Reply With Quote
that's because pavTHETIC is a ing re . he thinks he has the upper hand on everyone here but we all realize what a ing re he is.
My political party..lol
How about you make sure you're A, registered as a democrat (You must in order to vote) B, make sure you're listed.
I do agree they need to make it an open process but the constant whining I often hear about people not being able to vote is usually do to them being lazy s and missing the deadline to register accordingly.
that's because pavTHETIC is a ing re . he thinks he has the upper hand on everyone here but we all realize what a ing re he is.
KW drooling all over his keyboard again.
have you decided whether Mueller is working with Trump to get all the Democrat baby eaters yet, Q?
you should look into it more closely. there's a lot of spooky details.
https://slate.com/news-and-politics/...ing-names.html
poor djohn
"It's a reflection of us still not knowing," Page told Rep. John Ratcliffe (R-Texas) when questioned about texts she and Strzok exchanged in May 2017 as Robert Mueller was being named a special prosecutor to take over the Russia investigation.
With that statement, Page acknowledged a momentous fact: After nine months of using some of the most awesome surveillance powers afforded to U.S. intelligence, the FBI still had not made a case connecting Trump or his campaign to Russia's election meddling.
“Page opined further, acknowledging "it still existed in the scope of possibility that there would be literally nothing" to connect Trump and Russia, no matter what Mueller or the FBI did.
"As far as May of 2017, we still couldn't answer the question," she said at another point.
For those who might cast doubt on the word of a single FBI lawyer, there's more.
Shortly after he was fired, ex-FBI Director James Comey told the Senate there was not yet evidence to justify investigating Trump for colluding with Russia. "When I left, we did not have an investigation focused on President Trump," Comey testified.
And Strzok, the counterintelligence boss and leader of the Russia probe, texted Page in May 2017 that he was reluctant to join Mueller's probe and leave his senior FBI post because he feared "there's no big there, there."
The Department of Justice (DOJ) inspector general asked Strzok shortly before he was fired from the FBI what he meant by that text, and he offered a most insightful answer.
Strzok said he wasn't certain there was a "broad, coordinated effort" to hijack the election and that the evidence of Trump campaign aides talking about getting Hillary Clinton dirt from Russians might have been just a "bunch of opportunists" talking to heighten their importance.
Strzok added that, while he raised the idea of impeachment in some of his texts to Page, "I am, again, was not, am not convinced or certain that it will," he told the IG.
So, by the words of Comey, Strzok and Page, we now know that the Trump Justice Department - through Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein - unleashed the Mueller special prosecutor probe before the FBI could validate a connection between Trump and Russia.
http://thehill.com/hilltv/rising/406...mpression=true
how can you validate evidence before an investigation?
btw, this all goes to the fair-mindedness of Page and Strzok...
Strzok wasn't sure there was any good evidence and was reluctant to join the investigation...
Was Christopher Steele Disseminating Russian Disinformation to the State Department?
Steele’s extensive interactions with Deripaska and Deripaska’s lawyers make it unlikely that the succession of memos on Russia and Ukraine he offered to Winer and the State Departmen were not “related in any way” to Deripaska. Ukraine was a pressing issue for Deripaska and the crisis there was the main topic Steele was analyzing.
Does the fact that those memos were distributed at State for years mean U.S. policy might have been warped by Russian disinformation, as some on Capitol Hill fear? No, says a senior State Department official who was serving at the time—because the Russia hands weren’t naïve. Asked about the Russia and Ukraine memos Steele provided to State, the official tells The Weekly Standard, “We were not aware of his specific sources but assumed that many of them were close to Putin and were peddling information that was useful to the Kremlin.”
The official says the Putinesque spin of the memos led them to take Steele’s analysis with more than a grain of salt: “There was a huge discount factor for that reason.”
This was the reputation Steele had at the upper reaches of State: Among the people who saw his work most frequently and who had the most expertise in Russian issues, the onetime MI6 officer was seen as “peddling information that was useful to the Kremlin.”
https://www.weeklystandard.com/eric-...mpression=true
Trump Defender Alan Dershowitz Drops a Truth Bomb About Manafort's Plea Deal: 'A Very Bad Day for' the President
“If you don’t know what a cooperator is saying then it’s a bad day for you because you’re vulnerable.”
Alan Dershowitz on Sunday flipped the script on Donald Trump,
telling NBC’s Chuck Todd that
news of Paul Manafort’s plea deal with special counsel Robert Mueller is bad news for the president.
Dershowitz argued Manafort should have agreed to cooperate with Mueller before he was found guilty on 8 counts last month before pointing out the
“deal says that Manafort will cooperate on anything the special counsel asks him about.
There are no limits.”
“I understand why Rudy Giuliani wants to put this in the most positive light,” Dershowitz acknowledged.
“But this was a very bad day for the Trump administration.
It’s very bad because
he doesn’t know what Manafort is saying and
[Trump] can’t count on Manafort saying things that the special counsel already knows.”
https://www.alternet.org/trump-defender-alan-dershowitz-drops-truth-bomb-about-manaforts-plea-deal-very-bad-day-president
Strange the Manafort didn't plea and cooperate before the first trial
As if the entire Russia investigation just started when Mueller was appointed
lol leaning on Strzok and Page for support.
"Legal analysts say Manafort must have something valuable to share with
Mueller’s team, which agreed to drop five of the seven charges
he faced and potentially urge leniency at his sentencing, if his cooperation is helpful."
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world...nl_most&wpmm=1
Then goes on to post back to back Lisa Paige non-BOOMs.
Papa G speaking freely now that he’s finally been sentenced.
Putin Critics Have Really Bad Luck
By Josh Marshall
September 16, 2018 11:24 am
You may remember that during the World Cup –
I’m not sure which game but late in the tournament –
some Pussy Riot members rushed on to the field dressed as police officers
and disrupted the match.
One of them is now fighting for his life after being poisoned.
https://talkingpointsmemo.com/edblog...+%28TPMNews%29
”With that statement, Page acknowledged a momentous fact: After nine months of using some of the most awesome surveillance powers afforded to U.S. intelligence, the FBI still had not made a case connecting Trump or his campaign to Russia's election meddling.”Then goes on to post back to back Lisa Paige non-BOOMs.
so, at the end of the "fixed" FBI investigation that Strzok and Page contrived to take down DJT, neither one thought they had any good evidence, and both were skeptical that Mueller would find anything.
cool story, bro.
Suddenly, Lisa Paige is a central figure in the Mueller Investigation? She's an FBI lawyer. Or was.”With that statement, Page acknowledged a momentous fact: After nine months of using some of the most awesome surveillance powers afforded to U.S. intelligence, the FBI still had not made a case connecting Trump or his campaign to Russia's election meddling.”
It's been a year and change since Mueller took over which has probably netted that much more intel. But keep pushing your non-collusion narrative. It's clearly winning.
Again, it has been pointed out and yet you still peddle garbage.”With that statement, Page acknowledged a momentous fact: After nine months of using some of the most awesome surveillance powers afforded to U.S. intelligence, the FBI still had not made a case connecting Trump or his campaign to Russia's election meddling.”
That only shows how fair-minded they are.
They were investigating leads and had not concluded anything. Comey said the same thing. Brennan did too. AS of MAY 17, 2017 - they were working on the case. If you do not cherry-pick - I am sure they could also add - "on the other hand - there was no conclusion that there WASN'T collusion/conspiracy." This is how investigations work, you investigate and eliminate as you go along.
There is/was enough smoke to warrant an investigation. Obviously they were correct as evidenced by all the other evidence that has been unearthed since - and more and more is coming out. Unstoppable now. The criminals will be revealed and exposed and prosecuted.
I hope you read every interview and I hope you are honest enough with yourself to see the difference in questions from Democrats (searching for the truth)
and Republicans (concealing the truth and acting as Trump defenders)
You won't.
There are currently 5 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 5 guests)
Posting Permissions