Russiagate

[billvon 2,400]

Schiff today announced that the House investigation into Trump's dealings with Russia would be reopened.  Specifically they will investigate:

==============

(1)  The scope and scale of the Russian government’s operations to influence the U.S. political process, and the U.S. government’s response, during and since the 2016 election;

(2) The extent of any links and/or coordination between the Russian government, or related foreign actors, and individuals associated with Donald Trump’s campaign, transition, administration, or business interests, in furtherance of the Russian government’s interests;

(3) Whether any foreign actor has sought to compromise or holds leverage, financial or otherwise, over Donald Trump, his family, his business, or his associates;

(4)  Whether President Trump, his family, or his associates are or were at any time at heightened risk of, or vulnerable to, foreign exploitation, inducement, manipulation, pressure, or coercion, or have sought to influence U.S. government policy in service of foreign interests; and

(5) Whether any actors – foreign or domestic – sought or are seeking to impede, obstruct, and/or mislead authorized investigations into these matters, including those in the Congress.

================

It will be interesting to see what the investigation discovers now that it is not being run by lapdogs.

Meanwhile, acting AG Whittaker made the 84th announcement that the Mueller investigation would be over real soon now:

"Right now, you know, the investigation is, I think, close to being completed.”

Reminds me of:

Aug 2017: "White House special counsel Ty Cobb predicts the cloud of an investigation into Russian meddling in the U.S. election will soon be lifted from President Donald Trump and says he would be “embarrassed” if it still hangs over the president in 2018. . . . “I’d be embarrassed if this is still haunting the White House by Thanksgiving and worse if it’s still haunting him by year end.”" (Reuters)

[Phil1111 911]

Russian-Style Kleptocracy Is Infiltrating America

" Richard Palmer served as the CIA station chief in the United States’ Moscow embassy. ...In the dying days of the U.S.S.R., Palmer had watched as his old adversaries in Soviet intelligence shoveled billions from the state treasury into private accounts across Europe and the U.S. It was one of history’s greatest heists. ...

The United States, Palmer made clear, had allowed itself to become an accomplice in this plunder. His assessment was unsparing. The West could have turned away this stolen cash; it could have stanched the outflow to shell companies and tax havens. Instead, Western banks waved Russian loot into their vaults. "

Color me orange. trump wasn't the only one with open arms ready to launder Russian assets and protect kleptocrats and mob monies.

This story should be required reading for those trying to understand the corrosive effects of Russian cash.

Edited February 8, 2019 by Phil1111

[rushmc 18]

From Senate Democrats and Republicans. No collusion. Go figure.

[kallend 1,625]

11 hours ago, rushmc said:

From Senate Democrats and Republicans. No collusion. Go figure.

Well, there's a surprise, Mueller hasn't reported in yet.

"We were never going to find a contract signed in blood saying, 'Hey Vlad, we're going to collude,'" one Democratic aide said.

Trump and his associates had more than 100 known contacts with Russians before the January 2017 presidential inauguration.

 

 

 

[BillyVance 34]

4 hours ago, kallend said:

Well, there's a surprise, Mueller hasn't reported in yet.

"We were never going to find a contract signed in blood saying, 'Hey Vlad, we're going to collude,'" one Democratic aide said.

Trump and his associates had more than 100 known contacts with Russians before the January 2017 presidential inauguration.

 

 

 

Well yeah... but no proof of any direct collusion affecting the election, that was the whole point. Trump was known to do business deals all over the world, including Russia.

What a complete shit show. More than 2 years of investigating and charging/convicting a bunch of people with shit that had nothing to do with collusion, and they still haven't found anything to directly link Trump?

We'll see what the Mueller report says when it comes out, but I predict it's going to hurt the Democrats in 2020.

[wmw999 2,123]

Well, to be fair, the Hillary investigations lasted for longer, with fewer results, and then were repeated (what’s the definition of insanity? Doing the same thing and expecting a different result). But you probably think that one didn’t go far enough. 

Sometimes perspective matters 

Wendy P. 

Edited February 13, 2019 by wmw999
blast you autocorrect

[billvon 2,400]

1 minute ago, BillyVance said:

Well yeah... but no proof of any direct collusion affecting the election, that was the whole point.

I get a kick out of the constant redefinition of the issue by Trump supporters.

There was NO COLLUSION!

There was NO COLLUSION between the Trump campaign and Russia!
There was NO COLLUSION between Trump himself and Russia!
There was NO COLLUSION between Trump himself and Russia when it came to actually influencing the election!

What's next?  "There was NO COLLUSION between Trump himself and Russia that SIGNIFICANTLY influenced the election!"  "There was NO COLLUSION between Trump himself and Putin himself that PROVABLY caused him to win!"

Quote

What a complete shit show. More than 2 years of investigating and charging/convicting a bunch of people with shit that had nothing to do with collusion, and they still haven't found anything to directly link Trump?

Trump was named as "Individual 1" as a co-conspirator in Cohen's case.  The charge was lying to investigators about Trump's involvement with Russia.  He pled guilty to it.

That is a direct link.  Trump is now an unindicted co-conspirator.

Quote

Trump was known to do business deals all over the world, including Russia.

So why do you suppose he lied about it so often and so vehemently?  Why have so many of his inner circle been convicted/pled guilty to lying about it?  What is he hiding?

 "I know nothing about the inner workings of Russia. I don't deal there. I have no businesses there."

"I have nothing to do with Russia, folks."

"First of all, I don't know Putin, have no business whatsoever with Russia, have nothing to do with Russia."

"I have no income from Russia.  I don't do business with Russia."

“I have no dealings with Russia, I have no deals in Russia, I have no deals that could happen in Russia because we’ve stayed away.”

[Phil1111 911]

7 minutes ago, billvon said:

I get a kick out of the constant redefinition of the issue by Trump supporters.

There was NO COLLUSION!

There was NO COLLUSION between the Trump campaign and Russia!
There was NO COLLUSION between Trump himself and Russia!
There was NO COLLUSION between Trump himself and Russia when it came to actually influencing the election!

What's next?  "There was NO COLLUSION between Trump himself and Russia that SIGNIFICANTLY influenced the election!"  "There was NO COLLUSION between Trump himself and Putin himself that PROVABLY caused him to win!"

Trump was named as "Individual 1" as a co-conspirator in Cohen's case.  The charge was lying to investigators about Trump's involvement with Russia.  He pled guilty to it.

That is a direct link.  Trump is now an unindicted co-conspirator.

So why do you suppose he lied about it so often and so vehemently?  Why have so many of his inner circle been convicted/pled guilty to lying about it?  What is he hiding?

 "I know nothing about the inner workings of Russia. I don't deal there. I have no businesses there."

"I have nothing to do with Russia, folks."

"First of all, I don't know Putin, have no business whatsoever with Russia, have nothing to do with Russia."

"I have no income from Russia.  I don't do business with Russia."

“I have no dealings with Russia, I have no deals in Russia, I have no deals that could happen in Russia because we’ve stayed away.”

You would think that that would be the end of such talk. ..sigh... But no.

[billvon 2,400]

13 minutes ago, Phil1111 said:

You would think that that would be the end of such talk. ..sigh... But no.

But her emails . . .

[wolfriverjoe 1,341]

26 minutes ago, BillyVance said:

Well yeah... but no proof of any direct collusion affecting the election, that was the whole point. Trump was known to do business deals all over the world, including Russia.

What a complete shit show. More than 2 years of investigating and charging/convicting a bunch of people with shit that had nothing to do with collusion, and they still haven't found anything to directly link Trump?

We'll see what the Mueller report says when it comes out, but I predict it's going to hurt the Democrats in 2020.

Do you think laundering money for the Russian mob isn't a crime?

 

Do you think obstruction of justice isn't a crime (lying to the FBI about contacts with the Russian government - Flynn)?

 

Do you think a business deal that includes a multi-million dollar penthouse condo being given to the head of a hostile nation isn't at least a little bit questionable?

 

And there's the very simple fact that Mueller has yet to reveal anything about Trump. I suspect he has a lot of info about him. Flynn, Manafort, Pecker, and all the others that have been turned. 

Do you think Mueller would be offering immunity or recommending light/no prison sentences for these guys if they didn't have something very valuable to the investigation?

[Phil1111 911]

From the Swamp Chronicles

Regular stories of fraud, money laundering, corruption and coverup. Featuring Allen Weisselberg, trump's chief financial officer.

"In late 2016, I had lunch with a former high-ranking Trump Organization executive, a person who said he was happy to share dirt on his old boss, but who confessed to not having much dirt to share. This executive wrote a list of people whom I might contact to find out about anything potentially illegal or unethical that Donald Trump may have done. At the bottom of the list was the name Weisselberg. “Allen is the one guy who knows everything,” the person told me. “He’ll never talk to you.” I have had nearly identical conversations with different people who work or have worked for the Trump Organization many times since. They all described his role similarly: Allen Weisselberg, the firm’s longtime chief financial officer, is the center, the person in the company who knows more than anyone.

On Friday, the Wall Street Journal broke the story that Weisselberg had been granted immunity by federal prosecutors in the Southern District of New York "

Then there is trump's lawyer who will fill in any blanks. The continuous dialogue about the wall, no collusion, etc. All all just republican talking points to keep the party in denial. Keep the base in denial.

Mueller will be old news while the SDNY is still generating case after case. For the delinquent  trump children to deny then defend themselves

Edited February 13, 2019 by Phil1111

[kallend 1,625]

3 hours ago, BillyVance said:

 

What a complete shit show. More than 2 years of investigating and charging/convicting a bunch of people with shit that had nothing to do with collusion, and they still haven't found anything to directly link Trump?

 

They don't have to for the investigation to have succeeded.  Dozens of indictments, guilty pleas and sentences of Trump's associates (and likely more to come) satisfy the parameters of Mueller's appointment.  Add to that the money confiscated and Mueller has turned a profit for the government.

Compare with Whitewater, Benghazigate and Emailgate, all led by the GOP and none of which produced anything while costing $(tens of millions) of taxpayer money. 

[kallend 1,625]

18 hours ago, wolfriverjoe said:

Do you think laundering money for the Russian mob isn't a crime?

 

.

.

.

.

And there's the very simple fact that Mueller has yet to reveal anything about Trump. I suspect he has a lot of info about him. Flynn, Manafort, Pecker, and all the others that have been turned. 

Do you think Mueller would be offering immunity or recommending light/no prison sentences for these guys if they didn't have something very valuable to the investigation?

Flynn, Papadopoulos, Cohen and now Manafort all found to have lied about their contacts with Russians.

Why would they lie if there was no wrongdoing involved?

[DJL 232]

19 hours ago, billvon said:

"I know nothing about the inner workings of Russia. I don't deal there. I have no businesses there."

"I have nothing to do with Russia, folks."

"First of all, I don't know Putin, have no business whatsoever with Russia, have nothing to do with Russia."

"I have no income from Russia.  I don't do business with Russia."

“I have no dealings with Russia, I have no deals in Russia, I have no deals that could happen in Russia because we’ve stayed away.”

Could you imagine if Hillary was the one who said all of that?

[kallend 1,625]

And another one:

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/08/31/us/politics/patten-fara-manafort.html?fbclid=IwAR39nleMozMjIcikI1P5S2gyu8ddJAv9hh-IxbupOTMSpI9sYMIJ789AhC8

[DJL 232]

3 minutes ago, kallend said:

And another one:

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/08/31/us/politics/patten-fara-manafort.html?fbclid=IwAR39nleMozMjIcikI1P5S2gyu8ddJAv9hh-IxbupOTMSpI9sYMIJ789AhC8

There would be an armed caravan of trucks (with truck nuts) circling the White House blasting Ted Nugent on a 24 hour loop if this had been Hillary.

[billvon 2,400]

27 minutes ago, kallend said:

And another one:

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/08/31/us/politics/patten-fara-manafort.html?fbclid=IwAR39nleMozMjIcikI1P5S2gyu8ddJAv9hh-IxbupOTMSpI9sYMIJ789AhC8

Again, please do not post blind links.

[rushmc 18]

Sad but expected.

 

https://www.breitbart.com/the-media/2019/02/16/networks-refuse-cover-senates-no-russia-collusion-report/

 

“The same networks that spent 2,202 minutes of collective airtime to push the Russia Collusion Media-Hoax are refusing to cover the Senate Intelligence Committee bipartisan report, which found no collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia.”

[gowlerk 1,914]

11 minutes ago, rushmc said:

Sad but expected.

 

https://www.breitbart.com/the-media/2019/02/16/networks-refuse-cover-senates-no-russia-collusion-report/

 

“The same networks that spent 2,202 minutes of collective airtime to push the Russia Collusion Media-Hoax are refusing to cover the Senate Intelligence Committee bipartisan report, which found no collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia.”

CNN coverage of the senate report.

https://www.cnn.com/2018/07/03/politics/senate-intelligence-putin-donald-trump/index.html

Rueters

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-russia-cyber/senate-panel-backs-intelligence-agencies-on-russia-trump-conclusions-idUSKBN1JT2YB

Bloomberg

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-07-03/senate-russia-probe-agrees-that-putin-meddled-to-help-trump

Time

http://time.com/5340060/donald-trump-vladimir-putin-summit-russia-meddling/

 

You were saying?.......

 

Edited February 16, 2019 by gowlerk

[wolfriverjoe 1,341]

Those don't say that there was 'no collusion'. 

Of course, the report that says they 'didn't find any collusion' (which is very different than 'no collusion') also said that it was not yet complete.

Of course, someone conveniently ignores that part.

[kallend 1,625]

4 hours ago, rushmc said:

 

https://www.breitbart.com/

You still have a sense of the ridiculous.

[DJL 232]

On 2/16/2019 at 12:13 PM, wolfriverjoe said:

Those don't say that there was 'no collusion'. 

Of course, the report that says they 'didn't find any collusion' (which is very different than 'no collusion') also said that it was not yet complete.

Of course, someone conveniently ignores that part.

Hey, give him a break.  This is the same guy who complained that people like Booker and Harris hadn't spoken out about Fairfax without actually checking to find out if Booker and Harris had spoken out about Fairfax.

I'm starting to think that he's a genius of the adage "If you want the right answer on the internet then first post the wrong answer" and is getting all of us to do his news sleuthing for him.  And for that I say:

[billvon 2,400]

The evidence against Trump is mounting.  From an interview with Andrew McCabe, former FBI director:

Interviewer: "Do you still believe the President could be a Russian asset?" 

McCabe:  "I think it's possible. I think that's why we started our investigation, and I'm really anxious to see where Mueller concludes that." 

In other words, the FBI had enough evidence to begin an investigation into Russia's hold over Trump.

In other news the NYT just published an essay on Trump's long and difficult relationship with the truth and the law.  Even while he tweeted "NO COLLUSION!" over 1000 times, he was trying to undermine and sabotage the investigation to protect himself.  And what we know so far isn't even the extent of it.  The Times describes the "extent of an even more sustained, more secretive assault by Mr. Trump on the machinery of federal law enforcement. Interviews with dozens of current and former government officials and others close to Mr. Trump, as well as a review of confidential White House documents, reveal numerous unreported episodes in a two-year drama."

It's also a good overview of how tenuous the relationship between Trump's words and the truth is.  In one episode, Trump was trying to figure out to tell people that Flynn had resigned.  One of his aides told him about an (unsubstantiated) rumor that Paul Ryan had said that Trump asked Flynn to resign.  From the article:

================

It was unclear where Mr. Ryan had gotten that information, but Mr. Trump seized on Mr. Ryan’s words. “That sounds better,” the president said, according to people with knowledge of the discussions. Mr. Trump turned to the White House press secretary at the time, Sean Spicer, who was preparing to brief the news media.

“Say that,” Mr. Trump ordered.

But was that true? Mr. Spicer pressed.

“Say that I asked for his resignation,” Mr. Trump repeated.

==================

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/19/us/politics/trump-investigations.html?action=click&module=Top Stories&pgtype=Homepage

[BillyVance 34]

This is how I expect Trump to emerge from this soon to end witch hunt

[gowlerk 1,914]

6 minutes ago, BillyVance said:

This is how I expect Trump to emerge from this soon to end witch hunt

Unless he proves to be somewhat less than invincible. Maybe Q will help him.