|
Post by soonernvolved on Jul 19, 2018 13:30:20 GMT -6
So, when is Bernie Sanders going to be targeted by Mueller? The Hoarse Whisperer @hoarsewisperer Umm, guys... Robert Mueller just submitted his list of evidence for the Paul Manafort trial and look whose name is all over the first 30 items. Tad Devine. Bernie Sanders' Chief Strategist. 11:39 AM - Jul 19, 2018 7,130 6,032 people are talking about this
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Jul 19, 2018 13:31:12 GMT -6
pjmedia.com/trending/bernie-sanders-strategist-named-in-new-cache-of-mueller-evidence/Tad Devine, Sanders’ chief strategist, appears from exhibit 5 onward. Mueller listed a memo from 2006 involving Manafort, Devine, and former Ukrainian President Viktor Vanukovych, Russian President Vladimir Putin’s puppet in Ukraine. Mueller’s evidence lists email after email between Devine and Manafort, connecting them both to Konstantin Kilimnik, a Putin-connected operative whom Manafort described as “my Russian brain.”
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Jul 19, 2018 13:32:07 GMT -6
The Hoarse Whisperer @hoarsewisperer For the folks chiming in to essentially say "so what?":
This is evidence of wrongdoing in a criminal trial.
When the government is serving up your Campaign Strategist's communications as evidence proving criminal activity, you've got a problem. 11:52 AM - Jul 19, 2018
2,863
796 people are talking about this ......
Time for Sanders to answer some questions from Mueller and feel the Bern!
|
|
|
Post by trumped on Jul 19, 2018 14:59:59 GMT -6
Jim Hoft Jim Hoft @gatewaypundit · 41m Dirty Cop Mueller Releases 500 Pieces of Evidence in Manafort Show Trial... AND NOT ONE Deals With Collusion=> SHUT IT DOWN
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Jul 19, 2018 15:02:50 GMT -6
In relation to the previous post: thehill.com/policy/national-security/397812-mueller-releases-list-of-more-than-500-pieces-of-evidence-againstSpecial counsel Robert Mueller’s office on Wednesday released an itemized list of evidence prosecutors are considering for use against Paul Manafort as the former Trump aide’s Washington D.C. trial approaches. The list, first reported by Politico, contains about 500 items ranging from immunity agreements to texts between Manafort, Ukraine’s former president and a fellow U.S. political consultant. Other items on the list include photographs and documents of expensive purchases prosecutors say Manafort made with money he attempted to hide from U.S. authorities after working for pro-Russia political parties in Ukraine. Manafort is charged with a number of financial crimes, including bank fraud and money laundering. ....... Still no collusion charges.
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Jul 19, 2018 15:06:53 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by trumped on Jul 19, 2018 15:07:36 GMT -6
^^^ to the one above this one you posted too fast lol. “No cullusion comment”
And there never will be. This whole thing is a delaying tactic since they have no agwnda this is delay til midterms in hopes of taking over House to impeach Trump on fake charges. Its an endless cycle of intentional fail, because their unhinged army will spin it til the next manufactured crisis. All to delay. And to keep attwntion away from Trumps winning.
Just today another 100 remains were returned from NK. Not a peep out of Leftist press
|
|
|
Post by trumped on Jul 19, 2018 15:41:08 GMT -6
Adam Carter @with_integrity · 3h Q: Who was charged under USC 52 in the indictment? A: Nobody
Q: What is USC 52? A: It's the US code for election related crimes.
Q: What does that mean? A: It means anyone that's told you the indictment charges people for election interference has lied.
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Jul 19, 2018 19:17:17 GMT -6
Hmmm Conversation Falco Falco @nick_Falco 1) BOMBSHELL- From DECEMBER 2015–The word LURES is redacted by FBI but not OIG "OCONUS LURES" OCONUS= Outside Contiguous US LURES= In this context LURES = SPIES - multiple Is this an admission that the FBI wanted to run a baited Sting Op using foreign agents against Trump?
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Jul 19, 2018 19:19:03 GMT -6
Falco @nick_Falco 2) Kevin Brock (FMR ASST DIR OF COUNTER-INTELLIGENCE FBI)
"If the FBI opened a Source or tasked a Source to gather information particulary from a US person, before opening a formal investigation, then that would be a violation of the guidelines."
Looks like we have a VIOLATION
/video/1
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Jul 19, 2018 19:19:51 GMT -6
Conversation Tony Shaffer Tony Shaffer @t_S_P_O_O_K_Y I'd call this evidence of collusion and wrongdoing... Falco @nick_Falco 1) BOMBSHELL- From DECEMBER 2015–The word LURES is redacted by FBI but not OIG
"OCONUS LURES" Show this thread
|
|
|
Post by okie52 on Jul 19, 2018 21:46:04 GMT -6
Comey , the leaker, continues to show he’s a POS.
Yet he’s so incompetent he couldn’t decide whether he wanted to harm Hillary or Trump through his actions.
I will say he probably sucked both Ws and Obama’s cock as a good big government suppporter would.
|
|
|
Post by kcrufnek on Jul 20, 2018 1:22:25 GMT -6
Well, this is interesting... I found gaucho's source for his/her copy and paste plagiarisms www.surlyhorns.com/board/index.php?/topic/172-indictments-pending-in-the-robert-mueller-investigation/&page=117Post #5837 (posted 30 minutes before gaucho posted it here) I wish we could go back 5 years and tell the olds that Lou Dobbs, Fox News, the Republican President, and the GOP would refuse to speak out against Russian military intelligence trying to screw with our elections. oh wait, I have better things to do with a time machine than convincing simpletons of something they wouldn’t accept. Post #5852 I feel now's a good time to remind everyone that Mueller is a true patriot who has served his country and has stood up for what is right in a more heroic fashion than all of the MAGA-hat wearing, wrap-themselves-in-the-flag, Toby Keith-listening, I-hate-the-blacks-oops-I-mean-NFL-players-because-they-won't-stand-for-the-anthem, I-need-7-AR-15s-even-though-I-live-in-Southlake-NRA-members combined. Two posts this dolt tried to pass off for his own
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Jul 20, 2018 5:04:14 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Jul 20, 2018 5:05:32 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Jul 20, 2018 5:15:19 GMT -6
www.dailywire.com/news/33323/breaking-mueller-offers-immunity-tony-podesta-ryan-saavedra?ampFox News' Tucker Carlson reported exclusively on Thursday night that two sources confirmed to the network that Podesta was offered immunity to testify against Manafort for a "near identical crime." "In other words, for a near identical crime, Bill and Hillary's friend could escape and emerge completely unscathed while Paul Manafort may rot in jail," Carlson said. "Only one of them made the mistake of chairing Donald Trump's presidential campaign." Last October, Podesta stepped down from the Podesta Group, an organization that he founded, after it came under investigation by Mueller at the same time that Manafort and Rick Gates were indicted for financial crimes. Politico reported: The investigation into Podesta and his firm grew out of investigators’ examination of Manafort’s finances. Manafort organized a PR campaign on behalf of a nonprofit called the European Centre for a Modern Ukraine. Podesta Group was one of several firms that were paid to do work on the PR campaign to promote Ukraine in the U.S. Podesta Group filed paperwork with the Justice Department in April stating that it had done work for the European Centre for a Modern Ukraine that also benefited the same Ukrainian political party that Manafort once advised. This latest development in Mueller’s Russia investigation may add to the overwhelming allegations of political bias that he has been accused of as his team of prosecutors is comprised of only Democrat prosecutors with no Republicans on his staff.
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Jul 20, 2018 5:57:39 GMT -6
If reports turn out to be accurate, this would make the sixth Clinton linked associate that received an immunity deal: Paul Combetta, the computer specialist who deleted Hillary Clinton’s emails when they were under subpoena, was granted immunity by the Obama DOJ in September 2016. www.nytimes.com/2016/09/09/us/politics/hillary-clinton-emails-investigation.htmlCheryl Mills, Hillary Clinton’s former chief of staff and attorney, received an immunity deal from the Justice Department during the year-long FBI investigation of Clinton’s server before she even testified. www.washingtonexaminer.com/five-clinton-aides-received-immunity-deals-in-fbi-probeJohn Bentel director of the State Department’s Office of Information Resources Management, was given immunity by the Obama DOJ. Heather Samuelson, a senior Hillary Clinton adviser, was also given immunity agreements, bringing the total number of witnesses who were protected by deals to five. Bryan Pagliano, Clinton’s former IT aide who set up her email server, received immunity by the Obama DOJ. ........ The Obama DOJ interviewed 17 top witnesses in the Hillary Clinton server investigation AFTER the decision was made to exonerate her. thehill.com/homenews/administration/367141-congressional-investigators-find-irregularities-in-fbis-handling-of
|
|
|
Post by kcrufnek on Jul 20, 2018 7:26:21 GMT -6
I had seen reports that both Podestas were getting a deal.
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Jul 20, 2018 7:39:47 GMT -6
I had seen reports that both Podestas were getting a deal. I’ve seen similar reports as well. It wouldn’t surprise me if in the near future both brothers are given immunity
|
|
|
Post by sooner98 on Jul 20, 2018 7:53:58 GMT -6
Can someone explain how Rosenstein could have legally added the memo to the Special Counsel's mandate to investigate Russian interference to also go after Manafort's past dealings? Wouldn't that be the job of the Attorney General? (yes, yes, I know that Jeff Sessions has proven himself to not be a real, actual Attorney General, but still...) Does this mean that Rosenstein can add anything he damn well pleases to Mueller's mandate? That's pretty frightening.
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Jul 20, 2018 8:30:46 GMT -6
www.breitbart.com/radio/2018/07/20/exclusive-darrell-issa-fbi-probably-hacked-the-russian-hackers-to-gather-evidence/amp/Darrell Issa: FBI Probably Hacked the Russian Hackers to Gather Evidence .... Excerpts: Issa said, “The premise of the Russian probe is all about a collusion for which there’s not one piece of evidence after a year and a half, and the original investigation was tainted by Peter Strzok and his activities. A lot of people missed it, but it’s not an accident that the downgrading of the offense by Hillary Clinton from a crime to a non-crime — that language change — occurred on Peter Strzok’s own computer, and he finally said, ‘Well, according to the metadata, it was my computer’ Well, of course it was your computer; you did it.” Issa continued, “When you look at this, whether it’s the Department of Justice, the FBI, or even the same intelligence networks that Democrats constantly remind us said there were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq that were, for the most part, not found, so when the president says the equivalent of ‘trust, but verify’ — to use a Reagan term — why wouldn’t he? Why wouldn’t he always say, ‘I want to have second sources, and I want to verify things, and that you take no one at blind faith when there are lives in such great numbers at stake.’?” Issa warned of reciprocal consequences from foreign states should President Donald Trump demand the extradition of Russian nationals indicted via Mueller’s allegations. He observed, “If [Donald Trump] had supported these indictments, and said, ‘Yes, absolutely, turn [the indicted Russian intelligence operatives] over,’ what would Putin have appropriately said? Or maybe even the Italian government, to use more of an ally? ‘Okay, fine, you turn over your spies who we have named and asked for from various things.'” Issa added, “Italy has issued arrest warrants for multiple CIA agents who they have credible evidence performed a rendition in their country and took a foreign national out and took him out, and took him to Guantanamo, essentially. They want him back. Well, we’re not turning over our CIA operatives.” Issa noted Comey’s record of making false statements while testifying under oath before congressional committees. He remarked, “Let’s just look at the indictment and who it came from. It came from the same Department of Justice based on the FBI work that former [FBI] Director Comey was running just a few years ago. Remember that Director Comey came before the Judiciary Committee and said he absolutely needed a court order to force Apple to write a piece of software to remotely go into the San Bernardino shooter’s iPhone, unlock it, and tell him what was there. What was amazing he swore under oath that — and this is the director of the FBI, before he was fired — that they had used all their vast assets, and the FBI was the best. A few weeks later, they paid some service who unlocked it for them, and just about the same time a college professor published for $250 worth of hardware what it would take to actually duplicate that chip and decode it in a manner of minutes. So, we’ve been lied to directly by the FBI director, and that’s just an example where he was proven to lie by people that weren’t Republicans or Democrats.” Issa described as ironic the issuance of indictments related to criminal hacking based on information likely obtained by criminal hacking. He said, “When you see these indictments of people who will never be brought to trial, the information about how they found out who they were will never be gotten. It’s frivolous on its face. That doesn’t mean I wouldn’t like to catch these guys and put them where all spies go, but let’s understand — and I’m going to belabor a point for a moment, if I can — how did we find out who these spies were? We probably used our own hackers to go into their computers and find out who they were, and so the irony of claiming that these people we found out; we didn’t find out about these people because we made a phone call and asked, ‘Who are your spies on this?’ We found out through clandestine illegal sources, but we’re not going to allow an indictment in Russia to have those people go. “ Issa concluded, “Much of what you see and hear, right now, is a game to get the public to see something that isn’t there. President Trump has worked harder than any other president in my lifetime to liberate America, to make it free and secure to revitalize our military, and he has been an appropriate enemy of Russia activity while in fact reaching out and trying to do an extension of the START Nuclear Treaty and deal with Iran, North Korea, and Syria.”
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Jul 20, 2018 9:37:33 GMT -6
Democrats trying to protect Mueller by invoking obscure House rule: www.politico.com/story/2018/07/20/house-dems-plan-longshot-gambit-to-protect-mueller-734947Three Democrats on the powerful Judiciary Committee are invoking an obscure House rule that permits a handful of lawmakers to call for a “special meeting” on any bill. If the committee’s chairman, Rep. Bob Goodlatte (R-Va.), declines to approve the meeting within three days, the panel’s 40 members of the panel — 23 Republicans and 17 Democrats — have an opportunity to overrule him and hold the meeting anyway. “We do not take these actions lightly, but believe that we are left with no other choice given the circumstances,” said Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.), the ranking Democrat on the committee, in a letteralso signed by Reps. Sheila Jackson Lee (D-Texas) and Steve Cohen (D-Tenn.) It’s a longshot gambit — the Republican-controlled committee is virtually guaranteed to support Goodlatte. But it’s the latest effort by Democrats to spotlight inaction on measures they describe as increasingly urgent as Trump has more aggressively challenged the validity of Mueller’s probe. ..... Kind of humorous that they are announcing this measure, right after it was leaked that Mueller granted immunity to one of the Podesta brothers. I’m sure it’s just a coincidence & nothing more.
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Jul 20, 2018 14:27:14 GMT -6
thehill.com/homenews/senate/398091-booker-calls-on-kavanaugh-to-recuse-himself-if-trump-related-cases-make-it-to?__twitter_impression=trueTo avoid the prospect that President Trump could effectively choose a judge in his own case, I request that you pledge to recuse yourself from any cases related to the Special Counsel’s investigation and any that otherwise may immediately impact the President and his associates as it relates to the ongoing criminal investigation should you be confirmed,” Booker said in a letter to Kavanaugh on Friday. “The American public must have full confidence that the integrity of any decisions handed down by the Supreme Court on these matters will not be tainted by any impropriety or the appearance of impropriety from the President’s selection of you.” Booker cited remarks Kavanaugh made in 2016, “on the ability of a sitting President to be investigated.”
|
|
|
Post by sooner98 on Jul 20, 2018 14:50:39 GMT -6
thehill.com/homenews/senate/398091-booker-calls-on-kavanaugh-to-recuse-himself-if-trump-related-cases-make-it-to?__twitter_impression=trueTo avoid the prospect that President Trump could effectively choose a judge in his own case, I request that you pledge to recuse yourself from any cases related to the Special Counsel’s investigation and any that otherwise may immediately impact the President and his associates as it relates to the ongoing criminal investigation should you be confirmed,” Booker said in a letter to Kavanaugh on Friday. “The American public must have full confidence that the integrity of any decisions handed down by the Supreme Court on these matters will not be tainted by any impropriety or the appearance of impropriety from the President’s selection of you.” Booker cited remarks Kavanaugh made in 2016, “on the ability of a sitting President to be investigated.” Wait, I thought Trump wasn't under investigation here. This is a counterintelligence investigation, not a criminal investigation, right? Doesn't there have to be an underlying crime for a criminal investigation? What supposed crime has been committed? Why are you lying to Judge Kavanaugh, Senator Booker? You snakes were able to trick Jeff Sessions into unnecessarily recusing himself. I'm pretty sure you won't be able to do the same with Justice Kavanaugh.
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Jul 20, 2018 16:23:22 GMT -6
Honestly, I’m laughing at this point: www.tmz.com/2018/07/20/manhattan-madam-kristin-davis-subpoenaed-robert-mueller-trump/Kristin Davis, the Manhattan Madam who went to prison and was connected to former New York Governor Eliot Spitzer, is being subpoenaed in the Robert Mueller investigation … TMZ has learned. Davis worked for former Trump aide Roger Stone for a decade, and had numerous interactions with Stone and Andrew Miller — who ran Davis’ campaign for Governor and who was subpoenaed by Mueller a month ago. Sources familiar with the matter tell us, Davis’ lawyer is negotiating the scope of the subpoena with Mueller’s team.
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Jul 20, 2018 19:05:47 GMT -6
www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-07-20/one-fbi-text-russia-probe-should-alarm-every-americanFor any American who wants an answer sooner, there are just five words, among the thousands of suggestive texts Page and Strzok exchanged, that you should read. That passage was transmitted on May 19, 2017. “There’s no big there there,” Strzok texted. The date of the text long has intrigued investigators: It is two days after Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein named special counsel Robert Mueller to oversee an investigation into alleged collusion between Trump and the Russia campaign. Since the text was turned over to Congress, investigators wondered whether it referred to the evidence against the Trump campaign. This month, they finally got the chance to ask. Strzok declined to say — but Page, during a closed-door interview with lawmakers, confirmed in the most pained and contorted way that the message in fact referred to the quality of the Russia case, according to multiple eyewitnesses. The admission is deeply consequential. It means Rosenstein unleashed the most awesome powers of a special counsel to investigate an allegation that the key FBI officials, driving the investigation for 10 months beforehand, did not think was “there.” By the time of the text and Mueller’s appointment, the FBI’s best counterintelligence agents had had plenty of time to dig. They knowingly used a dossier funded by Hillary Clinton’s campaign — which contained uncorroborated allegations — to persuade the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) court to issue a warrant to monitor Trump campaign adviser Carter Page (no relation to Lisa Page). They sat on Carter Page’s phones and emails for nearly six months without getting evidence that would warrant prosecuting him. The evidence they had gathered was deemed so weak that their boss, then-FBI Director James Comey, was forced to admit to Congress after being fired by Trump that the core allegation remained substantially uncorroborated. ....... The answer as to why a pro such as Strzok would take such action has become clearer, at least to congressional investigators. That clarity comes from the context of the other emails and text messages that surrounded the May 19, 2017, declaration. It turns out that what Strzok and Lisa Page were really doing that day was debating whether they should stay with the FBI and try to rise through the ranks to the level of an assistant director (AD) or join Mueller’s special counsel team. “Who gives a f*ck, one more AD like [redacted] or whoever?” Strzok wrote, weighing the merits of promotion, before apparently suggesting what would be a more attractive role: “An investigation leading to impeachment?” Lisa Page apparently realized the conversation had gone too far and tried to reel it in. “We should stop having this conversation here,” she texted back, adding later it was important to examine “the different realistic outcomes of this case.” A few minutes later Strzok texted his own handicap of the Russia evidence: “You and I both know the odds are nothing. If I thought it was likely, I’d be there no question. I hesitate in part because of my gut sense and concern there’s no big there there.” So the FBI agents who helped drive the Russia collusion narrative — as well as Rosenstein’s decision to appoint Mueller — apparently knew all along that the evidence was going to lead to “nothing” and, yet, they proceeded because they thought there was still a possibility of impeachment. Impeachment is a political outcome. The only logical conclusion, then, that congressional investigators can make is that political bias led these agents to press an investigation forward to achieve the political outcome of impeachment, even though their professional training told them it had “no big there there.” And that, by definition, is political bias in action. How concerned you are by this conduct is almost certainly affected by your love or hatred for Trump. But put yourself for a second in the hot seat of an investigation by the same FBI cast of characters: You are under investigation for a crime the agents don’t think occurred, but the investigation still advances because the desired outcome is to get you fired from your job.
|
|
|
Post by xingtherubicon on Jul 20, 2018 20:35:17 GMT -6
oh, dammit...you spoiled the ending
|
|
|
Post by kcrufnek on Jul 21, 2018 1:15:27 GMT -6
oh, dammit...you spoiled the ending Hopefully it was happy.
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Jul 21, 2018 4:25:33 GMT -6
www.sfgate.com/news/article/Russian-firm-indicted-in-special-counsel-probe-13090964.phpA Russian company accused by special counsel Robert Mueller III of being part of an online operation to disrupt the 2016 presidential campaign is leaning in part on a decision by Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh to argue that the charge against it should be thrown out. The 2011 decision by Kavanaugh, writing for a three-judge panel, concerned the role that foreign nationals may play in U.S. elections. It upheld a federal law that said foreigners temporarily in the country may not donate money to candidates, contribute to political parties and groups, or spend money advocating for or against candidates. But it did not rule out letting foreigners spend money on independent advocacy campaigns. Kavanaugh “went out of his way to limit the decision,” said Daniel Petalas, a Washington lawyer and former interim general counsel for the Federal Election Commission. A motion filed by the Russian company this week repeatedly cites Kavanaugh’s decision, bringing new attention to his rulings on campaign finance laws and regulations during his tenure on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. The Supreme Court affirmed the decision in 2012 in a one-sentence order, without noted dissent or scheduling the case for a hearing. The Obama administration had asked the opinion be affirmed, arguing in a brief that the federal law was narrowly tailored to respect the speech rights of foreigners. Neither the law in question “nor any other provision of federal law prohibits foreign nationals from speaking out on issues of public policy,” wrote Solicitor General Donald Verrilli. “The statute thus leaves open . . . a broad range of expressive activity, from contributing to issue groups, to creating advocacy websites, to funding mass television advertising.”
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Jul 21, 2018 14:38:52 GMT -6
Tom Fitton ✔ @tomfitton We expect the corrupt FISA documents used to spy on @realdonaldtrump team Monday.
|
|