forever. You have reaped what you sowed.

[RavenHawk]

So the report proves there was no collusion or obstruction, yet it was written in such a way that one can't prove the negative.  And the Progs jump all over that.  And these are the people that say they believe in science?  I.E. you can't prove a negative.  I believe that Barr is a smart man.  He knows what he is doing and the carnage is only beginning.  The question is, who's going to be indicted first?  Is it going to be Comey or Stroik or higher?

 

[Einsteinium]

4 minutes ago, Hammerclaw said:

Even were all that true--which it isn't--it's too late, now. When your side lowered the bar for Bill Clinton when it comes to honesty and integrity, it's stays down forever. You have reaped what you sowed.

I don't know what 'my side' is in this case. I was a kid when Bill Clinton was in office, so I apologize for not being old enough to vote or do anything to counter his lies and lack of integrity which I agree he had. Though Trump in comparison just blows Clinton out of the water.

 

As I keep saying, the hypocrisy is just mind boggling.

[ian hacktorp]

4 minutes ago, Einsteinium said:

I don't know what to say.

Clearly.  But since you didn't seem to notice, it is the Left-wing MSM that is currently spitting crow feathers.

And just to be accurate, Mueller's report didn't fail to find collusion or obstruction because it was credibly done...it was because they had absolutely nothing to base it on.

All the rest of the innuendo and hanging questions in the report show it to be a farce.  This will all come out.

[Gromdor]

Just now, RavenHawk said:

So the report proves there was no collusion or obstruction, yet it was written in such a way that one can't prove the negative.  And the Progs jump all over that.  And these are the people that say they believe in science?  I.E. you can't prove a negative.  I believe that Barr is a smart man.  He knows what he is doing and the carnage is only beginning.  The question is, who's going to be indicted first?  Is it going to be Comey or Stroik or higher?

 

That is incorrect.  It demonstrated collusion and obstruction, but admitted it did not find enough to charge and convict.

[Einsteinium]

1 minute ago, hacktorp said:

Clearly.  But since you didn't seem to notice, it is the Left-wing MSM that is currently spitting crow feathers.

And just to be accurate, Mueller's report didn't fail to find collusion or obstruction because it was credibly done...it was because they had absolutely nothing to base it on.

All the rest of the innuendo and hanging questions in the report show it to be a farce.  This will all come out.

You are just simply wrong though. The report speaks for itself.

[+Hammerclaw]

1 minute ago, Einsteinium said:

I don't know what 'my side' is in this case. I was a kid when Bill Clinton was in office, so I apologize for not being old enough to vote or do anything to counter his lies and lack of integrity which I agree he had. Though Trump in comparison just blows Clinton out of the water.

 

As I keep saying, the hypocrisy is just mind boggling.

That's exactly what we think of you guys. You were willing to put those two back in the White House. That's what enabled a man like Trump to be elected. Yours is a sad indictment of the current generation of Democrats; not knowing your own history and falling victim to it's legacy.

[Einsteinium]

1 minute ago, Hammerclaw said:

That's exactly what we think of you guys. You were willing to put those two back in the White House. That's what enabled a man like Trump to be elected. Yours is a sad indictment of the current generation of Democrats; not knowing your own history and falling victim to it's legacy.

I actually agree with this post of yours. Though I don't agree that I am a democrat, I am not. I vote for both republicans and democrats and I am not a registered member of either party.

Just because I disagree with a lot of your views on Trump does not make me a democrat.