Traitor Trump

[tourist]

Conway was spot on —Malignant Narcissist. Anyone? Anyone? :thumb:

I'm not familiar with your reference. Please explain. If its a quote, include the entire quote, not just parts of it supporting your position. Basic Writing 001.

 

[PlayerRep]

The Steele Dossier was the biggest part of the FISA warrant. The very first Russian allegation towards page was from the Steele Dossier.

The FISA court relied on the assurances from the FBI and signers of the application that the Steele Dossier was reliable. Apparently, there was virtually no basis for saying the Steele Dossier was correct or reliable. The application said Steele had been reliable in the past. The FISA court doesn't independently verify an application from the FBI.

Besides the Steele Dossier, the FISA warrant cited the existence of a newspaper report describing similar things. However, the basis of the newspaper article was information from Steele, who lied to the FBI initially and said he wasn't leaking.

The application didn't say that the Steele Dossier was financed by the Clinton campaign and DNC, and that it was her/their opposition research. Don't you think that would have been a relevant fact.

The application for the FISA warrant has been challenged multiple times.

The Fisa application has been released. Much of what it said isn't accurate. Note that Page, the person who was the subject of the warrant, was not charged by Mueller or anyone else.

You are way behind what has gone on.

i notice you never answer legit questions challenging your conclusions, greenie, such as about all the unreported contacts between russia and members of the trump campaign.

typical.

You may not have noticed, but I did in fact answer. I said they were mostly minor and irrelevant. The Mueller report looked at all of them, especially the potentially more important ones. The mueller report found none of them to be a big deal.

Why can’t some of you accept the Mueller report? Was his 2 year investigation with unlimited recourses not enough?

Pointing out the numerous a contacts with Russians is not even an argument. It is just plain dumb.

Happy to debate you or anyone on Russian collusion.

no, greenie, i meant you should sometimes try to answer the question that was asked, not the one you posed to yourself in your head. the question asked was, given the large number of unreported contacts with russians, be they about insignificant issues on the surface or not, don't you think that reasonably leads to enough suspicion to at least check out what's up?

All of these contacts were not known until the investigation of 2 years by Mueller was completed.

Of the few contacts that were known in 2016, some could or should have been "checked out". That certainly doesn't include getting essentially a fraudulent Fisa warrant to "spy" on a US citizen, Page. And certainly not to use opposition research, unverified, from Clinton and the DNC to get and renew the Fisa warrant.

I'm not so sure that sending an agents, including a hot blonde flirting her way in, to London to talk to Popadopolous was necessary or a good idea.

It looks like Barr, Durham and the inspector general are going to get to the bottom of this. Some senior FBI, DOJ and intel heads are going to get exposed and hammered. The FBI agent Strzok can be thrown in there too.

What they did, "spying" on a presidential candidate, is horrible, inappropriate and potentially illegal. Also, maneuvering to get a special counsel appointed.

Appointing a special counsel when there was scant actual evidence of a crime (collusion) was also completely inappropriate.

These top guys didn't follow procedures, just talked to themselves, and royally goofed up. Mark my words. I find the lack of judgement of these top guys to be embarrassing for the US.

 

[PlayerRep]

Trump is tweeting he would have liked someone to have told him that Gen. Flynn was under investigation prior to making him his national security adviser. Wtf. Obama told him in the Oval Office to stay away from Flynn and Assistant AG Sally Yates contacted Don McGahn and informed him that Flynn was compromised by the Russians because they knew he had lied to Pence and Spicer ect., about his phone calls with Russian Ambassador. Other then the fox talking points, how can anyone square the proof of facts about Flynn and Trump now claiming he didn’t know and he should have been told Flynn was a bad actor. Conway was spot on —Malignant Narcissist. Anyone? Anyone? :thumb:

Trump is asking why he wasn't warned much much sooner than that. Flynn was one of 4 Trumpees being investigated as part of the investigation that started at the end July 2016. Trump isn't talking about stuff that started after Flynn talked to the Russian ambassador at the end of December 2016.

See this article. https://www.dailycaller.com/2019/04/20/fbi-investigated-flynn-earlier-russia/

"In congressional testimony in December, Comey said that four individuals were initially placed under investigation. It is still not clear if the file against Flynn was opened at the same time as Papadopoulos’s or if that happened later.

One area of investigation may have been Flynn’s visit to Moscow in December 2015. The retired lieutenant general was paid $45,000 to attend an event hosted by RT, the Russia-owned news outlet. Flynn sat at the same table as Russian President Vladimir Putin.

It has also been reported that American intelligence authorities were provided a tip regarding Flynn’s interactions in February 2014 with a Russian-British academic at Cambridge University.

Flynn served as director of the Defense Intelligence Agency at the time of the visit to Cambridge, England. The event was hosted by Sir Richard Dearlove, the former head of MI6, and Stefan Halper, an academic who has been identified as a longtime FBI and CIA informant. Dearlove and Halper grew concerned with Flynn’s interactions with the Cambridge academic, Svetlana Lokhova, according to The Washington Post. Those concerns were conveyed to American and British intelligence, though it is not certain when that occurred."

Obama didn't provide any specifics to Trump in their meeting on Nov. 10, 2016. Obama and Flynn had had their differences, and that was known. So, Trump probably thought it was just sour grapes stuff. The Sally Yates thing was later and way too late (Jan. 26, 2017).

Dutch, you are woefully uniformed on these topics. The bulk of what you have been saying is not correct.

 

[tourist]

[

Of the few contacts that were known in 2016, some could or should have been "checked out". That certainly doesn't include getting essentially a fraudulent Fisa warrant to "spy" on a US citizen, Page. And certainly not to use opposition research, unverified, from Clinton and the DNC to get and renew the Fisa warrant.

I'm not so sure that sending an agents, including a hot blonde flirting her way in, to London to talk to Popadopolous was necessary or a good idea.

It looks like Barr, Durham and the inspector general are going to get to the bottom of this. Some senior FBI, DOJ and intel heads are going to get exposed and hammered. The FBI agent Strzok can be thrown in there too.

What they did, "spying" on a presidential candidate, is horrible, inappropriate and potentially illegal. Also, maneuvering to get a special counsel appointed.

Appointing a special counsel when there was scant actual evidence of a crime (collusion) was also completely inappropriate.

These top guys didn't follow procedures, just talked to themselves, and royally goofed up. Mark my words. I find the lack of judgement of these top guys to be embarrassing for the US.

This is the definition of the 'Deep State'.

 

[Dutch Lane]

Conway was spot on —Malignant Narcissist. Anyone? Anyone? :thumb:

I'm not familiar with your reference. Please explain. If its a quote, include the entire quote, not just parts of it supporting your position. Basic Writing 001.

Google George Conway’s ( Kellyanne’s husband) May 12 twitter.

It’s a chat board basic writing is all in the eye of the beholder, thought you followed trump. Doesn’t fox and friends report on George’s twitter shots at trump? :thumb:

 

[tourist]

Conway was spot on —Malignant Narcissist. Anyone? Anyone? :thumb:

I'm not familiar with your reference. Please explain. If its a quote, include the entire quote, not just parts of it supporting your position. Basic Writing 001.

Google George Conway’s ( Kellyanne’s husband) May 12 twitter.

It’s a chat board basic writing is all in the eye of the beholder, thought you followed trump. Doesn’t fox and friends report on George’s twitter shots at trump? :thumb:

I was familiar with her posts/statements, not his. You need to clarify your posts, significantly. Maybe retake 001.

 

[Dutch Lane]

Trump is tweeting he would have liked someone to have told him that Gen. Flynn was under investigation prior to making him his national security adviser. Wtf. Obama told him in the Oval Office to stay away from Flynn and Assistant AG Sally Yates contacted Don McGahn and informed him that Flynn was compromised by the Russians because they knew he had lied to Pence and Spicer ect., about his phone calls with Russian Ambassador. Other then the fox talking points, how can anyone square the proof of facts about Flynn and Trump now claiming he didn’t know and he should have been told Flynn was a bad actor. Conway was spot on —Malignant Narcissist. Anyone? Anyone? :thumb:

Trump is asking why he wasn't warned much much sooner than that. Flynn was one of 4 Trumpees being investigated as part of the investigation that started at the end July 2016. Trump isn't talking about stuff that started after Flynn talked to the Russian ambassador at the end of December 2016.

See this article. https://www.dailycaller.com/2019/04/20/fbi-investigated-flynn-earlier-russia/

"In congressional testimony in December, Comey said that four individuals were initially placed under investigation. It is still not clear if the file against Flynn was opened at the same time as Papadopoulos’s or if that happened later.

One area of investigation may have been Flynn’s visit to Moscow in December 2015. The retired lieutenant general was paid $45,000 to attend an event hosted by RT, the Russia-owned news outlet. Flynn sat at the same table as Russian President Vladimir Putin.

It has also been reported that American intelligence authorities were provided a tip regarding Flynn’s interactions in February 2014 with a Russian-British academic at Cambridge University.

Flynn served as director of the Defense Intelligence Agency at the time of the visit to Cambridge, England. The event was hosted by Sir Richard Dearlove, the former head of MI6, and Stefan Halper, an academic who has been identified as a longtime FBI and CIA informant. Dearlove and Halper grew concerned with Flynn’s interactions with the Cambridge academic, Svetlana Lokhova, according to The Washington Post. Those concerns were conveyed to American and British intelligence, though it is not certain when that occurred."

Obama didn't provide any specifics to Trump in their meeting on Nov. 10, 2016. Obama and Flynn had had their differences, and that was known. So, Trump probably thought it was just sour grapes stuff. The Sally Yates thing was later and way too late (Jan. 26, 2017).

Dutch, you are woefully uniformed on these topics. The bulk of what you have been saying is not correct.

Flynn told Trump/his transition team in early January 2016 that he was currently under investigation related to his lobbying/ties to Turkey going back to 2014. Or does that not count in Trump world because it was the wrong investigation? Chris Christie also warned Trump prior to and after his inauguration multiple times that Flynn should never be allowed inside the Whitehouse let alone given a position in the administration.

Do you believe that Trump didn’t direct Flynn to speak with Kislyak about the Obama administration sanctions in late 2016? I’m thinking that Flynn fell on his sword when news broke about Kislyak so as not to implicate Trump and that’s why Trump was trying to take care of him with Comey. Or do you believe Trump’s claim that the requests to Comey to let Flynn go were fabricated by Comey? I believe he testified under oath in both closed sessions and public hearings that he took contemporaneous notes of the conversations and also spoke with senior FBI officers about Trump’s requests.

What exactly do you consider as the “bulk” of what I have been saying as not correct?

 

[PlayerRep]

Trump is tweeting he would have liked someone to have told him that Gen. Flynn was under investigation prior to making him his national security adviser. Wtf. Obama told him in the Oval Office to stay away from Flynn and Assistant AG Sally Yates contacted Don McGahn and informed him that Flynn was compromised by the Russians because they knew he had lied to Pence and Spicer ect., about his phone calls with Russian Ambassador. Other then the fox talking points, how can anyone square the proof of facts about Flynn and Trump now claiming he didn’t know and he should have been told Flynn was a bad actor. Conway was spot on —Malignant Narcissist. Anyone? Anyone? :thumb:

Trump is asking why he wasn't warned much much sooner than that. Flynn was one of 4 Trumpees being investigated as part of the investigation that started at the end July 2016. Trump isn't talking about stuff that started after Flynn talked to the Russian ambassador at the end of December 2016.

See this article. https://www.dailycaller.com/2019/04/20/fbi-investigated-flynn-earlier-russia/

"In congressional testimony in December, Comey said that four individuals were initially placed under investigation. It is still not clear if the file against Flynn was opened at the same time as Papadopoulos’s or if that happened later.

One area of investigation may have been Flynn’s visit to Moscow in December 2015. The retired lieutenant general was paid $45,000 to attend an event hosted by RT, the Russia-owned news outlet. Flynn sat at the same table as Russian President Vladimir Putin.

It has also been reported that American intelligence authorities were provided a tip regarding Flynn’s interactions in February 2014 with a Russian-British academic at Cambridge University.

Flynn served as director of the Defense Intelligence Agency at the time of the visit to Cambridge, England. The event was hosted by Sir Richard Dearlove, the former head of MI6, and Stefan Halper, an academic who has been identified as a longtime FBI and CIA informant. Dearlove and Halper grew concerned with Flynn’s interactions with the Cambridge academic, Svetlana Lokhova, according to The Washington Post. Those concerns were conveyed to American and British intelligence, though it is not certain when that occurred."

Obama didn't provide any specifics to Trump in their meeting on Nov. 10, 2016. Obama and Flynn had had their differences, and that was known. So, Trump probably thought it was just sour grapes stuff. The Sally Yates thing was later and way too late (Jan. 26, 2017).

Dutch, you are woefully uniformed on these topics. The bulk of what you have been saying is not correct.

Flynn told Trump/his transition team in early January 2016 that he was currently under investigation related to his lobbying/ties to Turkey going back to 2014. Or does that not count in Trump world because it was the wrong investigation? Chris Christie also warned Trump prior to and after his inauguration multiple times that Flynn should never be allowed inside the Whitehouse let alone given a position in the administration.

Do you believe that Trump didn’t direct Flynn to speak with Kislyak about the Obama administration sanctions in late 2016? I’m thinking that Flynn fell on his sword when news broke about Kislyak so as not to implicate Trump and that’s why Trump was trying to take care of him with Comey. Or do you believe Trump’s claim that the requests to Comey to let Flynn go were fabricated by Comey? I believe he testified under oath in both closed sessions and public hearings that he took contemporaneous notes of the conversations and also spoke with senior FBI officers about Trump’s requests.

What exactly do you consider as the “bulk” of what I have been saying as not correct?

Doesn't count. Different investigation. Wasn't as serious. Didn't involve Russia. Trump has been saying for months that he should have been told about the Russian investigation earlier. And he has also said he should have been told about the Russian ambassador investigation sooner.

After presidential elections, presidents often get a running start. It's done by every president. Whether Trump told him to talk to the Ambassador or not doesn't matter, as Trump wouldn't have gotten in any trouble. What was wrong was how the FBI came to talk to Flynn, I believe at the White House, and essentially set him up. they had no business doing that. In point of fact, in Flynn's charging or plea docs, it says Flynn had a conversation with.a senior member of the Presidential Transition Team, not Trump. So, yes I don't believe Trump directed him to contact the Ambassador. They didn't even talk about it.

Christie recommended Flynn for another position. "Gov. Chris Christie of New Jersey, who led the transition in the days after the election, did not recommend that Mr. Flynn be appointed national security adviser, preferring instead that he be slotted as director of national intelligence, a Cabinet-level job but one with narrower responsibilities."

This is what was behind what Obama said to Trump about Flynn. Had nothing to do with Russia or investigations. "Mr. Flynn’s name came up during a broader discussion about personnel issues, the former administration officials said. Mr. Obama’s concerns about Mr. Flynn, which were first reported by NBC News, were largely about his management of the D.I.A. and predated the later concerns about his contacts with the Russian ambassador, Sergey I. Kislyak."

This doesn't say January 2016. "Michael T. Flynn told President Trump’s transition team weeks before the inauguration that he was under federal investigation for secretly working as a paid lobbyist for Turkey during the campaign, according to two people familiar with the case. Despite this warning, which came about a month after the Justice Department notified Mr. Flynn of the inquiry, Mr. Trump made Mr. Flynn his national security adviser."

Flynn had the highest security clearance from the Obama administration. If they were concerned about him, why didn't they revoke the security clearance?

Examples of the bulk of things you get wrong, are virtually everything you said in the last few posts.

 

[argh!]

i notice you never answer legit questions challenging your conclusions, greenie, such as about all the unreported contacts between russia and members of the trump campaign.

typical.

You may not have noticed, but I did in fact answer. I said they were mostly minor and irrelevant. The Mueller report looked at all of them, especially the potentially more important ones. The mueller report found none of them to be a big deal.

Why can’t some of you accept the Mueller report? Was his 2 year investigation with unlimited recourses not enough?

Pointing out the numerous a contacts with Russians is not even an argument. It is just plain dumb.

Happy to debate you or anyone on Russian collusion.

no, greenie, i meant you should sometimes try to answer the question that was asked, not the one you posed to yourself in your head. the question asked was, given the large number of unreported contacts with russians, be they about insignificant issues on the surface or not, don't you think that reasonably leads to enough suspicion to at least check out what's up?

All of these contacts were not known until the investigation of 2 years by Mueller was completed.

Of the few contacts that were known in 2016, some could or should have been "checked out". That certainly doesn't include getting essentially a fraudulent Fisa warrant to "spy" on a US citizen, Page. And certainly not to use opposition research, unverified, from Clinton and the DNC to get and renew the Fisa warrant.

I'm not so sure that sending an agents, including a hot blonde flirting her way in, to London to talk to Popadopolous was necessary or a good idea.

It looks like Barr, Durham and the inspector general are going to get to the bottom of this. Some senior FBI, DOJ and intel heads are going to get exposed and hammered. The FBI agent Strzok can be thrown in there too.

What they did, "spying" on a presidential candidate, is horrible, inappropriate and potentially illegal. Also, maneuvering to get a special counsel appointed.

Appointing a special counsel when there was scant actual evidence of a crime (collusion) was also completely inappropriate.

These top guys didn't follow procedures, just talked to themselves, and royally goofed up. Mark my words. I find the lack of judgement of these top guys to be embarrassing for the US.

you still didn't answer the question.

 

[argh!]

I think they should just keep investigating. After all, it is only a waste of millions of tax dollars! I sure as hell don't want the congress and senate to the job they were elected to do like Govern. No, just keep on bickering for the next 6 years and run up that National Debt for doing nothing. Brilliant!

it has become tradition, unfortunately, and the republicans are just as bad as the dems. how many times did they pointlessly vote to repeal obamacare, when obama was in office? there are other examples, of course, hillary hillary hillary, etc... it has gotten old, and i wish both parties would stop the stupidity.

Agreed! So lets start the stop of stupidity here. We voted Trump in because we are sick of the Politics as usual in DC. Because so many hate Trump because he changes things, (People fear change) they won't ever let him do his job. I wish term limits would be enacted! Only way problems will get fixed.

oh, i am pretty sure i understand why trump won, and i (sort of) understand his appeal. and while i agree people fear change, the bigger issue with trump is the endless lies and narcissism. in a lot of ways, he's even more of a politician than the pathetic ones in congress.

as for non-traditional candidates, one guy who is kind of interesting is andrew yang. while i disagree with some of his views, and am unsure about universal basic income, he puts his positions out there for people to see (over 70 positions on his website), and backs them with logic. he's the only guy so far who is actually thinking of what the future will look like, with artificial intelligence, job losses, etc, and also the only guy running who seems to really understand why trump got elected - and he's courting the same voters. of all the strange things, he's asian-american, but white nationalists support the guy, although he disavows them. anyway, unlike sanders et al, he isn't running a whiny anti-trump campaign, he's proposing solutions, and openly states he's willing to change his mind based on logical arguments.

 

[PlayerRep]

You may not have noticed, but I did in fact answer. I said they were mostly minor and irrelevant. The Mueller report looked at all of them, especially the potentially more important ones. The mueller report found none of them to be a big deal.

Why can’t some of you accept the Mueller report? Was his 2 year investigation with unlimited recourses not enough?

Pointing out the numerous a contacts with Russians is not even an argument. It is just plain dumb.

Happy to debate you or anyone on Russian collusion.

no, greenie, i meant you should sometimes try to answer the question that was asked, not the one you posed to yourself in your head. the question asked was, given the large number of unreported contacts with russians, be they about insignificant issues on the surface or not, don't you think that reasonably leads to enough suspicion to at least check out what's up?

All of these contacts were not known until the investigation of 2 years by Mueller was completed.

Of the few contacts that were known in 2016, some could or should have been "checked out". That certainly doesn't include getting essentially a fraudulent Fisa warrant to "spy" on a US citizen, Page. And certainly not to use opposition research, unverified, from Clinton and the DNC to get and renew the Fisa warrant.

I'm not so sure that sending an agents, including a hot blonde flirting her way in, to London to talk to Popadopolous was necessary or a good idea.

It looks like Barr, Durham and the inspector general are going to get to the bottom of this. Some senior FBI, DOJ and intel heads are going to get exposed and hammered. The FBI agent Strzok can be thrown in there too.

What they did, "spying" on a presidential candidate, is horrible, inappropriate and potentially illegal. Also, maneuvering to get a special counsel appointed.

Appointing a special counsel when there was scant actual evidence of a crime (collusion) was also completely inappropriate.

These top guys didn't follow procedures, just talked to themselves, and royally goofed up. Mark my words. I find the lack of judgement of these top guys to be embarrassing for the US.

you still didn't answer the question.

Yes, I did.

Your question: "given the large number of unreported contacts with russians, be they about insignificant issues on the surface or not, don't you think that reasonably leads to enough suspicion to at least check out what's up?"

My answer: "Of the few contacts that were known in 2016, some could or should have been "checked out". "

What don't you understand?

 

[argh!]

no, greenie, i meant you should sometimes try to answer the question that was asked, not the one you posed to yourself in your head. the question asked was, given the large number of unreported contacts with russians, be they about insignificant issues on the surface or not, don't you think that reasonably leads to enough suspicion to at least check out what's up?

All of these contacts were not known until the investigation of 2 years by Mueller was completed.

Of the few contacts that were known in 2016, some could or should have been "checked out". That certainly doesn't include getting essentially a fraudulent Fisa warrant to "spy" on a US citizen, Page. And certainly not to use opposition research, unverified, from Clinton and the DNC to get and renew the Fisa warrant.

I'm not so sure that sending an agents, including a hot blonde flirting her way in, to London to talk to Popadopolous was necessary or a good idea.

It looks like Barr, Durham and the inspector general are going to get to the bottom of this. Some senior FBI, DOJ and intel heads are going to get exposed and hammered. The FBI agent Strzok can be thrown in there too.

What they did, "spying" on a presidential candidate, is horrible, inappropriate and potentially illegal. Also, maneuvering to get a special counsel appointed.

Appointing a special counsel when there was scant actual evidence of a crime (collusion) was also completely inappropriate.

These top guys didn't follow procedures, just talked to themselves, and royally goofed up. Mark my words. I find the lack of judgement of these top guys to be embarrassing for the US.

you still didn't answer the question.

Yes, I did.

Your question: "given the large number of unreported contacts with russians, be they about insignificant issues on the surface or not, don't you think that reasonably leads to enough suspicion to at least check out what's up?"

My answer: "Of the few contacts that were known in 2016, some could or should have been "checked out". "

What don't you understand?

so limit the inquiry to what you already know? strange.

 

[PlayerRep]

All of these contacts were not known until the investigation of 2 years by Mueller was completed.

Of the few contacts that were known in 2016, some could or should have been "checked out". That certainly doesn't include getting essentially a fraudulent Fisa warrant to "spy" on a US citizen, Page. And certainly not to use opposition research, unverified, from Clinton and the DNC to get and renew the Fisa warrant.

I'm not so sure that sending an agents, including a hot blonde flirting her way in, to London to talk to Popadopolous was necessary or a good idea.

It looks like Barr, Durham and the inspector general are going to get to the bottom of this. Some senior FBI, DOJ and intel heads are going to get exposed and hammered. The FBI agent Strzok can be thrown in there too.

What they did, "spying" on a presidential candidate, is horrible, inappropriate and potentially illegal. Also, maneuvering to get a special counsel appointed.

Appointing a special counsel when there was scant actual evidence of a crime (collusion) was also completely inappropriate.

These top guys didn't follow procedures, just talked to themselves, and royally goofed up. Mark my words. I find the lack of judgement of these top guys to be embarrassing for the US.

you still didn't answer the question.

Yes, I did.

Your question: "given the large number of unreported contacts with russians, be they about insignificant issues on the surface or not, don't you think that reasonably leads to enough suspicion to at least check out what's up?"

My answer: "Of the few contacts that were known in 2016, some could or should have been "checked out". "

What don't you understand?

so limit the inquiry to what you already know? strange.

Several things. Criminal investigations, especially special counsel investigations, are not supposed to be started at the drop of a hat.

A special counsel is appointed to investigate a crime. An SC is limited in what it can do. A SC isn't appointed to do an "inquiry" or even to do a general investigation. Inquiries can be done in multiple ways, including by Congressional committees as well as independent committees which have been appointed to investigate varied things, such as 911. Another type of investigation should have occurred, not a SC. I said that from the get-go.

The SC was appointed on flimsy grounds, and I think Barr, Durham and/or the Inspector General are going to criticize Rosenstein. He panicked at best. Don't think he was corrupt, but he goofed up. And Comey, the head of the FBI and who signed the warrant request multiple times, claims he didn't know the Steele Dossier was paid for the Clinton/DNC. What kind of FBI signs such an important warrant application, and doesn't even knows the genesis of the primary evidence? he's either lying or incompetent.

For what had occurred, which turned out not to be much, I don't think there should have been any big investigation of the Trump campaign. The bar just has to be higher for a political campaign to be investigated. I suspect Barr will create new rules and procedures after his review is done. Note that Barr and others, even Durham, are not conducting a criminal investigation at this time.

The FISA warrant against Page was obtained improperly. They didn't follow the rules and procedures. Jeez, you can't use unverified opposition research as the main thrust of getting a Fisa warrant against a US citizen. The bar is very high. Some top people at FBI/DOJ have admitted that no Fisa warrant would have been sought without the (unverified) Steele Dossier.

The Mueller investigation was horrible for the country. It distracted the US for 2 years. I assume you're not okay with Trump's administration investigating, and trying to set up, Trump's opponent in 2 years?

Note that not one American was charged with any crime related to the Russian collusion investigation. Not Page, who has not been charged with anything. Not Flynn. Not the lower level people. Nobody.
Nada.

Also note how many members of Congress are currently trying to interfere with Barr's investigation. Are they obstructing justice? They are saying Trump obstructing justice for doing the same thing. Are they willing to admit that they are obstructing?

 

[PlayerRep]

Article on the Steele Dossier. Below are quotes from the article. It's unbelievably that many at the top of US intel and FBI believed this BS.

"Ten days before the FBI used the Christopher Steele anti-Trump “dossier” to secure a Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) warrant to spy on Trump campaign adviser Carter Page, a State Department official wrote in a memo that a key claim in the dossier was false, a report said.

“This once again shows officials at the FBI and (Department of Justice) DOJ were well aware the dossier was a lie — from very early on in the process all the way to when they made the conscious decision to include it in a FISA application,” Meadows said. “The fact that Christopher Steele and his partisan research document were treated in any way seriously by our Intelligence Community leaders amounts to malpractice.”

Later she quoted Steele as suggesting he was “managing” four priorities — “Client needs, FBI, WashPo/NYT, source protection,” her handwritten notes show.

Those same notes suggest Steele spun some wild theories to State, including one that the Russians had a “plant in DNC” and had assembled an “HRC dossier.”

In her typed memo, Kavalec quoted Steele as saying: “The Russians have succeeded in placing an agent inside the DNC.”

Steele “offered Kavalec other wild information that easily could have been debunked before the FISA application — and eventually was, in many cases, after the media reported the allegations,” Solomon noted.

Those allegations include:

Trump lawyer Michael Cohen traveled to Prague to meet with Russians.
Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort owed the Russians $100 million and was the “go-between” from Russian President Vladimir Putin to Trump.
Carter Page met with a senior Russian businessman tied to Putin.
The Russians secretly communicated with Trump through a computer system.

Special counsel Robert Mueller’s report “dispelled all those wild theories while hardly mentioning Steele, except for a passing reference to his dossier being ‘unverified,’ ” Solomon noted. “That’s significant, because the FISA request from October 2016 that rested heavily on Steele’s information was marked ‘verified application’ before the FBI submitted it to the court.”


https://www.worldtribune.com/state-dept-memo-to-fbi-on-steele-dossier-flagged-error-10-days-before-fisa/

 

[PlayerRep]

Use of Steele Dossier in US intel assessment-report.

It looks like head of CIA Brennan insisted that the unverified Steele Dossier be used and highlighted in the assessment. In a draft of the report, journalist Bob Woodward said: "they actually put the dossier on page two in kind of a breakout box," and a two-page summary was attached as an exhibit. These were not in the final version of the report, but it's clear the dossier was used in assembling the report. Brennan is now saying Comey was insisting on this. There are apparently Comey emails at the time, to his staff, saying Brennan had insisted using it in the report. Brennan has some testimony to Congress under oath denying this, and some think he may have perjured himself.

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/bob-woodward-steele-dossier-appeared-in-draft-of-us-intel-assessment-on-russian-meddling

 

[argh!]

you still didn't answer the question.

Yes, I did.

Your question: "given the large number of unreported contacts with russians, be they about insignificant issues on the surface or not, don't you think that reasonably leads to enough suspicion to at least check out what's up?"

My answer: "Of the few contacts that were known in 2016, some could or should have been "checked out". "

What don't you understand?

so limit the inquiry to what you already know? strange.

Several things. Criminal investigations, especially special counsel investigations, are not supposed to be started at the drop of a hat.

A special counsel is appointed to investigate a crime. An SC is limited in what it can do. A SC isn't appointed to do an "inquiry" or even to do a general investigation. Inquiries can be done in multiple ways, including by Congressional committees as well as independent committees which have been appointed to investigate varied things, such as 911. Another type of investigation should have occurred, not a SC. I said that from the get-go.

The SC was appointed on flimsy grounds, and I think Barr, Durham and/or the Inspector General are going to criticize Rosenstein. He panicked at best. Don't think he was corrupt, but he goofed up. And Comey, the head of the FBI and who signed the warrant request multiple times, claims he didn't know the Steele Dossier was paid for the Clinton/DNC. What kind of FBI signs such an important warrant application, and doesn't even knows the genesis of the primary evidence? he's either lying or incompetent.

For what had occurred, which turned out not to be much, I don't think there should have been any big investigation of the Trump campaign. The bar just has to be higher for a political campaign to be investigated. I suspect Barr will create new rules and procedures after his review is done. Note that Barr and others, even Durham, are not conducting a criminal investigation at this time.

The FISA warrant against Page was obtained improperly. They didn't follow the rules and procedures. Jeez, you can't use unverified opposition research as the main thrust of getting a Fisa warrant against a US citizen. The bar is very high. Some top people at FBI/DOJ have admitted that no Fisa warrant would have been sought without the (unverified) Steele Dossier.

The Mueller investigation was horrible for the country. It distracted the US for 2 years. I assume you're not okay with Trump's administration investigating, and trying to set up, Trump's opponent in 2 years?

Note that not one American was charged with any crime related to the Russian collusion investigation. Not Page, who has not been charged with anything. Not Flynn. Not the lower level people. Nobody.
Nada.

Also note how many members of Congress are currently trying to interfere with Barr's investigation. Are they obstructing justice? They are saying Trump obstructing justice for doing the same thing. Are they willing to admit that they are obstructing?

wasn't the mueller investigation focused on russian interference in the election, with the power to investigate any other potential crime that appeared during the investigation? that is a much different initial focus than a direct investigation of the trump campaign, but it appears the ones who were closest to russians with interests in interfering with the election turned out to be related to the trump campaign.

as for comey, my best guess is that trump won the electoral college due to comey (not the popular vote, obviously).

 

[PlayerRep]

Yes, I did.

Your question: "given the large number of unreported contacts with russians, be they about insignificant issues on the surface or not, don't you think that reasonably leads to enough suspicion to at least check out what's up?"

My answer: "Of the few contacts that were known in 2016, some could or should have been "checked out". "

What don't you understand?

so limit the inquiry to what you already know? strange.

Several things. Criminal investigations, especially special counsel investigations, are not supposed to be started at the drop of a hat.

A special counsel is appointed to investigate a crime. An SC is limited in what it can do. A SC isn't appointed to do an "inquiry" or even to do a general investigation. Inquiries can be done in multiple ways, including by Congressional committees as well as independent committees which have been appointed to investigate varied things, such as 911. Another type of investigation should have occurred, not a SC. I said that from the get-go.

The SC was appointed on flimsy grounds, and I think Barr, Durham and/or the Inspector General are going to criticize Rosenstein. He panicked at best. Don't think he was corrupt, but he goofed up. And Comey, the head of the FBI and who signed the warrant request multiple times, claims he didn't know the Steele Dossier was paid for the Clinton/DNC. What kind of FBI signs such an important warrant application, and doesn't even knows the genesis of the primary evidence? he's either lying or incompetent.

For what had occurred, which turned out not to be much, I don't think there should have been any big investigation of the Trump campaign. The bar just has to be higher for a political campaign to be investigated. I suspect Barr will create new rules and procedures after his review is done. Note that Barr and others, even Durham, are not conducting a criminal investigation at this time.

The FISA warrant against Page was obtained improperly. They didn't follow the rules and procedures. Jeez, you can't use unverified opposition research as the main thrust of getting a Fisa warrant against a US citizen. The bar is very high. Some top people at FBI/DOJ have admitted that no Fisa warrant would have been sought without the (unverified) Steele Dossier.

The Mueller investigation was horrible for the country. It distracted the US for 2 years. I assume you're not okay with Trump's administration investigating, and trying to set up, Trump's opponent in 2 years?

Note that not one American was charged with any crime related to the Russian collusion investigation. Not Page, who has not been charged with anything. Not Flynn. Not the lower level people. Nobody.
Nada.

Also note how many members of Congress are currently trying to interfere with Barr's investigation. Are they obstructing justice? They are saying Trump obstructing justice for doing the same thing. Are they willing to admit that they are obstructing?

wasn't the mueller investigation focused on russian interference in the election, with the power to investigate any other potential crime that appeared during the investigation? that is a much different initial focus than a direct investigation of the trump campaign, but it appears the ones who were closest to russians with interests in interfering with the election turned out to be related to the trump campaign.

as for comey, my best guess is that trump won the electoral college due to comey (not the popular vote, obviously).

Nope, that is not accurate. See the below scope section. Note the (i), the first prong, which is to investigate the Trump campaign.

"(b) The Special Counsel is authorized to conduct the investigation confirmed by then-FBI Director James B. Comey in testimony before the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence on March 20, 2017, including: (i) any links and/or coordination between the Russian government and individuals associated with the campaign of President Donald Trump; and (ii) any matters that arose or may arise directly from the investigation; and (iii) any other matters within the scope of 28 C.F.R. § 600.4(a)."

 

[Dutch Lane]

:thumb:

This NY Times link allows you to put cursor on circle and see what the contact was about. For example, Hope Hicks get an email from Russia passing along Putin's congress to Trump for winning.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/01/26/us/politics/trump-contacts-russians-wikileaks.html

Thanks for the link. So there were now over 140 contacts? Still if they were all so innocuous why did they lie at every turn and tried to deny them when they became known to the public? Why did page initially deny about meeting with Russian officials and then later acknowledged that he did in fact meet with senior Russians connected Rosneft? Why did Flynn lie? My guess is he lied to protect Trump because Trump put him up to telling Kislyak not to react to the Obama sanctions and fell on his sword to protect and insulate Trump. Why else did he lie about the phone calls? Does anyone also have a different take on why Flynn lied about that? :thumb:

If they were a big deal, why didn't Mueller conclude there was Russian collusion?

People lie all the time, for all kinds of reasons. In the case of Flynn, he got set up.

I think the arguments that there were so many contacts, and some people lied, are two of the dumbest reasons to argue that there must have been collusion.

Trump lies all the time for what seems to be no apparent reason. In this day and age, a lie doesn't prove anything.

Michael Flynn agreed to be interviewed by the FBI on January 24, 2017, four day after he had officially assumed the duties as National Security Adviser to the President. During the interview, Flynn made several false statements pertaining to his communications with the Russian ambassador.

First, Flynn made two false statements about his conversations with Russian Ambassador Kislyak in late December 2016, at at time when the United States had imposed sanctions on Russia for interfering with the 2016 presidential election and Russia was considering its response. Flynn told the agents that he did not ask Kislyak to refrain form escalating the situation in response to the United State's imposition of sanctions. That statement was false. On December 29, 2016, Flynn called Kislyak to request Russian restraint. Flynn made the call immediately after speaking to a senior Transition Team official (K.T. McFarland) about the call immediately after speaking to Kislyak. Flynn then spoke with McFarland after the Kislyak call to report on the substance of that conversation. Flynn also falsely told the FBI that he did not remember a follow-up conversation in which Kislyak stated that Russia had chosen to moderate its response to the U.S. sanctions as a result of Flynn's request. On December 31, 2016, Flynn in fact had such a conversation with Kislyak, and he againspoke with McFarland within hours of the call to relay the substance of his conversation with Kislyak.

Second, Flynn made false statements about calls he had previously made to representatives of Russia and other countries regarding a resolution submitted by Egypt to the United Nations Security Council on December 21, 2016. Specifically, Flynn stated that he only asked the countries' positions on how they would vote on the resolution and that he did not request that any of the countries take any particular action on the resolution. That statement was false. On December 22, 2016, Flynn called Kislyak, informed him of the incoming Trump Administration's opposition to the resolution, and requested that Russia vote against or delay the resolution. Flynn also falsely stated that Kislyak never described Russia's response to his December 22 request regarding the resolution. Kislyak in fact told Flynn in a conversation on December 23, 2016, that Russia would not vote against the resolution if it came to a vote.

Flynn made these false statements to the FBI at a time when he was serving as National Security Adviser and when the FBI had an open investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election, including the nature of any links between the Trump Campaign and Russia. Flynn's false statements and omissions impeded and otherwise had a material impact on that ongoing investigation. They also came shortly after Flynn made separate submissions to the Department of Justice, pursuant to FARA, that also contained materially false statements and omissions. Based on the totally of that conduct, the Office decided to charge Flynn with making false statements to the FBI, in violation of 18 U.S.C. Sec. 1001(a). On December 1, 2017, and pursuant to a plea agreement, Flynn plead guilty to that charge and also admitted his false statements to the Department in his FARA filing.

So PR you really think Flynn got set up? Please refrain from Fox talking points or Daily Caller pieces in your retort, and give us some proof of facts to support your claim if you can. Tourist jump in here too if you can. Thanks for playing. :thumb:

 

[tourist]

Of course! "Jump in her".....her what? :lol:
PRs doing fine. :thumb:

 

[Dutch Lane]

Of course! "Jump in her".....her what? :lol:
PRs doing fine. :thumb:

Typo lol : meant to say jump in here. :thumb: