Reply With Quote
Left finally found a clever meme
Started before that tbh.
Why do you and everyone on your side lie all the time?
Left finally found a clever meme
He/she/I don’t.
When was the second FISA warrant sought and when was it approved?
Investigation started before that tbh.
Do you know when that was?
Let everyone know.
His only options are to stall or lie.
He has a problem with the truth.
Investigation started before dossier. Intelligence received from other governments. But the dossier is what started it all lol
They are just too stupid to realize that the point of a plea deal is to reduce the charges/sentence one gets. NR put out an article claiming that the opposite was the case and of course they lack the critical thinking skills to overcome hearing what they want to hear.
I mean I know that if I agree to cooperate with law enforcement I'm not going to ask for them to do worse for me nor accept any such thing.
Dodge #1
When was the second FISA warrant sought and when was it approved?
How many federal cases have you prosecuted in court?
Fusion GPS transcripts reveal two things—the corruption of Trump, the treachery of the Republicans
why Republicans have been so anxious to keep this information under lock and key.
Every question asked by Republicans in the meeting—every single question—focused on trying to find information they could use
to demean and defame the witness.
They wanted to paint Fusion GPS as a “Democratic operation.”
They were determined to turn Christopher Steele’s visit to the FBI into a partisan act.
They used every moment of their time to find something Fusion had done wrong, or
that Steele had done wrong …
some way that both the company and the information they had gathered could be dismissed.
In a day-long interview that was supposed to further the
investigation into connections between the Trump campaign and Russian officials,
no Republican expressed the slightest interest in that topic.
a few things were clear:
Even before they hired Christopher Steele,
Fusion GPS was well aware of Trump’s numerous connections to crime bosses in Russia and in former Soviet states.
Steele was hired, not to generate information, but to fill in the gaps around relationships that were already obvious from the public record and Trump’s own statements.
Steele came across a flood of confirmation—
information that included deliberate efforts on the part of the Russian government to influence the United States election.
the transcript revealed just why Senator Chuck Grassley was so determined to keep it hidden.
Because the clear words on the page made it obvious that the
criminal charges leveled at Steele by Grassley and Senator Lindsey Graham went beyond political showboating and into the realm of egregious obstruction.
The transcript makes it dead clear that Republicans have no interest in finding the truth, or in protecting the nation.
Donald Trump was deeply involved with Russian mobsters,
who were largely responsible for his finances.
In fact, much of Trump’s claimed wealth was simply inexplicable,
apparently unmoored from any legitimate source.
Donald Trump, successful real estate tycoon, was a fiction.
https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2018/1/10/1731460/-Fusion-GPS-transcripts-reveal-two-things-the-corruption-of-Trump-the-treachery-of-the-Republicans?detail=emaildkre
‘It’s not a fabrication’: Six times the firm behind the infamous dossier contradicted Trump’s claims
1. Researchers weren't expecting to find what they did: The research started as open-ended, but as they uncovered more about Trump's alleged connections to Russia, Simpson said, he and former British spy Christopher Steele, whom Simpson hired to do the research, made a decision to go to the FBI.
2. There may have been a whistleblower in the Trump campaign: This is the biggest headline from 10 hours of interviews. Simpson says Steele told him that the FBI had “other intelligence about this matter from an internal Trump campaign source,” someone “inside the Trump organization.”
3. The FBI indicated it believed some of what was in the memos: After Steele and Simpson called the FBI to report that they had reason to believe the Trump campaign was colluding with Russia, Simpson said, the FBI asked Steele to share everything. A couple months after Steele gave the FBI a full briefing, the FBI said that it believed him, according to Simpson.
4. Some news events have corroborated the memo's findings: Simpson points out that Steele's memo alleged members of the Trump campaign were eager to hear information from Russia. A year later, Trump Jr. released emails suggesting as much, when he said, “If it's what you say I love it” to correspondence indicating that Russians had dirt on Clinton.
The dossier also identified former Trump foreign policy adviser Carter Page as a potential intermediary between the Trump campaign and Russia.
5. Steele, the former British spy, is a “Boy Scout”: That's how Simpson, who has a nearly decade-long working relationship with him, described the author of the dossier. It's one of the reasons he trusted Steele's information so much and agreed with Steele's expertise that they should contact the FBI with what they found.
6. Fusion GPS is not funded by Democrats or Russia: White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders has said from the podium that Fusion GPS is “Democratic-linked” and that it took money from the Russian government. Neither of those assertions is true, Simpson said.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...nl_most&wpmm=1
What time is it in Russia at 3:33am here?
Well put. Shreds much of the preferred Trump party narrative.
You haven't either but that's never stopped you from convicting Hillary and her ilk before so why are you asking this?
That's rich after you abandoned muh sundance.
When did the investigation start?
Dodge #2
When was the second FISA warrant sought and when was it approved?
Dodge #30
When did the investigation start?
I’m asking fuzzy this since he scoffed at the National Review article written by a federal prosecutor.
In the wake of the plea, however, a dissenting view emerged, mostly among veterans of the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York. Writing in the National Review, former Assistant U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York Andrew McCarthy read the plea very differently:
While initial reporting is portraying Flynn’s guilty plea as a major breakthrough in Mueller’s investigation of potential Trump-campaign collusion with the Russian regime, I suspect the opposite is true.
. . .
[A]s I explained in connection with George Papadopoulos (who also pled guilty in Mueller’s investigation for lying to the FBI), when a prosecutor has a cooperator who was an accomplice in a major criminal scheme, the cooperator is made to plead guilty to the scheme. This is critical because it proves the existence of the scheme. In his guilty-plea allocution (the part of a plea proceeding in which the defendant admits what he did that makes him guilty), the accomplice explains the scheme and the actions taken by himself and his co-conspirators to carry it out. This goes a long way toward proving the case against all of the subjects of the investigation.
That is not happening in Flynn’s situation. Instead, like Papadopoulos, he is being permitted to plead guilty to a mere process crime.
Before you dismiss McCarthy and this analysis because of McCarthy’s conservative politics, understand that he’s not the only one making this point. So is Preet Bharara, the former U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York whom President Donald Trump fired earlier this year. In his podcast this week, Bharara made an argument similar to McCarthy’s, suggesting that the best read of the plea agreement may be that a relatively narrow false statements case emerged because that was all that Mueller had against Flynn.
Bharara said that he “hate[s] to say it” but he doesn’t think Flynn got a sweetheart deal from Mueller despite broad exposure on other crimes. In the Southern District of New York, he said, when he reached a plea deal with flipping defendants, “we made them plead guilty to every bad act that they had ever done, especially if we were later going to be alleging other people had engaged in that activity as well.” The idea is that if you want Person X to testify that he and Person Y did something together, it’s important to make Person X plead guilty to that action. If you let him plead guilty only to false statements instead, you will have branded your own witness chiefly as a liar and not used his plea to establish your case against Person Y.
Bharara acknowledges that not all federal prosecution offices function the way the district does on this point. But he concludes that “I tend not to think it’s the case that [Mueller] just wiped the slate clean with Michael Flynn … I just don’t buy it.… There’s a decent reason for thinking that [false statements is] all that Mueller has at this point.”
http://foreignpolicy.com/2017/12/08/...nns-plea-deal/
The entire article is a good read.
“All of which is to say that there’s something about the Flynn plea that doesn’t make sense. There’s something important going on here that is not in the public do ents and that the press has not reported. We don’t purport to know what it is. Mystery reigns.”
Dodge #3
I asked you this question first.
When was the second FISA warrant sought and when was it approved?
Dodge #80
I asked you about muh sundance before that and you yourself. You can't accuse anyone of dodging anymore, coward.
When did the investigation start?
TSA the coward. Where is your main account, TSA?
Let's discuss muh sundance!
Don't ever ask me about muh sundance!
He's a little gunshy after that pizzagate fail. And boy what a failure it was.
There are currently 4 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 4 guests)
Posting Permissions
