Flynn in major trouble for speaking to Russia about sanctions

[TSA]

Meanwhile 8 top ranking agents of the DOJ/FBI have been demoted or resigned due to evidence uncovered in the OIG investigation and talks of Trump/Russia collusion are dead.

And if McCabe changed the 302’s of Mike Flynn’s interview Flynn will walk free.

[TSA]

And if McCabe changed the 302’s of Mike Flynn’s interview Flynn will walk free.

On top of all this djohn’s going to owe me $500 :rollin

[djohn2oo8]

And if McCabe changed the 302’s of Mike Flynn’s interview Flynn will walk free.

And "If". Which means you aren't sure. Your confidence is shaken.

[clambake]

:lmao democraps and repugs debating as to who has the less corrupt politicians :lmao

Shithole country :lol

this

[Pavlov]

Meanwhile 8 top ranking agents of the DOJ/FBI have been demoted or resigned due to evidence uncovered in the OIG investigation and talks of Trump/Russia collusion are dead.lol dead

Why do you have to reassure yourself so often, TSA?

[Pavlov]

That doesn’t show the charges have anything to do with Trump. Show me in the Gates indictment where it says the charges have to do with Trump.The part with the name Richard W. Gates III.

Sorry TSA, you're trying to connect the Clintons with names so anyone else can do the same thing.

[Pavlov]

To win the election. Manafort did what he was hired to do. He's a piece of shit, but he did what he was hired to do.Actually he was fired in August. :lol did you not know that?

Why was he hired over everyone else in the political world available?

[Pavlov]

Big Shot Bob’s got the left completely shook with the latest indictment. He’s slowly exposing the layers.According to whom?

Fake poet twitter?

[spurraider21]

lol dead

Why do you have to reassure yourself so often, TSA?
THERE ARE NO TRANSITIONAL FOSSILS

[Chris]

What is the FBI hiding in its war to protect Comey?



As the James Comey saga continues to unfold, the James Comey legend continues to unravel. The more we learn about his involvement in the deep state’s illicit targeting of President Trump, the more reason the American people have to question both his motives and his management as director of the FBI, the now-disgraced agency he headed before Trump fired him on May 9, 2017. Comey has left a trail of suspicious activities in his wake.

Comey now looms large over a burgeoning constitutional crisis that could soon overshadow Watergate at its worst. To deepen the crisis even further, it now appears some of Comey’s former FBI and Justice Department colleagues continue to protect him from accountability.

Three suspicious activities stand out, all intertwined: the so-called Comey Memos, Comey’s controversial testimony before the Senate Intelligence Committee and Comey’s book deal.

After Comey was fired by President Trump on May 9, 2017, he arranged to give The New York Times a Feb. 14, 2017, memorandum he had written about a one-on-one conversation with Trump regarding former national security adviser Michael Flynn. The New York Times published a report about the memo on May 16, 2017. Special counsel Robert Mueller was appointed the following day.


On June 8, 2017, Comey testified under oath before the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, where he stated he authored as many as nine such memos. Regarding the Flynn memo, Comey admitted: “I asked a friend of mine to share the content of the memo with a reporter [for The New York Times]. I didn’t do it myself for a variety of reasons, but I asked him to because I thought that might prompt the appointment of a special counsel.”

Comey also testified about Trump’s firing of him, and he detailed multiple conversations with Trump, during which Comey confirmed he told Trump three times that he was not a target of investigation. Judicial Watch is pursuing numerous FOIA lawsuits relating to Comey’s memoranda and FBI exit records as well a lawsuit for Justice Department communications about Comey’s Senate testimony. The American people deserve to know what, if any, complicity his former colleagues had in drafting that testimony and/or in engineering the appointment of Mueller.

The day before Comey’s testimony, Fox News reported: “A source close to James Comey tells Fox News the former FBI director’s Senate testimony has been ‘closely coordinated’ with Robert Mueller.” Comey may have violated the law in leaking his official FBI memos to the media, and it would be a scandal if Comey coordinated his Senate testimony with Mueller’s special counsel office.

That we have had to sue in federal court to discover the truth speaks volumes. The FBI has built a protective stonewall around Comey by refusing to release the Comey memos and refusing to disclose records of communications between the FBI and Comey prior to and regarding Comey’s testimony before the Senate Intelligence Committee.

Since his forced departure from the FBI, Comey signed a book deal in August, set for publication in April, for which he reportedly received an advance in excess of $2 million. Given the fact that the FBI appears to be letting Comey get away with stealing and leaking official government documents and colluding with the special counsel to get Trump, even a trusting person must be suspicious about his book deal.

The FBI has fanned those suspicions by, you guessed it, adding a new layer to the protective stonewall around Comey. Again, Judicial Watch has been forced to sue a recalcitrant FBI for records, including but not limited to forms Comey was required to complete relating to prepublication review of the book by the FBI. Did Comey’s cronies give the fired FBI director a pass on this long-standing requirement? Is that why they are stonewalling the Judicial Watch FOIA?

Based upon Comey’s performance to date, this book likely will be an elaborate exercise in self-apotheosis. That’s why the American public deserves to know if Comey’s former colleagues — many of whom we now know aided in his exoneration of Hillary Clinton and have participated in the contrived investigation of Donald Trump — scrutinized his literary claims or simply green-lighted his every word.

There is no doubt that the deep state is in deep cover-up mode. The FBI, Justice Department and the special counsel all are stonewalling our requests for Comey documents. The more they stonewall, the deeper the suspicions grow about Comey’s complicity in the entire attempt to use the bogus Trump dossier to prevent the election of Donald Trump, and then use it to undermine his presidency once he was elected to office. In my experience in Washington, when people refuse to come clean, it is usually because they are hiding dirty laundry.

Tom Fitton (@TomFitton) is the president of Judicial Watch.

http://thehill.com/opinion/campaign/374675-what-is-the-fbi-hiding-in-its-war-to-protect-comey

[spurraider21]

lol op-ed from tom fitton being masqueraded as news

[Chris]

966398196225400839

[Reck]

966398196225400839

And?

[Chris]

MUELLER MADNESS: Judge’s Decision RAISES NEW QUESTIONS over Flynn’s Plea Deal



A federal judge’s recent decision regarding special counsel Robert Mueller’s charges against former National Security Advisor Michael Flynn raised serious new questions about the DOJ’s probe into Russian meddling; with some calling on Flynn to withdraw his guilty plea.

The controversy began when U.S. District Judge Rudolph Contreras officially recused himself from the case; eventually being replaced by Judge Emmet Sullivan. Sullivan immediately ordered Mueller’s team to provide “any evidence in its possession that is favorable” to the former Trump advisor.

The judge’s request raises serious questions over whether Mueller and his team misled US officials in order to secure Flynn’s guilty plea; raising the possibility he could withdraw his admission and go to trial.

“Mueller’s team has since postponed Flynn’s sentencing. And last Wednesday, Mueller’s team filed a protective order ‘governing the production of discovery,’ which indicates they won’t fight the order to hand over documents,” writes Fox News.

“Could this provide General Flynn with factual grounds of which he was previously unaware to seek to have his plea vacated?” asked former assistant US attorney Andrew McCarthy. “Would he have a viable legal basis to undo the plea agreement that he and his lawyer signed on November 30? We do not know at this point.”

https://www.hannity.com/media-room/mueller-madness-judges-decision-raises-new-questions-over-flynns-plea-deal/

[TSA]

The part with the name Richard W. Gates III.

Sorry TSA, you're trying to connect the Clintons with names so anyone else can do the same thing.

Sorry Pavlov but you can't do the same thing. Gates committed those crimes when he was connected to the Clintons, not Trump.

[Pavlov]

Sorry Pavlov but you can't do the same thing. Gates committed those crimes when he was connected to the Clintons, not Trump.He was working for Trump when he communicated with van der Zwaan, according to the court documents.

Tell us what that communication has to do with the Clintons.

[Blake]

966398196225400839


And?

The ol tweet and run

[DarrinS]

http://thefederalist.com/2018/02/21/how-the-media-enable-rep-adam-schiffs-russian-bot-conspiracy-theories/

[TSA]

He was working for Trump when he communicated with van der Zwaan, according to the court documents.

Tell us what that communication has to do with the Clintons.


Van der Zwaan's conversation with the special counsel's office in which he allegedly lied happened three days after Manafort and Gates were charged with crimes related to their work for Ukrainian politicians and other business. Both have pleaded not guilty.
In early November, prosecutors questioned van der Zwaan on his work with international law firm Skadden Arps. They were investigating Manafort's, Gates' and other individuals' compliance with the Foreign Agents Registration Act, which governs foreign lobbying and propaganda work for foreign governments in the US, and wanted to know who paid for a Ukrainian report on the trial of a former prime minister and how it was paid for, prosecutors said in court Tuesday.
Van der Zwaan spoke with the special counsel's office a second time in early December to confess to his inaccuracies and what he knew, according to prosecutors' statements in court and a plea agreement released Tuesday.

https://www.cnn.com/2018/02/20/politics/robert-mueller-rick-gates/index.html

Skadden Arps produced the report for Yanukovych. Skadden Arps employed Greg Craig, White House counsel to Obama/assistant to the President Clinton/special counsel in the White House to Clinton and Clifford Sloan, Associate White House Counsel to President Clinton.


"The prosecutors' criminal charge Tuesday explains how van der Zwaan was in touch with Gates and an unnamed colleague of Gates' who was principally based in Ukraine again in September 2016.
They discussed how a criminal complaint in Ukraine could implicate a former Ukrainian official, Skadden and Manafort himself."

Tell us what these communications had to do with Trump.

[Pavlov]

Van der Zwaan's conversation with the special counsel's office in which he allegedly lied happened three days after Manafort and Gates were charged with crimes related to their work for Ukrainian politicians and other business. Both have pleaded not guilty.
In early November, prosecutors questioned van der Zwaan on his work with international law firm Skadden Arps. They were investigating Manafort's, Gates' and other individuals' compliance with the Foreign Agents Registration Act, which governs foreign lobbying and propaganda work for foreign governments in the US, and wanted to know who paid for a Ukrainian report on the trial of a former prime minister and how it was paid for, prosecutors said in court Tuesday.
Van der Zwaan spoke with the special counsel's office a second time in early December to confess to his inaccuracies and what he knew, according to prosecutors' statements in court and a plea agreement released Tuesday.

https://www.cnn.com/2018/02/20/politics/robert-mueller-rick-gates/index.html

Skadden Arps produced the report for Yanukovych. Skadden Arps employed Greg Craig, White House counsel to Obama/assistant to the President Clinton/special counsel in the White House to Clinton and Clifford Sloan, Associate White House Counsel to President Clinton.


"The prosecutors' criminal charge Tuesday explains how van der Zwaan was in touch with Gates and an unnamed colleague of Gates' who was principally based in Ukraine again in September 2016.
They discussed how a criminal complaint in Ukraine could implicate a former Ukrainian official, Skadden and Manafort himself."https://i.imgur.com/eLEz1zA.gif


Tell us what these communications had to do with Trump.Gates was working for Trump when he communicated with van der Zwaan, according to the court documents.

Easy questions tbh.

[Reck]

http://thefederalist.com/2018/02/21/how-the-media-enable-rep-adam-schiffs-russian-bot-conspiracy-theories/

Then it's a good thing these "experts" aren't Robert Mueller.

[TSA]

https://i.imgur.com/eLEz1zA.gif

Gates was working for Trump when he communicated with van der Zwaan, according to the court documents.

Easy questions tbh.

Were the crimes he committed during the time he was on the Trump campaign or the time he was working with Skadden Arps?

[TSA]

http://thefederalist.com/2018/02/21/how-the-media-enable-rep-adam-schiffs-russian-bot-conspiracy-theories/

:lol Hamilton68
:lol RandomGuy

[Chris]

And?

CNN has been promoting Russian collusion since the story (Steele Dossier) broke. They also promote Russian funded Trump protests. Put on your thinking cap McFly. It's not hard to connect the dots unless you choose to remain willfully ignorant because of partisanship.

[TSA]

:lol Hamilton68
:lol RandomGuy

965926273594941440

[TSA]

Were the crimes he committed during the time he was on the Trump campaign or the time he was working with Skadden Arps?

Easy question tbh I wonder what is taking so long.

[Pavlov]

Were the crimes he committed during the time he was on the Trump campaign or the time he was working with Skadden Arps?Gates?

Several of them were committed when he was working for the Trump campaign. So connected to Trump.

I have no knowledge of van der Zwaan's working for any campaign and never claimed any.

[Pavlov]

:lol Hamilton68
:lol RandomGuy:lol Laguna Beach Antifa

[Chris]

Why were Michael Moore and CNN promoting Russian funded protests?

Not an easy question. No surprise dodgerjohn refused to answer and no one else can. :lol

[TSA]

Gates?

Several of them were committed when he was working for the Trump campaign. So connected to Trump.
Which crimes were committed when he was working for the Trump campaign? Were these crimes you claim that were committed when he was working on the Trump campaign related to his work with Skadden Arps?

[Pavlov]

Which crimes were committed when he was working for the Trump campaign? Were these crimes you claim that were committed when he was working on the Trump campaign related to his work with Skadden Arps?:lol I "claim"?

I claimed Gates is connected to Trump and van der Zwaan committed his crime lying about his connection to Gates.

You haven't refuted any of it.

And you haven't proved Clinton is involved in any of this.

What crime are you accusing Clinton of here?

[Chris]

Why were Michael Moore and CNN promoting Russian funded protests?


73tGe3JE5IU

[Pavlov]

lol CNN promoting

[Chris]

Why is CNN doxing innocent people and promoting Russian funded protests?


966447116007628801

[spurraider21]

Why is CNN doxing innocent people and promoting Russian funded protests?


966447116007628801


lol harassing and doxxing. she agreed to do an interview :lmao

and she didn't really refute what he was saying... except when she went off the rails and starting saying BS, BS, BS it was hillary who colluded with russians, etc

[Chris]

:cry anyone who mentions Hillary is going off the rails :cry

:cry #StillWithHer :cry

[spurraider21]

*ding*

[Spurminator]

Only true pieces of shit post Mike Cernovich without feeling an overwhelming sense of shame.

[TSA]

:lol I "claim"?

I claimed Gates is connected to Trump and van der Zwaan committed his crime lying about his connection to Gates.

You haven't refuted any of it.

And you haven't proved Clinton is involved in any of this.

What crime are you accusing Clinton of here?

Yes "claimed". You claimed Gates committed several crimes when he was working for the Trump campaign. I asked you specifically about Gates crimes.


Gates?

Several of them were committed when he was working for the Trump campaign

So which crimes were committed when he was working for the Trump campaign? Were these crimes you claim that were committed when he was working on the Trump campaign related to his work with Skadden Arps?

I never accused the Clintons of any crimes here just said the van der Zwaan indictment is connected to them.

[Pavlov]

Why is CNN doxing innocent people and promoting Russian funded protests?


966447116007628801lol harmed

Who's going to harm her?

[Chris]

Woman Receives Abuse, Violent Threats After CNN Tracks Down, Publicly Shames Her for Sharing ‘Russian’ Event on Facebook


http://www.breitbart.com/tech/2018/02/21/woman-receives-abuse-violent-threats-after-cnn-tracks-down-publicly-shames-her-for-sharing-russian-event-on-facebook/


Drew Griffin and the network have not yet confronted Michael Moore, who attended a rally allegedly organized by Russians.

In July, the cable news giant hunted down a man who posted a meme on Reddit poking fun at the network. The man publicly apologized to the network.

[Pavlov]

Yes "claimed". You claimed Gates committed several crimes when he was working for the Trump campaign.He did.



So which crimes were committed when he was working for the Trump campaign? Were these crimes you claim that were committed when he was working on the Trump campaign related to his work with Skadden Arps?It's all there in the indictment. Conspiracy and lying. If you have a point to any of it, use that as your source, not fake poet banned twitter.


I never accused the Clintons of any crimes here just said the van der Zwaan indictment is connected to them.So just more bullshit innuendo.

It's more closely connected to Trump.

Because Gates.

Who worked for Trump at the time of their meeting.

You can't change it.

Sorry.

[Reck]

Woman Receives Abuse, Violent Threats After CNN Tracks Down, Publicly Shames Her for Sharing ‘Russian’ Event on Facebook


http://www.breitbart.com/tech/2018/02/21/woman-receives-abuse-violent-threats-after-cnn-tracks-down-publicly-shames-her-for-sharing-russian-event-on-facebook/

Is she alive? If so check mark.

You see, when someone on the left goes out for a peaceful protest, they get run down with cars and killed. Tolerant right. :tu

[Pavlov]

Woman Receives Abuse, Violent Threats After CNN Tracks Down, Publicly Shames Her for Sharing ‘Russian’ Event on Facebook


http://www.breitbart.com/tech/2018/02/21/woman-receives-abuse-violent-threats-after-cnn-tracks-down-publicly-shames-her-for-sharing-russian-event-on-facebook/So she's filing reports with the FBI, right?

[RandomGuy]

:lol Hamilton68
:lol RandomGuy

You have yet to address, even remotely, Hamilton's methodology. Your ad hominems are remarkably easy to dismiss.

"dur, bored member bad, dur".

Jeez, dude, here's a napkin for the saliva you have dribbling from your chin.

[RandomGuy]

:cry anyone who mentions Hillary is going off the rails :cry

:cry #StillWithHer :cry

muh Hillary


:lol

She lost, get over it.

[Chris]

muh Hillary


:lol

She lost, get over it.

She's being investigated. No Comey to cover everything up this time. Going to be an interesting year rife with revelations.

[TSA]

He did.


It's all there in the indictment. Conspiracy and lying. If you have a point to any of it, use that as your source, not fake poet banned twitter.

So just more bullshit innuendo.

It's more closely connected to Trump.

Because Gates.

Who worked for Trump at the time of their meeting.

You can't change it.

Sorry.



Were these crimes you claim that were committed when he was working on the Trump campaign related to his work with Skadden Arps yes or no?

[RandomGuy]

:lol Hamilton68
:lol RandomGuy




"These accounts were selected for their relationship to Russian-sponsored influence and disinformation campaigns, and not because of any domestic political content. The initial dashboard tracks 600 accounts that were
1) identified as participating in specific disinformation campaigns synchronized with Russia Today and Sputnik News,
2) meaningfully linked to users who self-identified as promoting pro-Russian viewpoints, and
3) bots that provide support to members of the first two categories.

We have monitored these datasets for months in order to verify their relevance to Russian disinformation programs targeting the United States. Russian influence operations targeting other audiences, such as in France and Germany, usually have different but overlapping content."

Seems like a fairly reasonable way to get at a network, assuming that the push was coordinated with other state-controlled Russian media.


Feel free to put forth a specific critique of the method, or even more funny, present one of your own. :lol

[TSA]

You have yet to address, even remotely, Hamilton's methodology. Your ad hominems are remarkably easy to dismiss.

"dur, bored member bad, dur".

Jeez, dude, here's a napkin for the saliva you have dribbling from your chin.

I did address their methodology along with the makeup of their team, that's why I get to :lol Hamilton68

Twitter and Facebook also :lol 'd Hamilton68

[TSA]

Seems like a fairly reasonable way to get at a network, assuming that the push was coordinated with other state-controlled Russian media.


Feel free to put forth a specific critique of the method, or even more funny, present one of your own. :lol

They have zero access to the user information that Twitter and Facebook have on their users. One of Hamilton68's own employees said it was all just a guess on their part. They've also refused to share their dashboard with Twitter and Facebook.

[Pavlov]

Were these crimes you claim that were committed when he was working on the Trump campaign related to his work with Skadden Arps yes or no?As far as I can tell, they could be. I didn't read all the specifics in the conspiracy and money laundering charges but they mostly have to do with work for Ukraine and the furtherance of the conspiracy goes into 2016, so probably. If you have a definitive answer based on a closer reading of the indictment, post it.

Tell me in your own words how this is really terrible legal news for Clinton and Obama.

[TSA]

As far as I can tell, they could be. I didn't read all the specifics in the conspiracy and money laundering charges but they mostly have to do with work for Ukraine and the furtherance of the conspiracy goes into 2016, so probably. If you have a definitive answer based on a closer reading of the indictment, post it.

Tell me in your own words how this is really terrible legal news for Clinton and Obama.I never said this was really terrible legal news for the Clintons and Obama. I just pointed out the most recent indictment had zero to do with Trump and is instead connected to the Clintons through Skadden Arps. From your above answer you are in agreement.

[Pavlov]

I never said this was really terrible legal news for the Clintons and Obama. I just pointed out the most recent indictment had zero to do with Trump and is instead connected to the Clintons through Skadden Arps. From your above answer you are in agreement.Nope.

It's connected to Trump.

Because Gates. Who worked for the Trump campaign.

And you did nothing to disprove it when given the chance.

[TSA]

Nope.

It's connected to Trump.

Because Gates. Who worked for the Trump campaign.

And you did nothing to disprove it when given the chance.

The crimes named in the indictment are not connected to Trump, they are connected to the Clintons via Skadden Arps. You said it yourself.

[Pavlov]

The crimes named in the indictment are not connected to Trump, they are connected to the Clintons via Skadden Arps. You said it yourself.Nope. I said the crimes are connected to Trump because he worked for Trump. That's much closer than any connection fake poet banned twitter tried to make to Clinton.

But you go right ahead and tell us what legal jeopardy you now see Clinton in because of your claims.

The only reason you have *ding*ed the latest indictments is just to spread some more innuendo.

It's always innuendo with you. Why do you feel the need to push that kind of innuendo whenever Mueller does something?

[Chris]

:corn:

[Pavlov]

:corn:You have no idea what is being discussed.

[Chris]

You have no idea what is being discussed.


Nope.

It's connected to Trump.

Because Gates. Who worked for the Trump campaign.

Truly a dizzying intellect :lol

[Splits]

lol TSA conspiracy antenna again triggered to 11 by another obscure sounding proper noun

[Chris]

Pavlov grandstanding just made my day :lol

[Pavlov]

Truly a dizzying intellect :lolOK, explain the charges against van der Zwaan in your own words.

[TSA]

Nope. I said the crimes are connected to Trump because he worked for Trump. That's much closer than any connection fake poet banned twitter tried to make to Clinton.

But you go right ahead and tell us what legal jeopardy you now see Clinton in because of your claims.

The only reason you have *ding*ed the latest indictments is just to spread some more innuendo.

It's always innuendo with you. Why do you feel the need to push that kind of innuendo whenever Mueller does something?Nope.

The crimes he committed years ago while working with the white house counsel to President Obama/assistant to President Clinton and the special counsel in the White House to President Clinton are more connected to Trump than the Clintons because he worked on Trump’s campaign? Are you seriously going to roll with that? :rollin

[Pavlov]

Nope.

The crimes he committed years ago while working with the white house counsel to President Obama/assistant to President Clinton and the special counsel in the White House to President Clinton are more connected to Trump than the Clintons because he worked on Trump’s campaign? Are you seriously going to roll with that? :rollinHm, two people not working for Clinton.

One guy working for Trump.

Yes, more connected to Trump.

[Chris]

966464302289862656

[Reck]

Good old Judicial watch loves wasting their time on shit that they know won't go anywhere.

But hey, it makes Chris feel reassured...somehow and for some reason. :lol

[Chris]

966470090303594496

[Pavlov]

966470090303594496lol trying to smear a Republican appointed by a Republican appointed by a Republican.

[Chris]

lol trying to smear a Republican appointed by a Republican appointed by a Republican.

Can someone translate this for a layman? This is too complex for me.

[Chris]

966029508267700224

I recall someone saying this was one of their favorite news sources.

[Pavlov]

Can someone translate this for a layman? This is too complex for me.:lol figures

[Pavlov]

966029508267700224

I recall someone saying this was one of their favorite news sources.From the same guy:966404213248004096

lol

I seem to recall Chris's being too chickenshit to list his favorite news sources.

[spurraider21]

966029508267700224

I recall someone saying this was one of their favorite news sources.
i recall you calling it fake

[Chris]

I seem to recall Chris's being too chickenshit to list his favorite news sources.

already posted :lol Your recollection sucks :lol


Tucker Carlson, Sebastian Gorka, Mike Cernovich, Judge Pirro, and occasionally Sean Hannity and Alex Jones

Daily Caller,Rebel Media (Canada), zerohedge, gatewaypundit, truepundit, and occasionally Fox

youtubers: Bill Still, Anthony Brian Logan, Mark Dice, 1791L(really good op-ed), CRTV (Gavin McInnes), Dick Morris, HIGH ENERGY, Jonathon Schwartz, Norm Macdonald, Paul Joseph Watson, Tgowdysc, Trey Smith, The Black Child

:tu

[Pavlov]

already posted :lol Your recollection sucks :lolYou didn't list any news sources.

[Chris]

WHY?!

966469011176378368

[Pavlov]

WHY?!

966469011176378368Still bashing Republicans.

[boutons_deux]

Still bashing Republicans.

Clinton/Dem "collusion" with Russia is a Repug/Fox/Trash fantasy, fabricated as a distraction for Trash and his mafiya going down.

Pootin's cyber army didn't create Repug/Dem polarization (Repug did that by themselves, since early 90s), but Pootin's people did work to amplify the polarization, probably targeting swing states, like MI, WI, PA

Then Comey/Nunez executed the coup de grace, according to Nate Silver, on Clinton with "maybe there's something there" bullshit about Huma's PC.

[Chris]

yep just a fantasy and fabrication eh boots :lol

XsFR8DbSRQE

[Chris]

966467844094349312

[pgardn]

966029508267700224

I recall someone saying this was one of their favorite news sources.


I love it.

Thanks for the opinion.
I also don't think Russian bots helped Trump win. He beat a whole slew of Republicans. What I do believe is Russians tried to create chaos in our elections. So Chris, what do you think about Russia playing with our elections? Should it be investigated by our intelligence as well as tried courts? And this bot stuff was fake as well, and you are posting it? What?

Pick a rock to hide under Chris, you can't use them all.

[Chris]

I love it.

Thanks for the opinion.
I also don't think Russian bots helped Trump win. He beat a whole slew of Republicans. What I do believe is Russians tried to create chaos in our elections. So Chris, what do you think about Russia playing with our elections? Should it be investigated by our intelligence as well as tried courts? And this bot stuff was fake as well, and you are posting it? What?

Pick a rock to hide under Chris, you can't use them all.

You just can't stay away. How adorable :lol

[Pavlov]

You just can't stay away. How adorable :lolYou didn't answer his questions.

[Chris]

You didn't answer his questions.

He's lucky he's not on the ignore list. I don't answer questions on demand, and he/she knows exactly where we stand, but presses the issue regardless. A habitual line stepper much like yourself.

[Pavlov]

He's lucky he's not on the ignore list. I don't answer questions on demand, and he/she knows exactly where we stand, but presses the issue regardless. A habitual line stepper much like yourself.So you're a hypocrite too.

OK.

[TSA]

Interesting breakdown of the actual writing in the dossier

Did Christopher Steele Write His Dossier, or Did a Russian Associate?

Among the few givens in the unfolding drama of alleged Russia-Trump collusion is that former MI6 intelligence officer Christopher Steele wrote the Donald Trump-Russia dossier, alternately known as the "Steele Dossier."

This is the notorious document that purports to detail "Republican candidate Donald Trump's activities in Russia and compromising relationship with the Kremlin."

The above quote is from the subhead of the document, titled "Company Intelligence Report 2016/080." Yet the same subhead hints at a disturbing pattern evident throughout the document: it appears to be written by someone whose native language is something other than English.

The phrase should read, "Republican candidate Donald Trump's activities in Russia and his compromising relationship with the Kremlin." As shall be seen, it is hard to believe that Christopher Steele actually wrote the original phrase or much of the rest of the eponymous dossier.

Christopher Steele, or "Chris Steele," as he bylined his reporting, attended Cambridge University and wrote for the student publication, Varsity. At Cambridge, he also served as president of the Cambridge Union Society, a debating club.

Contemporaries remember him as an "avowedly [l]eft-wing student with CND credentials." CND is shorthand for "Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament," a British organization that was particularly active when Steele arrived at Cambridge in the early 1980s. At the time, MI5 monitored CND for its reported communist ties.

As the British Guardian observed in an article on Steele, "Cambridge had produced some of MI6's most talented cold war officials. A few of them, it turned out – to great embarrassment – had secret second jobs with the KGB." But this is a story for another day.

The story for today is how a Cambridge journalist and debater could write a sentence like the following: "Alpha held 'kompromat' on Putin and his corrupt business activities from the 1990s whilst although not personally overly bothered by Alpha's failure to reinvest the proceeds of its TNK oil company sale into the Russian economy since, the Russian president was able to use pressure on this count from senior Kremlin colleagues as a lever on Fridman and AVEN to make them do his political bidding."

The articles we have unearthed from Steele's tenure at Varsity read like someone who knew his own language. Much of the Steele dossier reads like the sentence above: a syntactical nightmare with a near random use of punctuation.

The author of the dossier was, however, schooled in British English. The document contains distinctly English usages such as "programme," "defence," "authorised," and "manoeuvre." The use of such words as "regime," "apparatus," and "compatriot" indicates someone fluent in Cold War terminology.

That said, too many of the sentences read as though written by an individual not fully fluent in English, British or American. Here is one of several: "Trump's previous efforts had included exploring the real estate sector in St. Petersburg as well as Moscow but in the end Trump had had to settle for the use of extensive sexual services there from local prostitutes rather than business success." The very idea of linking "sexual services" and "business success" is jarring, as is the stand-alone use of "business success."

There are several basic misuses of the language that should have cautioned officials who read this document. One sentence, for instance, begins with the phrase "Speaking to a trusted compatriot." After parsing the sentence, it becomes clear that the author meant "According to a trusted compatriot." The "speaking to" misdirection makes a jumble out of the sentence.

In writing about sex, the author is particularly maladroit. He famously claims that Russian authorities had compromised Trump by catching him in his "personal obsessions and sexual perversion."

In one instance, Trump was alleged to have gotten revenge on the Obamas, "whom he hated." He did this by "defiling the bed where they had stayed on one of their official trips to Russia by employing a number of prostitutes to perform a 'golden showers' urination show." The common phrase is "golden shower," and what native English speaker would say "'golden showers' urination show"?

Another discordant pattern throughout the dossier is the absence of an article where one expects to see one. For instance, the phrase "to encourage splits and divisions in western alliance" is missing a "the" before "western alliance." The phrase "anchored upon countries' interest" should read, in context, "anchored upon the country's interest." More than once, the author misuses the possessive, as he does here.

The punctuation is bewildering throughout the dossier. As a case in point, several sentences begin with the word "however" without a following comma: "However it has not as yet been distributed abroad." In other instances, the "however" is followed by a comma: "However, there were other aspects ..." The latter is correct. On the use of commas before or after conjunctions such as "and" and 'but," there is no consistency whatsoever.

It is possible that the document had more than one author, one perhaps Russian, one most likely Steele. At one point, the reader is told that the Trump campaign leaked the DNC documents to WikiLeaks "to swing supporters of Bernie SANDERS away from Hillary CLINTON and across to TRUMP." The "summary" section straightens out the language. Now the goal is to switch voters "away from CLINTON and over to TRUMP."

There are many other little details that bug the reader. The author writes, "Things had become even 'hotter' since August on the TRUMP-RUSSIA track." Why put "hotter" in quotes? It is much too common a metaphor to demand that kind of attention.

What is most disturbing is that no one in the media appears to have reviewed the language of the dossier. Whether the primary author is Steele or a Russian associate, the dossier is a mess, both in its content and in its style.

A former KGB spy who defected to the United States, Konstantin Preobrazhenky, did not feel qualified to assess the language of the dossier. English is not his first language. As to content, however, he told us, "There is no information in the dossier whatsoever. It's just foolish speculation. There are no references. It is not an intelligence document of any kind. I was laughing when I was reading it."

One content point that reasserts itself repeatedly toward the end of the document is the notion of "Moscow's interference in the US Presidential election campaign." Another is Trump's perceived "unfitness" for office. Jammed in out of nowhere, these assertions read less like Russian intel than like Democrat talking points.

The question remains: who did the colluding? Was it the Trump campaign or the Clinton campaign? Much hinges on the authorship of this dossier. The media have an obligation to ask who else was involved in its creation. If Christopher Steele wrote it himself, Cambridge should rescind his degree.

https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2018/01/did_christopher_steele_write_his_dossier_or_did_a_ russian_associate.html

[Pavlov]

Interesting breakdown of the actual writing in the dossier

Did Christopher Steele Write His Dossier, or Did a Russian Associate?

Among the few givens in the unfolding drama of alleged Russia-Trump collusion is that former MI6 intelligence officer Christopher Steele wrote the Donald Trump-Russia dossier, alternately known as the "Steele Dossier."

This is the notorious document that purports to detail "Republican candidate Donald Trump's activities in Russia and compromising relationship with the Kremlin."

The above quote is from the subhead of the document, titled "Company Intelligence Report 2016/080." Yet the same subhead hints at a disturbing pattern evident throughout the document: it appears to be written by someone whose native language is something other than English.

The phrase should read, "Republican candidate Donald Trump's activities in Russia and his compromising relationship with the Kremlin." As shall be seen, it is hard to believe that Christopher Steele actually wrote the original phrase or much of the rest of the eponymous dossier.

Christopher Steele, or "Chris Steele," as he bylined his reporting, attended Cambridge University and wrote for the student publication, Varsity. At Cambridge, he also served as president of the Cambridge Union Society, a debating club.

Contemporaries remember him as an "avowedly [l]eft-wing student with CND credentials." CND is shorthand for "Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament," a British organization that was particularly active when Steele arrived at Cambridge in the early 1980s. At the time, MI5 monitored CND for its reported communist ties.

As the British Guardian observed in an article on Steele, "Cambridge had produced some of MI6's most talented cold war officials. A few of them, it turned out – to great embarrassment – had secret second jobs with the KGB." But this is a story for another day.

The story for today is how a Cambridge journalist and debater could write a sentence like the following: "Alpha held 'kompromat' on Putin and his corrupt business activities from the 1990s whilst although not personally overly bothered by Alpha's failure to reinvest the proceeds of its TNK oil company sale into the Russian economy since, the Russian president was able to use pressure on this count from senior Kremlin colleagues as a lever on Fridman and AVEN to make them do his political bidding."

The articles we have unearthed from Steele's tenure at Varsity read like someone who knew his own language. Much of the Steele dossier reads like the sentence above: a syntactical nightmare with a near random use of punctuation.

The author of the dossier was, however, schooled in British English. The document contains distinctly English usages such as "programme," "defence," "authorised," and "manoeuvre." The use of such words as "regime," "apparatus," and "compatriot" indicates someone fluent in Cold War terminology.

That said, too many of the sentences read as though written by an individual not fully fluent in English, British or American. Here is one of several: "Trump's previous efforts had included exploring the real estate sector in St. Petersburg as well as Moscow but in the end Trump had had to settle for the use of extensive sexual services there from local prostitutes rather than business success." The very idea of linking "sexual services" and "business success" is jarring, as is the stand-alone use of "business success."

There are several basic misuses of the language that should have cautioned officials who read this document. One sentence, for instance, begins with the phrase "Speaking to a trusted compatriot." After parsing the sentence, it becomes clear that the author meant "According to a trusted compatriot." The "speaking to" misdirection makes a jumble out of the sentence.

In writing about sex, the author is particularly maladroit. He famously claims that Russian authorities had compromised Trump by catching him in his "personal obsessions and sexual perversion."

In one instance, Trump was alleged to have gotten revenge on the Obamas, "whom he hated." He did this by "defiling the bed where they had stayed on one of their official trips to Russia by employing a number of prostitutes to perform a 'golden showers' urination show." The common phrase is "golden shower," and what native English speaker would say "'golden showers' urination show"?

Another discordant pattern throughout the dossier is the absence of an article where one expects to see one. For instance, the phrase "to encourage splits and divisions in western alliance" is missing a "the" before "western alliance." The phrase "anchored upon countries' interest" should read, in context, "anchored upon the country's interest." More than once, the author misuses the possessive, as he does here.

The punctuation is bewildering throughout the dossier. As a case in point, several sentences begin with the word "however" without a following comma: "However it has not as yet been distributed abroad." In other instances, the "however" is followed by a comma: "However, there were other aspects ..." The latter is correct. On the use of commas before or after conjunctions such as "and" and 'but," there is no consistency whatsoever.

It is possible that the document had more than one author, one perhaps Russian, one most likely Steele. At one point, the reader is told that the Trump campaign leaked the DNC documents to WikiLeaks "to swing supporters of Bernie SANDERS away from Hillary CLINTON and across to TRUMP." The "summary" section straightens out the language. Now the goal is to switch voters "away from CLINTON and over to TRUMP."

There are many other little details that bug the reader. The author writes, "Things had become even 'hotter' since August on the TRUMP-RUSSIA track." Why put "hotter" in quotes? It is much too common a metaphor to demand that kind of attention.

What is most disturbing is that no one in the media appears to have reviewed the language of the dossier. Whether the primary author is Steele or a Russian associate, the dossier is a mess, both in its content and in its style.

A former KGB spy who defected to the United States, Konstantin Preobrazhenky, did not feel qualified to assess the language of the dossier. English is not his first language. As to content, however, he told us, "There is no information in the dossier whatsoever. It's just foolish speculation. There are no references. It is not an intelligence document of any kind. I was laughing when I was reading it."

One content point that reasserts itself repeatedly toward the end of the document is the notion of "Moscow's interference in the US Presidential election campaign." Another is Trump's perceived "unfitness" for office. Jammed in out of nowhere, these assertions read less like Russian intel than like Democrat talking points.

The question remains: who did the colluding? Was it the Trump campaign or the Clinton campaign? Much hinges on the authorship of this dossier. The media have an obligation to ask who else was involved in its creation. If Christopher Steele wrote it himself, Cambridge should rescind his degree.

https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2018/01/did_christopher_steele_write_his_dossier_or_did_a_ russian_associate.htmlAnother conspiracy!

[Chris]

A lot of people contributed to the dossier, but we all know who paid for it. #LockHerUp

[Spurtacular]

Darrin is outraged!

lol old lady even *dings* during the interview. Just like Darrin.

Hillary wasn't in contact with the Russians? She was talking about an election that involved Hillary, nitwit.

Also :lol at your intrinsic support of CNN harassing senior citizens.

[Spurtacular]

Of course. Why would I want a felon to run for office?
spurraider21

Huh?

[Spurtacular]

:lmao wut

Mueller is Colin Powell 2.0 he will go in hiding after he either resigns or gets fired
:lol

How so?

[Pavlov]

Hillary wasn't in contact with the Russians?When was Hillary herself in contact with the Russians?

Be specific.

[TSA]

Another conspiracy!

Is calling everything you disagree with a “conspiracy!” the new version of your white flag?

Can you state with certainty that Steele and only Steele was the author of the dossier yes or no?

[Chris]

Think Horowitz. Inspector general report is coming soon which might be what Sessions is waiting on. If Trump fires Sessions, as indicated by a perceived rift through a Trump tweet, then he may face backlash from the Senate. After all Sessions gave up a seat to take on the job as AG. This won't stop Trump though if that is the case.

[Pavlov]

Is calling everything you disagree with a “conspiracy!” the new version of your white flag?

Can you state with certainty that Steele and only Steele was the author of the dossier yes or no?It's not my claim to prove.

It is now your conspiracy claim, so say why it's the latest big thing for you to exclaim here.

[Spurtacular]

When was Hillary herself in contact with the Russians?

Be specific.

Uranium One.

[Pavlov]

Uranium One.Not specific.

Be specific.

[TSA]

It's not my claim to prove.

It is now your conspiracy claim, so say why it's the latest big thing for you to exclaim here.

I made no claim at all and posted it for discussion. After reading the article do you think Steele was the only author of the dossier yes or no?

[Spurtacular]

:cry Muh hero gave twenty percent of our uranium to the Russia :cry

#StillWithHer

:lmao

[Chris]

It's Sullivan time :tu you heard it here first :tu

rcJpGj_ymGU

[diego]

the election wasnt decided by social media. "hacking the election" would have been altering votes on electronic machines or messing with voter IDs. There is some evidence of that, and that is obviously a very serious attack. Id love it if they proved that, or anything else that would get trump out, but at the same time whatever they could find to use against him will always be covered in conspiracy theories.

propaganda, fake news, has always existed. its just that technology has made it easier and better.

its not russia's fault that people believe that shit. Its the lack of education and critical thinking and a good press, and the people responsible for that are the same candidates and billionaires, and its in their interest to keep it that way because they rely on those tactics to keep their positions.

(no pgardn, having had a good press at one point or a slightly better press than other countries doesnt mean you have a good press now)

[Chris]

EXCLUSIVE: Not A Single Lawyer Known To Work For Mueller Is A Republican


http://cdn01.dailycaller.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/Robert_Mueller_Democratic_Donors-e1519229026587.jpg



* None of the 16 lawyers known to work for special counsel Robert Mueller are registered Republicans
* There are 13 registered Democrats on the investigation and three lawyers with no party affiliation
* Campaign finance records reveal that 11 lawyers are Democratic donors
* None of the 16 publicly-confirmed lawyers on special counsel Robert Mueller’s team are registered Republicans, The Daily Caller News Foundation has found.

Voter registration records indicate that 13 of the attorneys are Democrats and three have no party affiliation. This is the first time the political affiliation of all 16 lawyers has been reported.

One of the lawyers, Zainab Ahmad, appears to have registered as a Republican at the age of 18, but has since changed her registration status to unaffiliated.

There is a 17th lawyer on the Russia probe, but this person’s identity and political affiliation remain unknown.

The special counsel’s office has previously disclosed that nine of the 16 lawyers have made a total of $62,000 in donations to Democrats, with one of those nine lawyers having also donated $2,750 to Republican candidates.

However, that analysis only looked at donations found in Federal Elections Commission records. TheDCNF has uncovered two additional Democratic donors by searching for all donations – regardless of party – recorded in campaign finance databases at the state level.

Adam Jed, an appellate lawyer for the Justice Department, made two donations in 2017 – $1,000 to a Democratic candidate for Wisconsin attorney general and $100 to a Democratic candidate for Baltimore state’s attorney. Another DOJ lawyer, Aaron Zelinsky, donated $100 in 2014 to the Branford Democratic Town Committee in Connecticut and $100 to a Democratic state lawmaker in 2016.

That makes 11 lawyers on the Mueller team who have donated to Democratic campaigns.

Nearly $12,000 in total contributions were found in state databases, all of which were donated to Democrats.

http://dailycaller.com/2018/02/21/exclusive-zero-registered-republicans-mueller-lawyer/


Mueller, a registered Republican, is not included in these figures, but the former FBI director has donated to Republicans both statewide and nationally.

As his team has grown, details about the lawyers hired by Mueller have fueled accusations of political bias on the probe investigating whether the Trump campaign colluded with Russia to influence the 2016 presidential election.

Andrew Weissmann, an early member of the probe, attended former Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton’s election-night party in New York City. In January, he sent an email to then-acting Attorney General Sally Yates, praising her for refusing to enforce President Donald Trump’s travel ban.

“I am so proud and in awe. Thank you so much. All my deepest respects,” he wrote.

Mueller removed FBI agent Peter Strzok last summer after Strzok sent a colleague dozens of anti-Trump text messages.

TheDCNF more recently uncovered that Zelinsky had written overtly partisan articles for the liberal news outlet HuffPost.

The special counsel’s office declined to comment for this article beyond emphasizing that DOJ guidelines prohibit Mueller from considering political affiliation when making hiring decisions.

And defenders of the investigation point out that Andrew Goldstein, who donated thousands to the Obama campaigns in 2008 and 2012, prosecuted a powerful Democrat – former New York State Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver – on corruption charges in 2015.

“Lawyers of course have political opinions, but they routinely leave partisan attachments aside when prosecuting cases,” wrote the Bloomberg editorial board in January.

Yet the growing list of Democratic donors have led some to wonder whether any of the lawyers on Mueller’s team are Republicans.

“I wish there was just one person who came out on his staff who gave to Republicans, one person on his staff that we found out was a conservative writer,” Ari Fleischer, former press secretary to President George W. Bush, said on Fox News. “I mean – it just seems like the deck is stacked.”

James Quarles, a former assistant prosecutor on the Watergate investigation, did make two donations to Republicans, including a $2,500 contribution to Republican Rep. Jason Chaffetz; however, Quarles has also donated nearly $38,000 to Democratic campaigns.

No other lawyers working for Mueller are known to have contributed to Republican campaigns.

Jeannie Rhee, a former partner at the law firm WilmerHale, maxxed out her contributions to Clinton’s presidential campaign in 2015 and 2016 and donated thousands to the Obama campaigns in 2008 and 2011.

State campaign finance records reveal that Rhee also donated to local Democrats in states like Rhode Island, Massachusetts, Ohio and Virginia.

Records show that Weissmann, the former head of the DOJ criminal fraud unit, was also a frequent Democratic donor in New York, including a $1,000 contribution he made to Andrew Cuomo’s bid to become attorney general in 2006.

Only two registered Democrats did not make political contributions.

http://dailycaller.com/2018/02/21/exclusive-zero-registered-republicans-mueller-lawyer/

[Pavlov]

I made no claim at all and posted it for discussion. After reading the article do you think Steele was the only author of the dossier yes or no?I don't think it merits discussion if you make no claim after posting it tbh.

[Pavlov]

:lmao1) fake quote

Fake news to boot.

Some peathetic shit you got going there.

[Chris]

How sick is this? Seth Rich "hacks" the DNC with a memory stick and leaks crucial information about Hillary rigging the primaries. Seth Rich gets murdered. Hillary buys a dossier that launches an investigation into Trump and Russians. Kim Dotcom (Trump's "400 lb. genius") willing to testify under oath about Seth Rich and is being ignored by Mueller. God willing, the IG report will shed some light on this.

[Pavlov]

How sick is this? Seth Rich "hacks" the DNC with a memory stick and leaks crucial information about Hillary rigging the primaries. Seth Rich gets murdered. Hillary buys a dossier that launches an investigation into Trump and Russians. Kim Dotcom (Trump's "400 lb. genius") willing to testify under oath about Seth Rich and is being ignored by Mueller. God willing, the IG report will shed some light on this.lol you're pinning your hopes on a fat guy named Kim Dotcom.

[Chris]

966642180147294208

[clambake]

tick tock

[dabom]

700 pages of owning repug shit. :lol

[dabom]

Where are all these repug booms by the way. I might have missed some.

[djohn2oo8]

Where are all these repug booms by the way. I might have missed some.

Repug boom is an urban legend.

[Chris]

966758609290977286

[Pavlov]

966758609290977286Plenty of indictments and convictions from the Republican-appointed Republican Mueller. You should be proud.

[Chris]

Plenty of indictments and convictions from the Republican-appointed Republican Mueller. You should be proud.

EXCLUSIVE: Not A Single Lawyer Known To Work For Mueller Is A Republican


http://cdn01.dailycaller.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/Robert_Mueller_Democratic_Donors-e1519229026587.jpg

[Chucho]

Where are all these repug booms by the way. I might have missed some.

Where are the liberal booms?

[Pavlov]

EXCLUSIVE: Not A Single Lawyer Known To Work For Mueller Is A Republican


http://cdn01.dailycaller.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/Robert_Mueller_Democratic_Donors-e1519229026587.jpgSo the Republican-appointed Republican is a secret Democrat?

What are you trying to say here, Chris?

[dabom]

Where are the liberal booms?

Lot of guilty charges and indictments. Did you miss them all? :lmao

[djohn2oo8]

Lot of guilty charges and indictments. Did you miss them all? :lmao

Charged by Republicans too.

[Pavlov]

Charged by Republicans too.Chris says that if Mueller hired more Republicans they would ignore all the laws that were broken.

[Chucho]

Lot of guilty charges and indictments. Did you miss them all? :lmao


LOL, yeah, "booms". "Boom" would be proving liberal talking points. We got two indictments and 13 Russian trolls that wont go anywhere. Nunes memos aren't booms.

[Chris]

Think Horowitz. Inspector general report is coming soon which might be what Sessions is waiting on. If Trump fires Sessions, as indicated by a perceived rift through a Trump tweet, then he may face backlash from the Senate. After all Sessions gave up a seat to take on the job as AG. This won't stop Trump though if that is the case.

[dabom]

LOL, yeah, "booms". "Boom" would be proving liberal talking points. We got two indictments and 13 Russian trolls that wont go anywhere. Nunes memos aren't booms.

More than that faggot. :lmao

[djohn2oo8]

More than that faggot. :lmao

Not surprising he doesn't know the count.

[Chris]

966767521440452609

[Chris]

It's Sullivan time :tu you heard it here first :tu

rcJpGj_ymGU

In Unexpected Twist, Judge In Flynn Case Asks Mueller For "Exculpatory Evidence"



The federal judge assigned to the criminal case against Trump's former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn has ordered Special Counsel Robert Mueller to turn over any "exculpatory evidence" to Flynn's defense team.

Oddly, however, Flynn's legal team did not make this request. Instead, Judge Emmet G. Sullivan issued the order "sua sponte," or at his discretion, invoking the "Brady Rule" - which requires prosecutors to turn over previously unfiled evidence that might have a material impact on a defendant's case. Interestingly, two days before the order Mueller filed a motion for an agreed-upon protective order regarding the use of evidence in the case, including "sensitive materials," provided to Flynn's lawyers by the office of the Special Counsel.

https://www.zerohedge.com/sites/default/files/styles/inline_image_desktop/public/inline-images/emmet-sullivan-nasullivan00302_0.jpg?itok=zf23zOVo


The federal judge overseeing the criminal case against former Trump national security adviser Michael Flynn has ordered special counsel Robert Mueller’s team to turn over any “exculpatory evidence” to his defense team.

The development generated immediate attention in conservative circles, with some seizing on the order as a potential indication that Flynn’s guilty plea had been called into question.

Judge Emmet G. Sullivan filed the order on Friday, directing federal prosecutors to produce to Flynn’s legal team “any evidence in its possession that is favorable to defendant and material either to defendant’s guilt or punishment” in a timely manner.

Sullivan’s order invoked the “Brady Rule,” which requires prosecutors to disclose exculpatory evidence in their possession to the defense — that is, evidence that could prove favorable to the defendant in negating his guilt, reducing his potential sentence or bolstering the credibility of a witness.

Judge Andrew Napolitano, a frequent presence on Fox News who has been hailed by President Trump, was among the voices keenly interested in Sullivan’s decision.

“The judge on his own, not in response to any application from General Flynn’s lawyers says, ‘By the way, I want all exculpatory evidence, evidence that could help Flynn or hurt the government turned over to Flynn’s lawyers,'” Napolitano said on Fox News Tuesday.

“Why would he we want that after General Flynn has already pleaded guilty? That is unheard of. He must suspect a defect in the guilty plea. Meaning, he must have reason to believe that General Flynn pleaded guilty for some reason other than guilt.”

Other legal experts cautioned that it would be premature to make such a conclusion based on the court order alone.

They pointed to Sullivan’s past work overseeing the trial of former Sen. Ted Stevens (R-Alaska), in which the judge faulted prosecutors for misconduct in failing to turn over exculpatory evidence.

Still, experts acknowledged that such an order would typically be seen as unusual, especially in cases in which the defendant has already pleaded guilty.

“It’s not unexpected coming from him,” said Jack Sharman, a lawyer at Lightfoot, Franklin & White and former Whitewater special counsel. “I think it would probably be an over-read to make a conclusion about the defect in the plea just based on this order.”

Sullivan issued the order “sua sponte”—or at his own volition, unprovoked by Flynn’s defense team. He filed a nearly identical order in mid-December, after taking over the case.

There are no details in the filing that are specific to the case.

“It’s just a way to have in the record a judge’s reminder to the prosecutors about their Brady obligations,” said Randall Eliason, a George Washington University law professor and former U.S. attorney. “It’s just a generic, boilerplate [order] you could file in any case.”

Mueller two days prior had filed a motion for an agreed-upon protective order governing the use of material, including “sensitive materials,” in the case provided from the special counsel’s office to Flynn’s lawyers.

In early December, Flynn pleaded guilty to one count of lying to FBI agents about his contacts with then-Russian ambassador Sergey Kislyak during the transition. He has since been cooperating with Mueller’s investigation into Russian interference as part of the plea agreement.

Flynn was forced to resign as national security adviser last February after media reports based on leaks of U.S. surveillance revealed that he had lied to Vice President Mike Pence about his conversations with Kislyak by saying the two did not discuss sanctions on Russia.

Sullivan took over the case from Judge Rudolph Contreras, who recused himself a week after Flynn’s guilty plea was revealed.

Mueller has sought to delay a decision on Flynn’s sentencing hearing until May.

Flynn’s guilty plea is among a number of significant bombshells in Mueller’s ongoing probe, which has also produced money laundering-related charges against former Trump campaign officials. On Friday, Mueller indicted 13 Russians and three Russian entities on charges of orchestrating an elaborate campaign to interfere in the 2016 presidential election.

Flynn’s guilty plea was significant, however, because he is the first and only Trump administration official to be ensnared in the investigation thus far.

http://thehill.com/policy/national-security/374730-judicial-order-in-flynn-case-prompts-new-round-of-scrutiny

[Pavlov]

It's pretty expected from this judge TBH.

[Chris]

It's pretty expected from this judge TBH.

It's pretty much expected that the one and only Trump official who was ensnared (perjury trap) is either going to get a dismissal or a pardon. IE: Not in "major trouble" and "Russia collusion" was a big okey-doke and we told from the start that it was. Pretty much expected.

[clambake]

tick tock

[Pavlov]

It's pretty much expected that the one and only Trump official who was ensnared (perjury trap) is either going to get a dismissal or a pardon. IE: Not in "major trouble" and "Russia collusion" was a big okey-doke and we told from the start that it was. Pretty much expected.:lol No.

Republican fantasizing and wishcasting over "a generic, boilerplate [order] you could file in any case” is pretty much expected.

[Chucho]

More than that faggot. :lmao

OOOO, 5 total indictments. Two are somewhat relevant, but still no "boom".


I get it, I get the "us vs. them" and it being tied to your psyche. I'm hoping there's a "boom". I want him out if they can prove he did something that awful and unlawful. Right now, we're settling for the Leftist equivalent of the Nunes memo.

You can use your smilies, you can namecall and basically be the more retarded version of dJohn, but overselling stuff doesn't increase the actual impact of the nothingness going on.

[djohn2oo8]

966786099401166848

[djohn2oo8]

966789180981379072

[dabom]

OOOO, 5 total indictments. Two are somewhat relevant, but still no "boom".


I get it, I get the "us vs. them" and it being tied to your psyche. I'm hoping there's a "boom". I want him out if they can prove he did something that awful and unlawful. Right now, we're settling for the Leftist equivalent of the Nunes memo.

You can use your smilies, you can namecall and basically be the more retarded version of dJohn, but overselling stuff doesn't increase the actual impact of the nothingness going on.

So you moved from no booms to a couple booms to somewhat decent booms. :lol

[djohn2oo8]

966766995202068480
:lmao

[dabom]

966786099401166848


966789180981379072

Fuck!!!!!!!!... :lol

Speaking of Booms. :lol

[clambake]

oh my

[djohn2oo8]

966787987995492352

[Chucho]

So you moved from no booms to a couple booms to somewhat decent booms. :lol

How about no booms? Small potatoes is small potatoes. Get Trump or show actual collusion. That's what this investigation is doing and this is what everyone playing the "blue vs red" game has their hopes tied to.

[dabom]

How about no booms? Small potatoes is small potatoes. Get Trump or show actual collusion. That's what this investigation is doing and this is what everyone playing the "blue vs red" game has their hopes tied to.

Nothingburger to Trump or no potatoes. :lmao

[Pavlov]

966787987995492352Total proof it's connected to the Clintons!

[Chucho]

Nothingburger to Trump or no potatoes. :lmao

Oh, ok.

[TSA]

Total proof it's connected to the Clintons!
It bears noting that Bradley P. Moss doesn't know what the fuck he is talking about

966792678036856833

:lol djohn
:lol Pavlov
:lol 2010-2014

[TSA]

Where are all these repug booms by the way. I might have missed some.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DWIo4m-UMAEwsOS.jpg:large

[Chucho]

It bears noting that Bradley P. Moss doesn't know what the fuck he is talking about

966792678036856833

:lol djohn
:lol Pavlov
:lol 2010-2014

Still, not a boom. It's long established djohn is retarded and relies on tweets to form opinions. Pav is an ok dude, he does break out his goods in small doses time to time.

[Pavlov]

It bears noting that Bradley P. Moss doesn't know what the fuck he is talking about

966792678036856833

:lol djohn
:lol Pavlov
:lol 2010-2014You should keep reading. Indictments tend to be more than one page.

Let us know where you want to move the goalposts after that.

[Chris]

Hilarious that they are pushing Manafort doing 80 years vs. giving up Trump (pee pee tape etc..)

[TSA]

You should keep reading. Indictments tend to be more than one page.

Let us know where you want to move the goalposts after that.

The previous legwork by the FBI and Treasury Department's financial crimes unit "explains how the special counsel was able to swiftly bring charges against Manafort for complex financial crimes dating as far back as 2008," BuzzFeed says, "and it shows that Mueller could still wield immense leverage as he seeks to compel Manafort to cooperate in the ongoing investigation," as erstwhile partner Rick Gates appears to be doing. The FBI interviewed Manafort in 2014, but Justice Department leaders reportedly decided Manafort's apparent financial fraud was small potatoes compared with that of his longtime client Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych. "We had him in 2014," one former official said of Manafort. "In hindsight, we could have nailed him then."

From 2004 and 2014, eight banks filed 23 "suspicious activity reports" on accounts controlled by Manafort, and among those not included in Mueller's indictment are $5 million to and from Puerto Rican firm Maho Films Investment Co., where Manafort was one of two directors, and several smaller transactions that fraud investigators suspected might be pitched to avoid automatic fraud alerts, including two back-to-back $7,500 ATM withdrawals and an odd spending spree at a drug store: Officials at Wachovia "flagged $25,000 in 'fraudulent charges' at Duane Reade stores in New York City in September 2007," BuzzFeed reports. "Bank officials said the debit card was in Manafort's possession during that time."

http://theweek.com/speedreads/756287/muellers-team-reportedly-scouring-40-million-suspicious-paul-manafort-transactions

Why didn't Holder get Manafort in 2014? Do you think it was because he was working with Skadden Arps and the Podesta Group?

[Pavlov]

The previous legwork by the FBI and Treasury Department's financial crimes unit "explains how the special counsel was able to swiftly bring charges against Manafort for complex financial crimes dating as far back as 2008," BuzzFeed says, "and it shows that Mueller could still wield immense leverage as he seeks to compel Manafort to cooperate in the ongoing investigation," as erstwhile partner Rick Gates appears to be doing. The FBI interviewed Manafort in 2014, but Justice Department leaders reportedly decided Manafort's apparent financial fraud was small potatoes compared with that of his longtime client Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych. "We had him in 2014," one former official said of Manafort. "In hindsight, we could have nailed him then."

From 2004 and 2014, eight banks filed 23 "suspicious activity reports" on accounts controlled by Manafort, and among those not included in Mueller's indictment are $5 million to and from Puerto Rican firm Maho Films Investment Co., where Manafort was one of two directors, and several smaller transactions that fraud investigators suspected might be pitched to avoid automatic fraud alerts, including two back-to-back $7,500 ATM withdrawals and an odd spending spree at a drug store: Officials at Wachovia "flagged $25,000 in 'fraudulent charges' at Duane Reade stores in New York City in September 2007," BuzzFeed reports. "Bank officials said the debit card was in Manafort's possession during that time."

http://theweek.com/speedreads/756287/muellers-team-reportedly-scouring-40-million-suspicious-paul-manafort-transactions

Why didn't Holder get Manafort in 2014? Do you think it was because he was working with Skadden Arps and the Podesta Group?Another conspiracy!

OK, I think they did it all to set Trump up.

Somehow.

Did you ever get past indictment #5?

[TSA]

Another conspiracy!

OK, I think they did it all to set Trump up.

Somehow.

Did you ever get past indictment #5?

You got me. I missed that Manafort was using one of the rental properties through at least August 2017 as an income-generating rental property, charging thousands of dollars a week on Airbnb :rollin

[Pavlov]

You got me. I missed that Manafort was using one of the rental properties through at least August 2017 as an income-generating rental property, charging thousands of dollars a week on Airbnb :rollinDid you read all thirty-two (32) indictments?

How many overlap with Manafort's and/or Gate's times in the Trump campaign and transition?

Give a total number.

[TSA]

Did you read all thirty-two (32) indictments?

How many overlap with Manafort's and/or Gate's times in the Trump campaign and transition?

Give a total number.

I did but I wasn't counting as I went along. I was actually looking for charges of collusion with Russia and didn't see any.

How many overlapped with Manafort's and/or Gate's times in the Trump campaign and transition? How many of them had to do with colluding with Russia in the election?

[Pavlov]

I did but I wasn't counting as I went along.The indictments are numbered.

So you didn't read them.


I was actually looking for charges of collusion with Russia and didn't see any.No you weren't. You didn't read them at all.


How many overlapped with Manafort's and/or Gate's times in the Trump campaign and transition? How many of them had to do with colluding with Russia in the election?Dodge #1.

How many overlap with Manafort's and/or Gate's times in the Trump campaign and transition?

[TSA]

Dodge #1.

How many overlap with Manafort's and/or Gate's times in the Trump campaign and transition?

I'm not going to count them and it looks like you already have.

How many overlapped with Manafort's and/or Gate's times in the Trump campaign and transition? How many of them had to do with colluding with Russia in the election?

[Pavlov]

I'm not going to count them and it looks like you already have.They're numbered.

You didn't read them at all.


How many overlapped with Manafort's and/or Gate's times in the Trump campaign and transition? How many of them had to do with colluding with Russia in the election?Dodge #2.

How many overlap with Manafort's and/or Gate's times in the Trump campaign and transition?

[TSA]

They're numbered.

You didn't read them at all.

Dodge #2.

How many overlap with Manafort's and/or Gate's times in the Trump campaign and transition?

I did read them all and I just told you I'm not going to re-read them and count the dates. You already have. I'm refusing, you are dodging.

How many overlapped with Manafort's and/or Gate's times in the Trump campaign and transition? How many of them had to do with colluding with Russia in the election?

[Pavlov]

I'm refusingGood talk.

[TSA]

Good talk.

Thanks for sharing how many dates you counted :bobo

[Pavlov]

Thanks for sharing how many dates you counted :boboThanks for sharing the fact you didn't read any of the numbered indictments. :bobo

[TSA]

Thanks for sharing the fact you didn't read any of the numbered indictments. :bobo

I read the entire thing and admitted I didn't count the dates. Again, thanks for reading the entire thing, counting the dates, and not sharing them :bobo

[Pavlov]

I read the entire thing and admitted I didn't count the dates. Again, thanks for reading the entire thing, counting the dates, and not sharing them :boboOK, the answer is more than none.

Thanks for letting us know the thing you said was important yesterday isn't important anymore :bobo

[TSA]

OK, the answer is more than none.

Thanks for letting us know the thing you said was important yesterday isn't important anymore :bobo

How many more than one? Be specific.

Also how many charges had to do with Russian election collusion? Be specific.

[Pavlov]

How many more than one? Be specific.

Also how many charges had to do with Russian election collusion? Be specific.https://media1.tenor.com/images/c924b622b71a51d0c4aa21760c69b9f3/tenor.gif?itemid=9264828

Thanks for that :bobo

[TSA]

https://media.giphy.com/media/QA88yMhazfDI4/giphy.gif


How many more than one? Be specific.

Also how many charges had to do with Russian election collusion? Be specific.

[Pavlov]

How many more than one? Be specific.I asked you this question. You refused to answer and refused to look it up yourself now even though you say you have already read them completely.

Good talk. :bobo

[TSA]

I asked you this question. You refused to answer and refused to look it up yourself now even though you have already read them completely.

Good talk.

There is no need for me to do the legwork when you already have.

How many more than one? Be specific.

Also how many charges had to do with Russian election collusion? Be specific.

[Pavlov]

There is no need for me to do the legwork when you already have.You already read it.

You said you did.

Are you that bad at reading?

Yes or no.

[TSA]

You already read it.

You said you did.

Are you that bad at reading?

Yes or no.

I admitted to not counting the dates that overlapped when I read it.

Did you count the dates for each? If so how many more than one overlapped?

Also you keep dodging this question. How many charges had to do with Russian election collusion?

[Pavlov]

I admitted to not counting the dates that overlapped when I read it.And you're completely incapable of going back and counting.

Good talk.

[djohn2oo8]

966799840570232833

[Chris]

966810541032460288

[TSA]

And you're completely incapable of going back and counting.

Good talk.

I'm completely capable I just don't care to.

Did you count the dates for each? If so how many more than one overlapped?

Are you incapable of answering this question? How many charges had to do with Russian election collusion? I can answer it for you if you are incapable or if you just don't want to just let me know.

[Pavlov]

I'm completely capable I just don't care to.Good talk.

If you want an answer for a question about this you can't answer yourself, you let me know.

[djohn2oo8]

966799790125305856

[TSA]

[QUOTE=TSA;9296130]I'm completely capable I just don't care to./QUOTE]Good talk.

good quote

[Pavlov]

good quoteNow it's a good edit.

[djohn2oo8]

I'm completely capable I just don't care to.

Did you count the dates for each? If so how many more than one overlapped?

Are you incapable of answering this question? How many charges had to do with Russian election collusion? I can answer it for you if you are incapable or if you just don't want to just let me know.

They committed these crimes while working on the Trump campaign. Your excuse is gone buddy.

[TSA]

Good talk.

If you want an answer for a question about this you can't answer yourself, you let me know.

Nice edit :bobo

It's clear you don't want to answer the question about how many more than one so let's move on.

How many charges had to do with Russian election collusion? I can answer it for you if you are incapable or if you just don't want to just let me know.

[Pavlov]

They committed these crimes while working on the Trump campaign. Your excuse is gone buddy.He already moved the goalposts and declared victory.

[TSA]

They committed these crimes while working on the Trump campaign. Your excuse is gone buddy.

Pavlov is apparently incapable of answering I'll give you a shot. How many charges had to do with Russian election collusion?

[Pavlov]

Nice edit :bobo

It's clear you don't want to answer the question about how many more than one so let's move on.

How many charges had to do with Russian election collusion? I can answer it for you if you are incapable or if you just don't want to just let me know.Answer your first question first. You can answer it. After all, you read all the indictments you didn't know were numbered.

[Reck]

966810541032460288

Sounds like he's scared.

[TSA]

He already moved the goalposts and declared victory.

I thought this thread was about Trump/Russia election collusion?

[Pavlov]

I thought this thread was about Trump/Russia election collusion?Well, you're wrong about so many things, TSA.

This is another one.

[TSA]

Answer your first question first. You can answer it. After all, you read all the indictments you didn't know were numbered.

I've accepted your answer of more than one and moved on.

How many charges had to do with Russian election collusion?

[TSA]

Well, you're wrong about so many things, TSA.

This is another one.

I was under the impression this was the liberal wet dream thread of Trump impeachment. What is this thread about if not Trump/Russia election collusion?

[TSA]

966799840570232833

Mueller knows all, yet didn't include a single mention of the election. Why is that djohn?

[Pavlov]

I've accepted your answer of more than one and moved on.

How many charges had to do with Russian election collusion?You don't know?

I'm going to conclude you're being disingenuous again.

[TSA]

You don't know?

I'm going to conclude you're being disingenuous again.

I know the answer, just like you knew the answer to how many charges happened while on the campaign and refused to say.

So how many charges had to do with Russian election collusion?

[Pavlov]

I was under the impression this was the liberal wet dream thread of Trump impeachment. What is this thread about if not Trump/Russia election collusion?It is the de facto Special Counsel investigation thread, with all that entails.

So you were wrong.

Again.

[hater]

Lol so no collusion yet?

Mueller is gonna charge entire Trump campaign with random shit but I dounbt any colousion charges

Little Donnie Jr will be charged for jaywalking or some shit :lmao

[Pavlov]

I know the answerGood talk.

[Pavlov]

966807752696909826

:lol Why did Trump hire these guys?

[TSA]

Good talk.

Do you know the answer to whether or not the indictments mentioned collusion with Russia during the election yes or no?

[Pavlov]

Do you know the answer to whether or not the indictments mentioned collusion with Russia during the election yes or no?Do you?

[TSA]

Do you?

Yes I do. Do you?

[Pavlov]

Yes I do.Good talk. Don't know why you asked so many times.

[TSA]

Good talk. Don't know why you asked so many times.

I just wanted to see you type the words “no the new charges never mentioned collusion with Russia during the election, in fact none of the charges to date have mentioned collusion with Russia during the election”

:bobo

[Spurtacular]

1) fake quote

Fake news to boot.

Some peathetic shit you got going there.

Your hero fucked us over. Good job, dipshit.

:lol #StillWithHer

[TSA]

Nellie Ohr: Woman in the Middle

https://spectator.org/nellie-ohr-woman-in-the-middle/

Well worth the read and goes much deeper than Nellie Ohr

[djohn2oo8]

Pavlov is apparently incapable of answering I'll give you a shot. How many charges had to do with Russian election collusion?

I told you way back. Like last year, Manafort had many different charges coming his way, including money laundering. And you laughed and said no he would not catch those charges. So no, you don't get to puss out and try and play that card.

[TSA]

I told you way back. Like last year, Manafort had many different charges coming his way, including money laundering. And you laughed and said no he would not catch those charges. So no, you don't get to puss out and try and play that card.

I never once said Manafort would not catch those charges. You can try and back your claim but you won’t, and if you try you’ll fail.

Moving my on.

How many charges had to do with Russian election collusion?

[TSA]

I never once said Manafort would not catch those charges. You can try and back your claim but you won’t, and if you try you’ll fail.


P.S. I hope you prove me wrong

[TSA]

P.S. I hope you prove me wrong

P.P.S. Is there a timeline on our $500 bet?

[djohn2oo8]

Nunes - Recused
Sessions - Recused
Flynn - Registered as Foreign Agent/denied immunity. Accepted payments from Russia and hid from DOJ
Chaffetz - Confirming Flynn broke the law, then Chaffetz takes emergency break from Congress for a non serious "surgery"
NBC reports White house vetted Flynn even with his red flags
Manafort - Russia lobbying, money laundering with the US FIN center having those receipts.

Carter Page - Confirmed himself he hid meeting with Russian ambassador. Along with Sessions. Page also been under FBI watch since 2013. Wore a wire to Moscow carrying a tape of Trump promising to lift sanctions.

And yet somehow TSA thinks this is trending well for Donnie :lol


Lot of time wasted typing that without a single indictment to show

Why do you have to lie all the Time TSA?

[djohn2oo8]

You can't claim it will "absolutely not be a witch hunt" and then follow immediately with "Russians are most likely involved".

If no Russians are involved, will you admit the special counsel was nothing but a witch hunt?

Well now we know Russians were involved. Guess TSA, by his own question, can no longer claim witch hunt.

[TSA]

Why do you have to lie all the Time TSA?

Hey dipshit...there were no indictments at the time I said that. You just claimed I said Manafort wouldn’t catch those charges. Are you going to back your claim up or keep posting my statements that were true at the time?

[TSA]

Well now we know Russians were involved. Guess TSA, by his own question, can no longer claim witch hunt.

You’ve claimed Trump colluded with Russia during the election. How were the Russian troll farm indictments connected to Trump?

[TSA]

Why do you have to lie all the Time TSA?

Why do you dodge simple questions all the time?

How many charges had to do with Russian election collusion?

[djohn2oo8]

Hey dipshit...there were no indictments at the time I said that. You just claimed I said Manafort wouldn’t catch those charges. Are you going to back your claim up or keep posting my statements that were true at the time?

You said the only one getting indicted was Susan Rice.

[TSA]

You said the only one getting indicted was Susan Rice.

this is your white flag


I’ll try one more time.

You just claimed I said Manafort wouldn’t catch those charges. Are you going to back your claim up or keep posting my statements that were true at the time?

[djohn2oo8]

You’ve claimed Trump colluded with Russia during the election. How were the Russian troll farm indictments connected to Trump?

Russians were indicted. That's what your challenge was. Move dem goalpost some more.

[djohn2oo8]

this is your white flag


I’ll try one more time.

You just claimed I said Manafort wouldn’t catch those charges. Are you going to back your claim up or keep posting my statements that were true at the time?

You laughed at the though of Manafort being indicted for money laundering.

"Not a single indictment to show"

[djohn2oo8]

this is your white flag


I’ll try one more time.

You just claimed I said Manafort wouldn’t catch those charges. Are you going to back your claim up or keep posting my statements that were true at the time?

So because the statement was true at the time, you admit you didn't know how it was gonna turn out, just like all your predictions?

[TSA]

You laughed at the though of Manafort being indicted for money laundering.

"Not a single indictment to show"

I don’t see an lol anywhere, just a statement of fact at the time.

[TSA]

Russians were indicted. That's what your challenge was. Move dem goalpost some more.

Dodge, deflect, repeat.

Try again.

You’ve claimed Trump colluded with Russia during the election. How were the Russian troll farm indictments connected to Trump?

[TSA]

:yield

[TSA]

djohn im more interested in our bet. What’s the timeline?

[TSA]

So because the statement was true at the time, you admit you didn't know how it was gonna turn out, just like all your predictions?

I’ve read some dumb things today but this tops the list. djohn do you know what “prediction” means?

[clambake]

tick tock

[Pavlov]

TSA moved dem goalposts again and declared victory.

[hater]

Breaking News Ivanka trump charged with Bestiality :lmao

[hater]

Little Jr Trump charged with downloading torrents :lol

[DMX7]

Because you’re a dipshit who takes MSM reporting at face value.

The newest indictment has zero to do with Trump. The newest indictment is closely linked to the Clintons, the Clinton Foundation, the Podesta Group, the White House counsel to Obama/assistant to the President and special counsel in the White House for Clinton (Craig), and the associate White House counsel to Clinton (Sloan). These were the people directly involved with Manafort and his work in Ukraine and what got him indicted. None of this had anything to with Trump.


No, he was the CHAIRMAN OF THE TRUMP CAMPAIGN. Go back to watching Alex Jones and Fox News.

[TSA]

No, he was the CHAIRMAN OF THE TRUMP CAMPAIGN. Go back to watching Alex Jones and Fox News.

Great. How did the crimes he committed connect to Trump or his campaign?

[pgardn]

Great. How did the crimes he committed connect to Trump or his campaign?

It does not even matter now. You knew this would be wide-ranging. They are getting guys for lying and financial dealings; illegal due to restrictions and sanctions.

Thanks patriots.

And Nice job with Comey.

[boutons_deux]

Trump’s source of inspiration? Paul Manafort’s dark deeds and dubious clients

Former Ukrainian president Viktor Yanukovych had one rival locked up, and may have poisoned another. Trump’s dream?

It's hard to know exactly what set Trump off

It's always tempting to think that Trump is just too stupid to understand the danger he's in with the Mueller investigation, but this one might have set off some alarms, since these charges refer to a time when Gates was still with the campaign.

Manafort had been fired in August of 2016 so he wasn't an official member of the campaign at that time,

but he was often seen coming in and out of Trump Tower during the transition.

Manafort was advising the Trump team on how to handle the Russia probe.


Paul Manafort has reemerged as a player in the fight to shape the new administration ... after resigning under pressure as the chairman of Donald Trump's campaign this summer.

Manafort solidified his ties to the incoming White House when Trump selected Vice President-elect Mike Pence as his running mate in mid-July. Both men are Capitol Hill veterans:

Manafort as a lobbyist and Pence from his time as an Indiana congressman, with strong ties to the Republican establishment.


Recall that it was Manafort who engineered the choice of Pence (https://www.cbsnews.com/news/donald-trump-offered-chris-christie-vice-president-role-before-mike-pence/)

in the first place by manipulating Trump into dropping his first choice, New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie.

Rick Gates was also still visiting the White House last spring,

usually accompanying Trump's good friend Tom Barrack, the man who brought Manafort into the campaign in the first place.

White House has been able to say that Manafort and Gates' legal problems stemmed from their activities years in the past and had nothing to do with Trump.

That excuse looks as though it isn't going to hold.

if you wanted to hire someone to fix up the image of a crude, authoritarian demagogue for more civilized consumption, Manafort was your guy.

Of course Manafort wound up working for him.

https://www.salon.com/2018/02/22/trumps-source-of-inspiration-paul-manaforts-dark-deeds-and-dubious-clients/

nope, Trash, Manafort, Gates had no relaltionship. :lol

[boutons_deux]

Trash Trembles As Lawrence O’Donnell Shows Why Manafort Tax Evasion Charges Are Big Trouble

O’Donnell said, “The new indictment says they concealed years of work for lobbying work for Ukraine. Quote, in total more than $75 million flowing through the offshore accounts,

Manafort with the assistance of Gates, laundered more than $30 million, income that he concealed from the United States department of the treasury, the department of justice and others.

Some of the charges which include fraudulently obtaining banks loans came after he became chairman of the Trump campaign.

This came less than a week after Mueller indicted 13 Russians for interfering with the election.

The “New York Times” reports that Robert Mueller could be trying to use these charges as leverage to get closer to the White House.

”If tax evasion is Mueller’s target, Trump needs to be very worried

Trump has refused to release his tax returns.

It is a certainty that Robert Mueller wants them, he already has Trump’s tax returns.

If the Special Counsel is going to look at financial crimes committed with foreign partners, the Trump Organization is the poster child for shady activity.

Donald Trump and his business have enough skeletons in their closet to bury the entire Trump operation.

Mueller is working his way up the food chain, and if he is looking at financial crimes, Trump, his family, and

associates should all be very worried, because Mueller is looking at the one spot where Trump bodies are most likely buried.

https://www.politicususa.com/2018/02/22/trump-trembles-lawrence-odonnell-shows-manafort-tax-evasion-charges-big-trouble.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+politicususa%2FfJAl+%28Politi cus+USA+%29

[TSA]

It does not even matter now. You knew this would be wide-ranging. They are getting guys for lying and financial dealings; illegal due to restrictions and sanctions.

Thanks patriots.

And Nice job with Comey.

The special counsel investigation will most likely cost more than the what was laundered and obtained illegally by Manafort/Gates. Seem worth it to you? Expensive political charade you and I are paying for.

[TSA]

Trump’s source of inspiration? Paul Manafort’s dark deeds and dubious clients

Former Ukrainian president Viktor Yanukovych had one rival locked up, and may have poisoned another. Trump’s dream?

It's hard to know exactly what set Trump off

It's always tempting to think that Trump is just too stupid to understand the danger he's in with the Mueller investigation, but this one might have set off some alarms, since these charges refer to a time when Gates was still with the campaign.

Manafort had been fired in August of 2016 so he wasn't an official member of the campaign at that time,

but he was often seen coming in and out of Trump Tower during the transition.

Manafort was advising the Trump team on how to handle the Russia probe.


Paul Manafort has reemerged as a player in the fight to shape the new administration ... after resigning under pressure as the chairman of Donald Trump's campaign this summer.

Manafort solidified his ties to the incoming White House when Trump selected Vice President-elect Mike Pence as his running mate in mid-July. Both men are Capitol Hill veterans:

Manafort as a lobbyist and Pence from his time as an Indiana congressman, with strong ties to the Republican establishment.


Recall that it was Manafort who engineered the choice of Pence (https://www.cbsnews.com/news/donald-trump-offered-chris-christie-vice-president-role-before-mike-pence/)

in the first place by manipulating Trump into dropping his first choice, New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie.

Rick Gates was also still visiting the White House last spring,

usually accompanying Trump's good friend Tom Barrack, the man who brought Manafort into the campaign in the first place.

White House has been able to say that Manafort and Gates' legal problems stemmed from their activities years in the past and had nothing to do with Trump.

That excuse looks as though it isn't going to hold.

if you wanted to hire someone to fix up the image of a crude, authoritarian demagogue for more civilized consumption, Manafort was your guy.

Of course Manafort wound up working for him.

https://www.salon.com/2018/02/22/trumps-source-of-inspiration-paul-manaforts-dark-deeds-and-dubious-clients/

nope, Trash, Manafort, Gates had no relaltionship. :lol





And Yanukovych didn’t have a a relationship with Skadden Arps, Clintons, and Obama :lol

[djohn2oo8]

The special counsel investigation will most likely cost more than the what was laundered and obtained illegally by Manafort/Gates. Seem worth it to you? Expensive political charade you and I are paying for.

Now we have you on record justifying the crimes of money laundering and bank fraud.

[TSA]

Now we have you on record justifying the crimes of money laundering and bank fraud.

You have me on record saying a special counsel was a huge waste of tax payer money if Mueller is only indicting a Russian troll farm uncovered years ago and financial crimes that should have been prosecuted when the FBI knew about them in 2013.

[djohn2oo8]

You have me on record saying a special counsel was a huge waste of tax payer money if Mueller is only indicting a Russian troll farm uncovered years ago and financial crimes that should have been prosecuted when the FBI knew about them in 2013.
And yet you said no one would be indicted besides Susan Rice. Funny how you don't mention that multiple members of the Trump campaign and transition have been charged with crimes. Including Trump's own campaign manager who knows everything about Trump. Who vetted them?

[Chris]

3JlbDSnkSu4

[djohn2oo8]

lol Manafort bout to get his shit seized.

[boutons_deux]

Rachel Maddow Incredibly Ties Together Manafort, The Trump Campaign, and Financial Crimes


Maddow said:


For some reason times were tough and this stuff all happens in very close succession, all at once, late 2015 early 2016.

These guys are doing backflips allegedly flagrantly illegal backflips to try to get cash for Manafort and increasingly it was not working.

But then it all turned around.

For some reason manafort himself to the trump campaign as a full-time volunteer “I don’t need to get paid, I don’t have money problems.”

Then his money problems turn around.And, again, look at the timing here, look at the timing.

Between approximately 2016 and January 2017 manafort with the assistance of Gates sought and secured approximately $16 million.

$16 million in two loans from lender D. Finally, great relief. Money coming in.

Let’s put late 2015 and early 2016 behind them. Thank god for lender D.

I mean, they were still apparently ripping off lender D.

There was another doctored profit-and-loss statement where Gates took the real profit-and-loss statement and converted it from a PDF file to a word file, edited it, added $3.5 million. Then turned it back into a PDF. They learned not to use the bookkeeper anymore.

They even concocted a note that the over $300,000 that was overdue on Manafort’s American Express card, that was a big misunderstanding.

They concocted a story that Gates borrowed the card, he was good for it, pay no attention to how the quote delinquency on that American Express card significantly affected Paul Manafort’s credit score.

So they still hand to scam lender D but it worked.

Look at the timeline. That scrambling in late 2015 and early 2016 and it’s not working out.

But starting July, 2016, Gates and Manafort, jackpot.


Manafort wasn’t some rich guy with Russia connections.

He was a broke scammer who needed cash with Russia connections.

This was the guy that Trump put in charge of his campaign.

After Manafort joined the campaign, Russia’s efforts to help Trump hit another gear.

Paul Manafort has a lot of information that he could give to Mueller. Manafort could fill in some gaps.

Trump’s campaign needed help.

Paul Manafort needed cash.

Manafort also had the Russia connections.

https://www.politicususa.com/2018/02/22/rachel-maddow-incredibly-ties-together-manafort-trump-campaign-financial-crimes.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+politicususa%2FfJAl+%28Politi cus+USA+%29

[hater]

Ppl forgeting Yanukovic was the US darling and they supportd him thru and thru

He fell out of grace when he asked anloan from Rusia and said he would work with him to have good relations. Thqts when the Us execute the coup

[djohn2oo8]

967026255164932097
TSA's own arguments always come back to bite him in the ass.

[pgardn]

You have me on record saying a special counsel was a huge waste of tax payer money if Mueller is only indicting a Russian troll farm uncovered years ago and financial crimes that should have been prosecuted when the FBI knew about them in 2013.

Absolutely false.

THE PUBLIC who cares and understands can finally decide for themselves the extent of Russian interefernce. You can be a conservative fool and portray it as a few guys fiddling around on the Internet. You can go the other direction and know Trump was directly involved in colluding with Russians to sway votes in 3-5 key states or....

You can realize the difference between a shitty system of government run by ONE man and his leeches for 20+ years. And a country who actually has a system flexible enough to elect an ignorant novice. Chaotic and FREE. And if you can't see the difference, you need to get your ass out of this country and try another place for a while. Travel and get away from the hotels.

"But, but, we also did... "

Yeah we did, and WE KNOW this. Think about it. Then vote in every election. School board to President.

[djohn2oo8]

967045874605068288

[dabom]

Boom.

[djohn2oo8]

967043931975319553

[clambake]

The special counsel investigation will most likely cost more than the what was laundered and obtained illegally by Manafort/Gates. Seem worth it to you? Expensive political charade you and I are paying for.

you are a fucking sell out.

[djohn2oo8]

Boom.

https://media0.giphy.com/media/kgKrO1A3JbWTK/giphy.gif

[clambake]

You have me on record saying a special counsel was a huge waste of tax payer money if Mueller is only indicting a Russian troll farm uncovered years ago and financial crimes that should have been prosecuted when the FBI knew about them in 2013.

you suck, comrade

[djohn2oo8]

967047694102482945

https://media.giphy.com/media/hxc32veg6tbqg/giphy.gif

[clambake]

The special counsel investigation will most likely cost more than the what was laundered and obtained illegally by Manafort/Gates. Seem worth it to you? Expensive political charade you and I are paying for.

look at this fucking post. this is the window you look through to see this guys character.

you're a low life piece of shit.




you used to be entertaining, but in life, you suck hard.

[Spurminator]

So the 4chan Trump Soldier talking point is now "feign concern over wasteful spending." Seems pretty weak.

[djohn2oo8]

967055317312921600

[boutons_deux]

So white guys stealing $10Ms should be ignored because law enforcement costs too much

[djohn2oo8]

967056868257517569