Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Tiggs

Russia probes II -- The Mueller Report

2,575 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

Robotic Jew
On 10/11/2019 at 7:07 PM, Harte said:

It was an offhand comment related to the investigation of corruption in Ukraine in a phone call concerning finding the origins of the "Russian collusion" hoax.

There was nothing whatsoever illegal about anything Trump said, and such types of conversations are common among cooperating heads of state.

Harte

If it's so common can you please provide examples of past presidents asking for their political opponents to be investigated by a foreign country?

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
Harte

As soon as you give me examples of a political party asking other country's leaders to help undermine ours.

I have to say again that you should read the transcript of the call, and not just the news stories that omit hundreds of words between the request made by Trump (cooperation on getting to the bottom of the weaponization of the intelligence community) and the offhand remark about Biden.

Trump has made it known that the DOJ is investigating how the collusion hoax started, and Ukraine is deeply involved in that.

On top of that, the investigation into Burisma Holdings was reopened well before that phone call, and also the Ukrainians didn't even know that their aid had been held up at the time.

Harte

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Farmer77
On 10/13/2019 at 6:33 AM, Harte said:

I have to say again that you should read the transcript of the call, and not just the news stories that omit hundreds of words between the request made by Trump (cooperation on getting to the bottom of the weaponization of the intelligence community) and the offhand remark about Biden.

Trump has made it known that the DOJ is investigating how the collusion hoax started, and Ukraine is deeply involved in that.

This is what happens when fantasy goes too far because the mad king won't listen to anyone . 

While it's starting more and more to look like sedition to me (especially in light of the bipartisan Senate report just released about Russian interference) Trump spreading conspiracy theories against the US isn't illegal (well not provably yet anyways)  . Trump using the US taxpayer funds to force a nation to manufacture the appearance that those conspiracy theories are real however is.  

 

 

 

Edited by Farmer77
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ExpandMyMind
On 10/13/2019 at 2:33 PM, Harte said:

I have to say again that you should read the transcript of the call

That would be quite the achievement considering the transcript hasn't actually been released. All that was released was Trump's summary of the call and he's an objectively worse source than anyone the WP or NYT quotes.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DieChecker
On 10/14/2019 at 8:23 AM, Farmer77 said:

Trump using the US taxpayer funds to force a nation to manufacture the appearance that those conspiracy theories are real however is.  

Manufacture? That's in the transcript, I suppose? Request... no... Demand to manufacture...?

It isnt in the transcript Farmer. It is possible to imply there was a demand. With calling on Trumps history and some poetic license. But I dont see anything that even implies manufacturing anything.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Farmer77
14 hours ago, DieChecker said:

Manufacture? That's in the transcript, I suppose? Request... no... Demand to manufacture...?

Yes manufacture. When all investigating intelligence agencies foreign and domestic , including bipartisan senate oversight, agree that Russia hacked the DNC in an attempt to help Trump get elected trying to coerce an investigation into Crowdstrike is manufacturing an investigation.

I know the die hards are still holding onto the well debunked conspiracy theories, and thats fine on a personal level, not so much on a using taxpayer funds level. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DieChecker
7 minutes ago, Farmer77 said:

Yes manufacture. When all investigating intelligence agencies foreign and domestic , including bipartisan senate oversight, agree that Russia hacked the DNC in an attempt to help Trump get elected trying to coerce an investigation into Crowdstrike is manufacturing an investigation.

I know the die hards are still holding onto the well debunked conspiracy theories, and thats fine on a personal level, not so much on a using taxpayer funds level. 

I'd disagree still. There's no hard fast evidence of request to manufacture anything. Its presumptive, and shouldnt be even under consideration, except it makes excellent media fodder... WHAT IF???? 

Are you still on about Trumps joke about Wikileaks and the DNC emails? Mueller put that to bed, I thought. Zero actual evidence of intent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Farmer77
1 minute ago, DieChecker said:

Are you still on about Trumps joke about Wikileaks and the DNC emails? Mueller put that to bed, I thought. Zero actual evidence of intent.

No in the memo of the phone call he mentions Crowdstrike in his requests for investigations. Honestly the more I think about it the more I think in light of the senate report that just came out that and his continued questioning of Russian interference is damn close to if not actual sedition.

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DieChecker
Just now, Farmer77 said:

No in the memo of the phone call he mentions Crowdstrike in his requests for investigations. Honestly the more I think about it the more I think in light of the senate report that just came out that and his continued questioning of Russian interference is damn close to if not actual sedition.

 

He did mention Crowdstrike. But I thought it was in context of getting servers supposedly in Ukraine, not to investigate Crowdstrike in any way. I thought he was just saying because of Crowdstrike, the FBI never got the DNC server, and he'd still like that server.

Which, still, is whack, and I think the comment was ignored, at least that's how I read it.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
skliss
10 hours ago, DieChecker said:

He did mention Crowdstrike. But I thought it was in context of getting servers supposedly in Ukraine, not to investigate Crowdstrike in any way. I thought he was just saying because of Crowdstrike, the FBI never got the DNC server, and he'd still like that server.

Which, still, is whack, and I think the comment was ignored, at least that's how I read it.

I still haven't seen a valid justification for using Crowdstrike in the first place. Who of us gets to refuse the FBI for an outside source? They are worried about the FBI but not some company who may leak everything imaginable OR are you more worried about other crimes the FBI might find than a corrupt (foreign?) company that will say whatever you want them to for big bucks.

The FBI not pursuing getting the original hard drives is unfathomable as well, right? Some one pretty high up had to say "Leave that alone." for them to accept  Crowdstrikes "results". 

Does this sound flaky to anyone else?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Earl.Of.Trumps
12 hours ago, Farmer77 said:

No in the memo of the phone call he mentions Crowdstrike in his requests for investigations. Honestly the more I think about it the more I think in light of the senate report that just came out that and his continued questioning of Russian interference is damn close to if not actual sedition.

 

Just the opposite, Farmer.

Trump has every reason to be suspicious of Crowdstrike of falsifying their report to the DoJ at the behest of crooked democrats that got caught with their hand in the cookie jar. It gives a way for Dems to change focus from their own misdeeds costing the election and focusing on Trump as the culprit.

If you want, I can list my evidences. But the truth is, our DoJ/FBI never had anything to go on inre, Russian collusion except the REDACTED report made up by Crowdstrike. That's it. The FBI was not allowed to examine that mail server.

Sad to say that Julian Assange of WikiLeaks claims that Russians had nothing to do with it and nobody believes him. 

Oh, well. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Earl.Of.Trumps
1 hour ago, skliss said:

I still haven't seen a valid justification for using Crowdstrike in the first place. Who of us gets to refuse the FBI for an outside source? They are worried about the FBI but not some company who may leak everything imaginable OR are you more worried about other crimes the FBI might find than a corrupt (foreign?) company that will say whatever you want them to for big bucks.

The FBI not pursuing getting the original hard drives is unfathomable as well, right? Some one pretty high up had to say "Leave that alone." for them to accept  Crowdstrikes "results". 

Does this sound flaky to anyone else?

BINGO, Skliss! Why oh why would the DNC not allow the FBI to examine the server??? This just is not right.

Crowdstrike, btw, has been caught falsifying reports before. How hard would it be for crowdstrike to take the report they made from examining some *other* server that was cracked by Russians, and simply redact it and hand it over to the DoJ?? Simple.

The biggest reason to think that the Crowdstrike report is quite questionable is that they have a direct relationship with the head of the DNC then, HILARY ROTTEN CLINTON!  Hilary, who ruined her own run to the white house with her overzealous cheating, and now so anxious to get negative attention off of her and placed on Trump

Say no more?

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
Farmer77
5 hours ago, Earl.Of.Trumps said:

Just the opposite, Farmer.

Trump has every reason to be suspicious of Crowdstrike of falsifying their report to the DoJ at the behest of crooked democrats that got caught with their hand in the cookie jar. It gives a way for Dems to change focus from their own misdeeds costing the election and focusing on Trump as the culprit.

If you want, I can list my evidences. But the truth is, our DoJ/FBI never had anything to go on inre, Russian collusion except the REDACTED report made up by Crowdstrike. That's it. The FBI was not allowed to examine that mail server.

Sad to say that Julian Assange of WikiLeaks claims that Russians had nothing to do with it and nobody believes him. 

Oh, well. 

Yeah i said it before this is what happens when no one will tell the emperor he has no clothes.

Youre posting conspiracy fantasy. Thats fine , you believe whatever you want to believe, POTUS using taxpayer funds to act on those beliefs that have no basis in reality and only benefit him politically however isnt OK.

 

5 hours ago, Earl.Of.Trumps said:

Sad to say that Julian Assange of WikiLeaks claims that Russians had nothing to do with it and nobody believes him. 

This is how absolutely bat **** crazy this all is. Even Bill Barr, the very guy helping the mad king with his conspiracy hunt, has openly admitted that Assange is a Russian asset. Its blatantly, nakedly, political. 

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DieChecker

CNN: Barr's investigation into origins of Trump-Russia probe is now a criminal investigation.
https://www.cnn.com/2019/10/24/politics/barr-probe-russia-2016-criminal-investigation/index.html

Going to force people to cooperate. Doubtless some on the left will call "witch hunt" now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Robotic Jew
6 hours ago, DieChecker said:

CNN: Barr's investigation into origins of Trump-Russia probe is now a criminal investigation.
https://www.cnn.com/2019/10/24/politics/barr-probe-russia-2016-criminal-investigation/index.html

Going to force people to cooperate. Doubtless some on the left will call "witch hunt" now.

Well, at the very least the argument could be made that it's a phoney retaliatory investigation couldn't it?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RoofGardener
16 minutes ago, Robotic Jew said:

Well, at the very least the argument could be made that it's a phoney retaliatory investigation couldn't it?

True, you COULD make that argument. But at the end of the day, the investigation will stand or fall on the nature of the facts that it uncovers. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Robotic Jew
15 minutes ago, RoofGardener said:

True, you COULD make that argument. But at the end of the day, the investigation will stand or fall on the nature of the facts that it uncovers. 

If they are indeed FACTS. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RoofGardener
2 minutes ago, Robotic Jew said:

If they are indeed FACTS. 

Indeed ! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RavenHawk
48 minutes ago, Robotic Jew said:

Well, at the very least the argument could be made that it's a phoney retaliatory investigation couldn't it?

Only someone who doesn't live in reality, maybe...

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RAyMO
30 minutes ago, RoofGardener said:

True, you COULD make that argument. But at the end of the day, the investigation will stand or fall on the nature of the facts that it uncovers. 

The problem with facts is that they are no longer independent of the source. By that I mean we will have Trumpist facts, and anti Trumpist facts.  On rare occasions the two may share the same underlining fact data, but by machinations of Trumpists and anti-Trumpists even shared data will have diametrically opposite meanings.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Robotic Jew
9 minutes ago, RavenHawk said:

Only someone who doesn't live in reality, maybe...

Image result for laughing gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RoofGardener
12 minutes ago, RAyMO said:

The problem with facts is that they are no longer independent of the source. By that I mean we will have Trumpist facts, and anti Trumpist facts.  On rare occasions the two may share the same underlining fact data, but by machinations of Trumpists and anti-Trumpists even shared data will have diametrically opposite meanings.

 

Stuff and nonsense. You have objective facts, and then you have hypothesis, derangement or lies. But at the end of the day, facts are facts. And that's a fact ! 

Edited by RoofGardener
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RAyMO
12 minutes ago, RoofGardener said:

Stuff and nonsense. You have objective facts, and then you have hypothesis, derangement or lies. But at the end of the day, facts are facts. And that's a fact ! 

You obviously don't live in a real world where contention is the norm. Yes you have objective facts - but one only entertains those that support ones cause and denigrate or reject any other fact that contradicts it. We see it all the time in the USA and in N Ireland.

In other words its not about the facts per se, its the interpretation and who wins the interpretation war.

Edited by RAyMO

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RoofGardener
16 minutes ago, RAyMO said:

You obviously don't live in a real world where contention is the norm. Yes you have objective facts - but one only entertains those that support ones cause and denigrate or reject any other fact that contradicts it. We see it all the time in the USA and in N Ireland.

In other words its not about the facts per se, its the interpretation and who wins the interpretation war.

A "true" fact - in the scientific meaning - can only be interpreted one way. Otherwise it is not so much a fact as an observation. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
skliss
8 hours ago, DieChecker said:

CNN: Barr's investigation into origins of Trump-Russia probe is now a criminal investigation.
https://www.cnn.com/2019/10/24/politics/barr-probe-russia-2016-criminal-investigation/index.html

Going to force people to cooperate. Doubtless some on the left will call "witch hunt" now.

Actually the spin this morning is Trump is weaponizing the doj to go after his enemies....ironic....right?....lol

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.