Russiagate

[Phil1111 917]

rushmc

Quote

Hillary Clinton’s use of private email server among ‘gravest’ offenses to transparency, judge says

***On Thursday, Lamberth ordered the State and Justice departments to work with Judicial Watch on a discovery plan to determine whether Clinton used the server to circumvent FOIA requirements, the Hill reported.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/hillary-clintons-use-of-private-email-server-among-gravest-offenses-to-transparency-judge-says

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cq8f8oU9wYs

[billvon 2,435]

Phil1111

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cq8f8oU9wYs

Nailed it, even from over two years ago. Putin did indeed get exactly what he wanted - a puppet that would sow division within the US, cripple its government and bend over backwards for Russia.

[ryoder 1,400]

billvon

So Trump has done everything he can to hide his contacts with Putin. No wonder the FBI has been investigating him to see if he's a Russian stooge.

A snippet of one transcript has leaked out:

Putin: "The woods are lovely, dark, and deep, but I have promises to keep. And miles to go before I sleep, and miles to go before I sleep. Remember. Miles to go before I sleep."


See? Perfectly innocent!

"There are only three things of value: younger women, faster airplanes, and bigger crocodiles" - Arthur Jones.

[DJL 232]

Hahaha, look who is back to being a huge fan of the FBI and government oversite...

"I encourage all awesome dangerous behavior." - Jeffro Fincher

[Phil1111 917]

Christie says Trump is surrounded by 'revolving door' of 'grifters, weaklings, convicted and unconvicted felons'
https://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/425578-christie-says-trump-is-surrounded-by-revolving-door-of-grifters

" the president is surrounded by "amateurs," "weakinglings" and "unconvicted felons."

Axios reported that Christie wrote in his book "Let Me Finish" that Trump has a "revolving door of deeply flawed individuals — amateurs, grifters, weaklings, convicted and unconvicted felons — who were hustled into jobs they were never suited for, sometimes seemingly without so much as a background check via Google or Wikipedia."

Claim "TRUMP IN 2016: "I only hire the best people!"

Fact Check- see the story above.

[SkyDekker 1,147]

rushmc

Quote

Hillary Clinton’s use of private email server among ‘gravest’ offenses to transparency, judge says

***On Thursday, Lamberth ordered the State and Justice departments to work with Judicial Watch on a discovery plan to determine whether Clinton used the server to circumvent FOIA requirements, the Hill reported.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/hillary-clintons-use-of-private-email-server-among-gravest-offenses-to-transparency-judge-says

Wouldn't that mean that Ivanka Trump's use of a private email for government business be among the 'gravest' offenses to transparency?

I mean if Hillary broke the law, she should be punished for that. But, then so should Ivanka.

[DJL 232]

Quote

Wouldn't that mean that Ivanka Trump's use of a private email for government business be among the 'gravest' offenses to transparency?

I mean if Hillary broke the law, she should be punished for that. But, then so should Ivanka.

How about Trump destroying the translator's notes in his conversations with Putin? Aren't there a lot of chapped asses over Hillary having disposed of the her old phones and electronics.

Anyway, her emails are there for any investigative body to see and none of them have found anything damning. Sure, some were not recoverable but the thing is she wasn't able to selectively block investigators from recovering any specific email. Mostly lost emails were recovered on the other end from recipients along with standard recovery efforts of the digital material. Investigators were then left with a cross section of her previously deleted emails which again showed nothing damning.

The people still chanting the "Lock Her Up" BS need to come to grips with the fact that there's nothing to send her to jail for.

"I encourage all awesome dangerous behavior." - Jeffro Fincher

[wolfriverjoe 1,353]

And I gotta love how they are STILL blaming her for the military response to the attacks on the embassy in Benghazi.

Since when does the Secretary of STATE have responsibility for military affairs?

When things went bad in Somalia (Black Hawk Down), there was significant criticism of how the military reacted, how the Pakistani "rescue" force had just sat in their compound while Americans were under attack, all of that.

The heat came down on Les Aspin, Secretary of DEFENSE. You know, the guy in charge of the military.

I'll agree that mistakes were made before the Benghazi attacks, but I can't see how HRC was responsible.

"There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy

"~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo

[DJL 232]

wolfriverjoe

And I gotta love how they are STILL blaming her for the military response to the attacks on the embassy in Benghazi.

Since when does the Secretary of STATE have responsibility for military affairs?

When things went bad in Somalia (Black Hawk Down), there was significant criticism of how the military reacted, how the Pakistani "rescue" force had just sat in their compound while Americans were under attack, all of that.

The heat came down on Les Aspin, Secretary of DEFENSE. You know, the guy in charge of the military.

I'll agree that mistakes were made before the Benghazi attacks, but I can't see how HRC was responsible.

Most of the current criticism is that the State Department disallowed the military response, I believe the primary one is that the security contractors had laser targeting hardware available to them and that an F16 launched from Northern Italy would've been able to arrive and delivered coordinated air strikes. That's some GI Joe/Hollywood bullshit if I ever heard it.

Ambassador Stevens wanted to bring diplomacy out from behind the exact barricades and armed guards that detractors say would've protected him.

As for these statements about whether The Video was the reason for anything... Who cares? It's what the CIA also thought at the time and considering that they were the ones on the ground there I don't fault Obama or Hillary or Rice or anyone for repeating it.

"I encourage all awesome dangerous behavior." - Jeffro Fincher

[Phil1111 917]

DJL

Quote

Wouldn't that mean that Ivanka Trump's use of a private email for government business be among the 'gravest' offenses to transparency?

I mean if Hillary broke the law, she should be punished for that. But, then so should Ivanka.

How about Trump destroying the translator's notes in his conversations with Putin? Aren't there a lot of chapped asses over Hillary having disposed of the her old phones and electronics.

Anyway, her emails are there for any investigative body to see and none of them have found anything damning. Sure, some were not recoverable but the thing is she wasn't able to selectively block investigators from recovering any specific email. Mostly lost emails were recovered on the other end from recipients along with standard recovery efforts of the digital material. Investigators were then left with a cross section of her previously deleted emails which again showed nothing damning.

The people still chanting the "Lock Her Up" BS need to come to grips with the fact that there's nothing to send her to jail for.

Its "Judicial Watch (JW) is an American conservative activist group[1] and self-styled watchdog group[2][3] that files Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuits to investigate claimed misconduct by government officials. ...

Activities and controversies

Judicial Watch’s main targets have been Democrats, particularly Bill and Hillary Clinton and the Obama administration.[14] "
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judicial_Watch

Which has initiated ZERO actions against the trump crime family. None against any trump official.

I will quote from the first sentence of this Judge's opinion:

"On his first day in office. President Obama set a worthy standard for his administration's compliance with the Freedom Of Information Act"

Marc and this conservative hatchet group are fishing in a dry mud hole. trump could have ordered and investigation of HRC on day one as promised.

They refused to do so. Both Marc and trump have refused to answer why.

[rushmc 18]

SkyDekker

***

Quote

Hillary Clinton’s use of private email server among ‘gravest’ offenses to transparency, judge says

***On Thursday, Lamberth ordered the State and Justice departments to work with Judicial Watch on a discovery plan to determine whether Clinton used the server to circumvent FOIA requirements, the Hill reported.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/hillary-clintons-use-of-private-email-server-among-gravest-offenses-to-transparency-judge-says

Wouldn't that mean that Ivanka Trump's use of a private email for government business be among the 'gravest' offenses to transparency?

I mean if Hillary broke the law, she should be punished for that. But, then so should Ivanka.

more than that we're talkin about the espionage act. Because she had top secret emails on her server both received and sent.

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[rushmc 18]

DJL

Hahaha, look who is back to being a huge fan of the FBI and government oversite...

You completely missed the point of my post

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[rushmc 18]

DJL

Quote

Wouldn't that mean that Ivanka Trump's use of a private email for government business be among the 'gravest' offenses to transparency?

I mean if Hillary broke the law, she should be punished for that. But, then so should Ivanka.

How about Trump destroying the translator's notes in his conversations with Putin? Aren't there a lot of chapped asses over Hillary having disposed of the her old phones and electronics.

Anyway, her emails are there for any investigative body to see and none of them have found anything damning. Sure, some were not recoverable but the thing is she wasn't able to selectively block investigators from recovering any specific email. Mostly lost emails were recovered on the other end from recipients along with standard recovery efforts of the digital material. Investigators were then left with a cross section of her previously deleted emails which again showed nothing damning.

The people still chanting the "Lock Her Up" BS need to come to grips with the fact that there's nothing to send her to jail for.

Yet again we have a post that says or States that Trump has done something that's illegal and should be taken care of. The point of my post regarding this is you didn't care when Hillary or Obama did it! Not that they did it first like the spin Master Bill likes to post

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[billvon 2,435]

Now that we know Trump destroyed any notes about his meetings with Putin, let's reexamine the timeline:

Jul 6 2017 - Trump arrives at G20 summit

Jul 7 - Trump has first meeting with Putin, with others present. Afterwards he destroys any records of the meeting.

Jul 7 - NYT contacts Trump family to ask them for comments on the story they are about to break - that Trump Jr met with a Russian agent in Trump tower.

Jul 7 - at G20 dinner, Trump sends frantic hand signals to Putin requesting they meet

Late Jul 7 - Trump has secret meeting with Putin - only him, Putin and translator. He does not inform any US staff. Again all records are destroyed.

Jul 8 - Trump calls NYT, says Russia was falsely accused of meddling in election

Jul 8 - Trump makes false statement about Trump Jr's role in the meeting

Jul 8 - NYT publishes story about meeting with Russian agent

Jul 11 - NYT publishes story with emails indicating the purpose was to get dirt on Hillary

Jul 19 - Trump's secret meeting with Putin revealed. Trump claims it was about "adoption."

In retrospect, Trump was likely trying to "get their stories straight" to avoid scrutiny.

We now have a president who colludes with Putin to avoid being held responsible for his administration's actions - and then uses his position to try to get Russia off the hook for what they did.

[SkyDekker 1,147]

Quote

Yet again we have a post that says or States that Trump has done something that's illegal and should be taken care of. The point of my post regarding this is you didn't care when Hillary or Obama did it! Not that they did it first like the spin Master Bill likes to post

That is simply not true. It was investigated and determination flowed from that. This is how it should work.

In your case you believe that your side should not be investigated. You have even started to believe in a made up entity, the Deep State, to explain away any negative outcome from that investigation.

Yet, somehow I don't think you can "see" the difference.

[billvon 2,435]

Giuliani gives up on the "there was no collusion!" story:

=========
Giuliani: You just misstated my position. I never said there no collusion between the campaign, or between people in the campaign.

Cuomo: Yes you have.

Giuliani: I have not. I said the president of the United States. There is not a single bit of evidence the president of the United States committed the only crime you could commit here, conspiring with the Russians to hack the DNC. . . .

Giuliani: He said "he didn't." He didn't say "nobody from his campaign . . ."

Cuomo: He actually said that.

Giuliani: Well, he never said that as far as I know.
==========

Trumpies will have to find another reverse gear on their excusemobile.

[JerryBaumchen 1,068]

Hi Bill,

Quote

Giuliani: Well, he never said that as far as I know.

And Nixon told Erlichmann & Haldeman that the Watergate witnesses could always say, 'I don't remember.'

Jerry Baumchen

[jakee 1,260]

billvon

Giuliani: He said "he didn't." He didn't say "nobody from his campaign . . ."

Cuomo: He actually said that.

Giuliani: Well, he never said that as far as I know.

Did Giuliani just redefine "never" as "less than 100 times a year"?

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[tkhayes 140]

On 1/10/2019 at 6:48 PM, rushmc said:

One thing's for sure. I'm looking forward to the changes coming to this site!

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln 

that is true, but it will not be from some constitutional ideology differences or right versus left.  It will be a French Revolution event based on wealth and opportunity inequality.

[kallend 1,651]

Oooh:

https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/jasonleopold/trump-russia-cohen-moscow-tower-mueller-investigation?ref=hpsplash

And more Oooh:

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-cohen/ex-trump-lawyer-rigging-polls-was-at-the-direction-of-trump-idUSKCN1PB1PZ

Edited January 18, 2019 by kallend

[DJL 232]

5 hours ago, kallend said:

Oooh:

https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/jasonleopold/trump-russia-cohen-moscow-tower-mueller-investigation?ref=hpsplash

And more Oooh:

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-cohen/ex-trump-lawyer-rigging-polls-was-at-the-direction-of-trump-idUSKCN1PB1PZ

The key part of this is: "The special counsel’s office learned about Trump’s directive for Cohen to lie to Congress through interviews with multiple witnesses from the Trump Organization and internal company emails, text messages, and a cache of other documents. Cohen then acknowledged those instructions during his interviews with that office."

This is no longer "Cohen says".  "Cohen says" doesn't stand up in court.  Independent interviews, emails, text messages and documents is admissible.

Now what?

[Phil1111 917]

19 minutes ago, DJL said:

The key part of this is: "The special counsel’s office learned about Trump’s directive for Cohen to lie to Congress through interviews with multiple witnesses from the Trump Organization and internal company emails, text messages, and a cache of other documents. Cohen then acknowledged those instructions during his interviews with that office."

This is no longer "Cohen says".  "Cohen says" doesn't stand up in court.  Independent interviews, emails, text messages and documents is admissible.

Now what?

Equally important was that Ivanka, trump Jr. were also briefed, aware and participatory in the Moscow trump Tower dealings. What Cohen represents in testimony in the House, Congress and trial(s). Is likely to just carry less weight than the e-mails and internal trump corporation documents. It takes but minutes at trial to destroy President trump's credibility given his propensity to lie.

IMO its important to hold the other participants in these crimes to account. The trump family. Donald Jr. testified under oath. I'm not sure if Ivanka did or not?

[SkyDekker 1,147]

59 minutes ago, DJL said:

 

This is no longer "Cohen says".  "Cohen says" doesn't stand up in court.  Independent interviews, emails, text messages and documents is admissible.

Now what?

Now what is indeed the big question. Nobody has been able to verify this yet, but if this report is true there is no doubt that Trump is a criminal. Even Barr will have a hard time arguing around this, since he was specifically asked during his hearing if the president influencing somebody to change their testimony would be obstruction. He confirmed. (the timing of those very specific questions are interesting to me)

Switched to Fox News a couple of times yesterday and this morning, they were not discussing this report at all. Even on their website it is not the leading story.

The reaction of the GOP is going to be telling today.

[billvon 2,435]

3 minutes ago, SkyDekker said:

 

The reaction of the GOP is going to be telling today.

I predict a whole lot of:

 

1)"FAKE NEWS!"  "Cohen is lying."  "Trump didn't do it."  "Nose ring something something."

2) "OK maybe he did something like that but it's not that bad." 

3) "Obama did it first."

[Phil1111 917]

46 minutes ago, SkyDekker said:

Now what is indeed the big question. Nobody has been able to verify this yet, but if this report is true there is no doubt that Trump is a criminal. Even Barr will have a hard time arguing around this, since he was specifically asked during his hearing if the president influencing somebody to change their testimony would be obstruction. He confirmed. (the timing of those very specific questions are interesting to me)

Switched to Fox News a couple of times yesterday and this morning, they were not discussing this report at all. Even on their website it is not the leading story.

The reaction of the GOP is going to be telling today.

Take your cue from FOX. Cohen is a convicted liar, Russia could have hacked trump Corporation e-mails to discredit trump personally. trump is not responsible for what Cohen says because Cohen "hardly ever worked for me".  The deep state could have fabricated those documents.

Trump calls Cohen a liar after bombshell BuzzFeed report

...Help me here Marc & Ron.

Edited January 18, 2019 by Phil1111