Mueller Investigation pt 7

[PhantomWolf]

No way is Pence electable.

I'm more worried that the Republicans will figure out that someone like Nikki Halley might actually be a winning strategy for them.

 

[a_unique_person]

At this point in time I think Barr is placating Trump. Other than subpoenas to make certain people look guilty, I don't see the courts dealing with this.

It's like asking Zelenski to publicly announce an investigation into Biden. It's like Darryl Issa's and Trey Gowdey's 11 Benghazi hearings. There is no there there and there doesn't need to be. "But her emails." But her emails what? It doesn't matter, just convince people by innuendo.

Are they going to find a DNC server in the Ukraine? Apparently there is no server even if the bizarre CT about it being in Ukraine had substance. The Steele dossier is not what started the investigation. There is overwhelming evidence right there in the Mueller report that Barr's investigation is a farce.

So I don't see anyone getting framed here. This will go on long enough for Trump to use the innuendo. That's all this is about.

Benghazi was all about keeping the "hate on Hillary" campaign slowly burning away, and it worked, she lost the campaign to be president. They didn't believe it was true any more than we did.



Trump is different. He is unhinged and backed by equally unhinged holy warriors. They really do believe all this and now the courts are stacked in their favour.

 

[Stacyhs]

It was a response to you saying "I see the Russians are busy again" after I posted a link to the New York Times reporting that the Barr/Durham inquiry was now a criminal investigation.

It sounds like something Hillary or Rachel Maddow has blurted out about Russia collision for the last three years, unless you have some kind of evidence that the Russians are behind the latest information relating to the investigation of how the Mueller investigation started.

Um, no. I was actually referring to Tanabear's post which was 2 up from my post separated only by PhantomWolf's post responding to Tanabear's post. It had nothing to do with you.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Benghazi was all about keeping the "hate on Hillary" campaign slowly burning away, and it worked, she lost the campaign to be president. They didn't believe it was true any more than we did.

Trump is different. He is unhinged and backed by equally unhinged holy warriors. They really do believe all this and now the courts are stacked in their favour.

There were many reasons Clinton lost. Benghazi was probably on the bottom of the list.

Trump may very well believe his CT. Barr, I'm not so sure. But the bottom line, they can't produce anything close to reliable evidence.

 

[acbytesla]

There were many reasons Clinton lost. Benghazi was probably on the bottom of the list.

Trump may very well believe his CT. Barr, I'm not so sure. But the bottom line, they can't produce anything close to reliable evidence.

I don't think there is any way to know how much the different aspects of the GOP smear job had to do with her loss. But if you look, Hillary's favorable/unfavourable ratings dropped dramatically between 2014 and January 2016 before even the first primary. Between Ben Ghazzi and the innuendo associated with her emails, the GOP did a number on her.

Now I blame her for fumbling how to handle these attacks, but I have no doubt they had a negative effect.

 

[tanabear]

I'm really not sure what your point is. Do you even know what the Steele dossier is/was? It's referred to as raw intelligence. Which is mostly information that has not been vetted at all. Usually bull **** with a few actual facts sprinkled in. In this case a great amount of it has been proved to be true. There was no attempted coup. Talk about absurd hyperbole. An investigation or inquiry is not a coup.
There was no

Yes, the Steele dossier was raw bits of supposed intelligence. This was admitted by Christopher Steele himself. But the Obama Justice Department and FBI sought a FISA warrant to monitor Carter Page in October of 2016. They signed off on the allegations in dossier as VERIFIED APPLICATION. However, James Comey testified to Congress in 2017 that the Dossier was salacious and unverified. So why didn't the FBI go through the basic spade work of attempting to verify those allegations before signing off on a FISA warrant? Because they were looking for any pre-text they could to spy on the Trump administration. By signing VERIFIED APPLICATION in October of 2016 they committed fraud and should be held accountable.

And yes, some of the information has been verified. Moscow is a city in Russia.

I'll give you a clue, it starts with an "A" and ends in an "A" and many consider it it the largest island on the planet.

Alexander Downer comes from Australia, as everyone knows, and Australia is entirely peopled with criminals, and criminals are used to having people not trust them...

The reference here is to Alexander Downer and George Papadopoulos's meeting at the Kensington Wine bar in May of 2016. This is where PapaD supposedly told Downer that the Russians have materials that could be damaging to Clinton, but didn't say what it was. Papadopoulos denied saying anything about this however. The official narrative is that Papadopoulos knew this because of his meeting with Joseph Mifsud on April 26th. He is portrayed as being a Russian agent. If Papadopoulos had never met any Russians or Russian agents then how can one open a collusion investigation between the Trump campaign and the Kremlin? James Comey wrote this in his Washington Post op-ed:

"In April 2016, that adviser talked to a Russian agent in London, learned that the Russians had obtained “dirt” on Hillary Clinton in the form of thousands of emails and that the Russians could assist the Trump campaign through the anonymous release of information damaging to Clinton."

That advisor is George Papadopoulos and the supposed Russian agent is Joseph Mifsud. If Mifsud is not a Russian agent then this entire Trump-Russia collusion investigation was a scam from the get-go. This is currently what Barr and John Durham are trying to discover.

So do you believe Joseph Mifsud is a Russian agent or not?

Being supported by and conspiring with are two different things.

The Steele Dossier makes reference to a two way flow of information between Trump and the Kremlin.

"In terms of the intelligence flow from the TRUMP team to Russia, Source E reported that much of this concerned the activities of business oligarchs and their families' activities and assets in the US, with which PUTIN and the Kremlin seemed preoccupied."

Trumpers are clinging to the nonsense the investigation of Trump was some deep-state plot. I suppose if you believe Trump's gaslighting, a ginned up investigation is all part of the same fantasy.

So do you believe that Joseph Mifsud is a Russian agent? Why are the people on these boards so reluctant to answer this basic question? James Comey affirmed it. But if this is un-resolved don't you support John Durham's inquiry to discover the Truth?

 

[Stacyhs]

I don't think there is any way to know how much the different aspects of the GOP smear job had to do with her loss. But if you look, Hillary's favorable/unfavourable ratings dropped dramatically between 2014 and January 2016 before even the first primary. Between Ben Ghazzi and the innuendo associated with her emails, the GOP did a number on her.

Now I blame her for fumbling how to handle these attacks, but I have no doubt they had a negative effect.

Agreed.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

I don't think there is any way to know how much the different aspects of the GOP smear job had to do with her loss. But if you look, Hillary's favorable/unfavourable ratings dropped dramatically between 2014 and January 2016 before even the first primary. Between Ben Ghazzi and the innuendo associated with her emails, the GOP did a number on her.

Now I blame her for fumbling how to handle these attacks, but I have no doubt they had a negative effect.

I have rebuttals to some of this but it belongs in another thread. I too blame her ultimately for her fumbling.

 

[acbytesla]

Yes, the Steele dossier was raw bits of supposed intelligence. This was admitted by Christopher Steel himself. But the Obama Justice Department and FBI sought a FISA warrant to monitor Carter Page in October of 2016. They signed off on the allegations in dossier as VERIFIED APPLICATION. However, James Comey testified to Congress in 2017 that the Dossier was salacious and unverified. So why didn't the FBI go through the basic spade work of attempting to verify those allegations before signing off on a FISA warrant? Because they were looking for any pre-text they could to spy on the Trump administration. By signing VERIFIED APPLICATION in October of 2016 they committed fraud and should be held accountable.

And yes, some of the information has been verified. Moscow is a city in Russia.



Alexander Downer comes from Australia, as everyone knows, and Australia is entirely peopled with criminals, and criminals are used to having people not trust them...

The reference here is to Alexander Downer and George Papadopoulos's meeting at the Kensington Wine bar in May of 2016. This is where PapaD supposedly told Downer that Russian have materials that could be damaging to Clinton, but didn't say what it was. Papadopoulos denied saying anything about this however. The official narrative is that Papadopoulos knew this because of his meeting with Joseph Mifsud on April 26th. He is portrayed as being a Russian agent. If Papadopoulos had never met any Russians or Russian agents then how can one open a collusion investigation between the Trump campaign and the Kremlin? James Comey wrote this in his Washington Post op-ed:

"In April 2016, that adviser talked to a Russian agent in London, learned that the Russians had obtained “dirt” on Hillary Clinton in the form of thousands of emails and that the Russians could assist the Trump campaign through the anonymous release of information damaging to Clinton."

That advisor is George Papadopoulos and the supposed Russian agent is Joseph Mifsud. If Mifsud is not a Russian agent then this entire Trump-Russia collusion investigation was a scam from the get-go. This is currently what Barr and John Durham are trying to discover.

So do you believe Joseph Mifsud is a Russian agent or not?



The Steele Dossier makes reference to a two way flow of information between Trump and the Kremlin.

"In terms of the intelligence flow from the TRUMP team to Russia, Source E reported that much of this concerned the activities of business oligarchs and their families' activities and assets in the US, with which PUTIN and the Kremlin seemed preoccupied."



So do you believe that Joseph Mifsud is a Russian agent? Why are the people on these boards so reluctant to answer this basic question? James Comey affirmed it. But if this is un-resolved don't you support John Durham's inquiry to discover the Truth?

I still don't understand your point. Do you know why they requested a FISA warrant and why the judge granted it? You're desperately trying to construct some nefarious dark world conspiracy despite the absence of any evidence. This is like Hillary's emails. You and all the rest of the gullible GOP base built a crazy scenario about how corrupt Hillary based on the absence of any incriminating evidence. In contrast, you dismiss a massive mountain of evidence against Trump.

The hypocrisy of the Republican party has reached massive proportions

 

[acbytesla]

I have rebuttals to some of this but it belongs in another thread. I too blame her ultimately for her fumbling.

Some politicians just know how to disarm their critics. Reagan and Hillary's husband Bill were masters at this. Bill's Southern charm could adroitly flip the tables. Hillary never seemed to learn how to pivot.

 

[a_unique_person]

There were many reasons Clinton lost. Benghazi was probably on the bottom of the list.

Trump may very well believe his CT. Barr, I'm not so sure. But the bottom line, they can't produce anything close to reliable evidence.

Trump needed all of them to barely win. Take away Benghazi and Clinton would have probably won.

 

[Squeegee Beckenheim]

However, James Comey testified to Congress in 2017 that the Dossier was salacious and unverified.

Didn't Trump say that you can't believe a single word Comey says? "Lying James Comey", wasn't it?

Why would someone who has faith in Trump believe anything Comey says?

 

[Belz...]

or Russia collusion and obstruction, except for the results part.

You don't know how right you are, and how much in agreement with PhantomWolf.

 

[Belz...]

Trump Stupidati

Oh, I like this one.

However, the complement to Illuminati should be Obscuranti, should it not?

 

[Belz...]

Have you ever read the dossier? How about this bit of conspiracy theorizing..

Have you? Most of the dossier, except for a glaring exception, has been either demonstrated to be true or is now highly probable.

So Trump had been conspiring with Putin and Russian intelligence for 5 years so at least since 2011.

No, that doesn't follow at all.

 

[CORed]

Even if the Republicans did vote to remove Trump it wouldn't allow the Democrats to take over the Government. VP Pence would become President and a new VP would be nominated by Pence and confirmed by a Republican Senate. And even so, the Government itself would remain as is, with the Democrats controlling the House and the Republicans controlling the Senate.

The only thing that removing Trump would do is remove Trump. That's it, and that is not a coup in any way shape or form.

A minor detail: A new VP has to be confirmed by both House and Senate (unlike executive appointments and judges, which are confirmed by Senate only). Getting the appointment through both Democratic controlled house and Republican controlled Senate might be difficult, which would leave Pelosi as Speaker of the House as next in line. However, you are correct that, with impeachment and removal, Pence would be President, and very likely Republican nominee for 2020, in the unlikely event that the impeachment inquiry reveals that Trump is drinking the blood of babies, or whatever it is that would convince Republican senators to vote for his removal.

 

[smartcooky]

Have you ever read the dossier?

I have

How about this bit of conspiracy theorizing.

Regale me!

"...the Russian authorities had been cultivating and supporting US Republican presidential candidate, Donald TRUMP for at least 5 years..."

So Trump had been conspiring with Putin and Russian intelligence for 5 years so at least since 2011.

If you tried reading what you write back to yourself before you post, it might give you a chance to see the mistakes you are making.

When an asset is "cultivated" and supported, that doesn't necessary mean that the asset is "conspiring". What is being implied in the Steele Dossier is the relationship between a puppet and its puppetmaster. Trump is the puppet, and Putin is the one pulling the strings.

"In terms of specifics, Source A confided that the Kremlin had been feeding TRUMP and his team valuable intelligence on his opponents, including Democratic presidential candidate Hillary CLINTON, for several years..."

So the Kremlin was plotting with Trump, a reality show star and real estate developer, to run for President in 2016 to thwart the ambitions of Hillary Clinton and this all started in 2011.

Same mistake. You are assuming that because "A" is helping "B", that "B" is therefore conspiring with "A". Your assumptions don't necessarily follow.

<snipped remaining repeated mistakes>

Perhaps you can explain why Trump....

1. Keeps going out of his way to help Russia & Putin.

2. Won't allow any any American government officials to be present (other than a translator) when talking with Putin.

3. Confiscates the translator's notes after talking with Putin.

4. Is so desperate to exonerate Russia for interference in the 2016 election; interference that the REPUBLICAN led Senate Intelligence Committee has 100% confirmed.

5. Blocked efforts of the US Government to condemn Russia for seizing Ukrainian shipping in the Kerch Strait.

6. Undermined US relationships with European allies (to the benefit of Putin).

7. Dismisses the evidence and the findings of his own intelligence officials, preferring to believe the Kremlin instead.

8. Calls the US’s commitment to NATO into question (to the benefit of Putin).

9. Fails to respond to Russian human rights violations thereby creating an easier political environment for Putin to crack down his opponents.

10. Attacks the European Union and publicly supports anti-EU, Kremlin-backed parties.

11. Repeatedly praises and defends Putin, thus affording him the credibility of his standing to the US presidency.

12. repeatedly parrots Putin/Russian/Kremlin talking points across a whole range of international issues.

13, Tries to block, lift, roll back, impede, and lessen the impact of Russia sanctions every chance he gets.

14. Attacks specific NATO members that are particularly vulnerable to Russian aggression.

15. Refused to recommit to NATO’s Article 5 at the opening of their new headquarters. (Article 5 is the bit that states that an attack on one NATO member is an attack on all).

16. Openly supported the Brexit campaign - something Putin desperately wants as well.

When you've done trying to explain/handwave these away, I've got plenty more examples to post.

 

[Safe-Keeper]

When you've done trying to explain/handwave these away, I've got plenty more examples to post.

"butbutobama!!"

 

[PhantomWolf]

Getting the appointment through both Democratic controlled house and Republican controlled Senate might be difficult, which would leave Pelosi as Speaker of the House as next in line.

I actually disagree here. I don't see the Democrats playing political games if the nominated person is a reasonable choice.

 

[acbytesla]

I actually disagree here. I don't see the Democrats playing political games if the nominated person is a reasonable choice.

I can't imagine it either.

The interesting question though is who would President Pence want as his VP and who would want the job? I would imagine if Trump was impeached and removed that there might be a free for all for the GOP nomination.