Comey and Mueller
- Thread starter Musburger1
- Start date
Joe Fan
10,000+ Posts
Good, short article on John Brennan's role in all this
"Confirmed: John Brennan Colluded With Foreign Spies to Defeat Trump"
-- This is the open scandal that Congress should investigate.
https://spectator.org/confirmed-john-brennan-colluded-with-foreign-spies-to-defeat-trump/
"Confirmed: John Brennan Colluded With Foreign Spies to Defeat Trump"
-- This is the open scandal that Congress should investigate.
"An article in the Guardian last week provides more confirmation that John Brennan was the American progenitor of political espionage aimed at defeating Donald Trump. One side did collude with foreign powers to tip the election — Hillary’s.
Seeking to retain his position as CIA director under Hillary, Brennan teamed up with British spies and Estonian spies to cripple Trump’s candidacy. He used their phony intelligence as a pretext for a multi-agency investigation into Trump, which led the FBI to probe a computer server connected to Trump Tower and gave cover to Susan Rice, among other Hillary supporters, to spy on Trump and his people.
John Brennan’s CIA operated like a branch office of the Hillary campaign, leaking out mentions of this bogus investigation to the press in the hopes of inflicting maximum political damage on Trump. An official in the intelligence community tells TAS that Brennan’s retinue of political radicals didn’t even bother to hide their activism, decorating offices with “Hillary for president cups” and other campaign paraphernalia.
A supporter of the American Communist Party at the height of the Cold War, Brennan brought into the CIA a raft of subversives and gave them plum positions from which to gather and leak political espionage on Trump. He bastardized standards so that these left-wing activists could burrow in and take career positions. Under the patina of that phony professionalism, they could then present their politicized judgments as “non-partisan.”....."
Seeking to retain his position as CIA director under Hillary, Brennan teamed up with British spies and Estonian spies to cripple Trump’s candidacy. He used their phony intelligence as a pretext for a multi-agency investigation into Trump, which led the FBI to probe a computer server connected to Trump Tower and gave cover to Susan Rice, among other Hillary supporters, to spy on Trump and his people.
John Brennan’s CIA operated like a branch office of the Hillary campaign, leaking out mentions of this bogus investigation to the press in the hopes of inflicting maximum political damage on Trump. An official in the intelligence community tells TAS that Brennan’s retinue of political radicals didn’t even bother to hide their activism, decorating offices with “Hillary for president cups” and other campaign paraphernalia.
A supporter of the American Communist Party at the height of the Cold War, Brennan brought into the CIA a raft of subversives and gave them plum positions from which to gather and leak political espionage on Trump. He bastardized standards so that these left-wing activists could burrow in and take career positions. Under the patina of that phony professionalism, they could then present their politicized judgments as “non-partisan.”....."
https://spectator.org/confirmed-john-brennan-colluded-with-foreign-spies-to-defeat-trump/
Seattle Husker
10,000+ Posts
Seattle Husker
10,000+ Posts
Here's an article that summarizes the current Republican approach to smearing anything/anyone investigating Russian interference. It was written by a former lead investigator for Sen. Grassley and IG for the Interior Dept. It puts into context much of the news like the IG referral of McCabe to the DOJ.
This statement could apply to some posters here.
This statement could apply to some posters here.
The "devoid of facts" comment is priceless.
ProdigalHorn
10,000+ Posts
"to protect Trump’s achilles heel — his and his staffs’ apparent collusion with the Russians"
If you start with the presumption of guilt, it alllll falls into place.
If you start with the presumption of guilt, it alllll falls into place.
Husker doesn't believe in conspiracy theories unless it deals with Trump.
OUBubba
5,000+ Posts
Fact: Stone messaged with Gucifer 2.0.
Fact: Stone foreshadowed Podesta's emails being leaked (think about that arrogance). Ironically, wikileaks released them 30 minutes after the Access Hollywood tape came out and a few hours after the joint memo to address election meddling.
Fact: The Attorney General lied about whether or not he had met with Russians.
Fact: The GOP platform was changed to be more Russia friendly in Cleveland.
Fact: Trump Jr., Manafort and Kushner (at least) met with Russians in Trump Tower under the premise that they'd have damaging information on Clinton and to discuss the Maginsky Act that significantly impacted Russian Oligarchs $, their families and their travel.
Fact: Flynn lied under oath about his contacts with Russians.
Fact: Stone foreshadowed Podesta's emails being leaked (think about that arrogance). Ironically, wikileaks released them 30 minutes after the Access Hollywood tape came out and a few hours after the joint memo to address election meddling.
Fact: The Attorney General lied about whether or not he had met with Russians.
Fact: The GOP platform was changed to be more Russia friendly in Cleveland.
Fact: Trump Jr., Manafort and Kushner (at least) met with Russians in Trump Tower under the premise that they'd have damaging information on Clinton and to discuss the Maginsky Act that significantly impacted Russian Oligarchs $, their families and their travel.
Fact: Flynn lied under oath about his contacts with Russians.
Seattle Husker
10,000+ Posts
Keep in mind, we KNOW that the Trump org met with the Russians on a number of fronts. The only question is whether any malfeasance was involved. It's these interactions that prompted the investigation and I'll reserve judgment pending the outcome of the investigation. To act like those interactions didn't take place strains credibility and belies the facts. There are guilty pleas that stand in direct contrast to those who claim no "collusion" existed.
Last edited:
Joe Fan
10,000+ Posts
You really have no idea whats going
Which is why I have grown so fond of you
You represent your people perfectly
And who, oh wise one, pled guilty to "colluding" with the Russians? And what did they collude about? And how is this so called "collusion" illegal?
Last edited:
OUBubba
5,000+ Posts
Ok. I was in the middle of Rib Crib at the desk. Lied to investigators is not under oath. Either is criminal, correct?
OUBubba
5,000+ Posts
If that's all you've got for criticism of those "Facts" then that's like making fun of Trump for poor word usage on the twitter machine. Like unpresidented or consensual or council. Low hanging fruit but really not the point. More like a garnish on a good breakfast.
What did he mean? 
ProdigalHorn
10,000+ Posts
No he didn't. he said he didn't meet in the context of those specific discussions and about the campaign. He obviously would have met with any Russian who wanted to talk to him in the course of his actual job, and as I understand it, that was pretty much him exchanging pleasantries at events. No one has shown any significant or substantial discussions he's had relevant to the case - at least none that I've seen.
Fact: Trump's been a pretty garbage puppet so far. Obama did zero about Russia for 7.99999 years. His strongest move was booting dignitaries out of Washington as he was quite literally vacating the oval office. He was a real pillar of strength when Russia was invading Ukraine a few years back, wasn't he? And the Democratic party absolutely dropped the hammer on... oh wait, they really didn't, did they?
Get back to me when Trump tells Putin on a hot mike that if he gets re-elected he'll have more flexibility to do what the Russians want. You didn't care then, so none of your comments mean anything at this point.
Fact: Manafort's already been indicted and not a peep about Russian collusion, so I'm not sure why this is relevant to proving collusion. Apparently Mueller didn't think the meeting constituted collusion.
Fact: The state department served as a funnel for Clinton cronies to feed info to an opposition research company designed to discredit a presidential candidate, in cooperation with foreign agents. That dossier was then used to obtain a warrant to spy on American citizens, and state department actors colluded to ensure that the media had an excuse to run with the story based on private internal meetings with the president-elect.
Except Comey said at the time that he didn't believe Flynn was lying, and Flynn and his family have since said he was pressured into that confession. You know, how Mueller was threatening to go after his son and basically force him to spend millions in legal fees if he didn't shut it down?
Hey remember this? http://money.cnn.com/2017/12/04/media/abc-news-president-brian-ross-flynn-correction/index.html That was when you guys were all excited that Flynn was going to flip and "cooperate" with Mueller (i.e. finger Trump.) That was fun.
If it weren't for the stuff you got wrong, this would be an INCREDIBLY weak argument. As it is, it's just a weak argument. None of those things even remotely proves ANYTHING.
ProdigalHorn
10,000+ Posts
Yeah, which of those guilty pleas from anyone in the Trump administration were related to collusion?
I remember Rib Crib well - meat was good, sides not fantastic but not bad. Introduced to barbecued bologna there, which while it was better than I was expecting, isn't really something I need to revisit.
Last edited:
Seattle Husker
10,000+ Posts
Just to be clear, you do understand that there is no actual crime for "collusion", right? I keep reading some on the right claim "nobody has been charged with collusion" as if an actual charge of collusion should appear to validate the interference.
To answer your question, Flynn and Papadoplous could be tied to lying directly about their interactions with Russians. The jury is still out on Manafort/Gates as they seem to be the most obvious to get their interactions with the Russians called out given their business dealings. I'd bet heavy money that they ultimately get charged with some level of charges related to Russian collusion. They are low hanging fruit though. Remember, Al Capone didn't go to jail for raqueteering but rather tax evasion because the latter was easier to prove. One might make the same argument for Manafort/Gates.
Cohen also has significant ties to Russian business interests.
With that said, I think Mueller is a long ways away from closing down the investigation. In fact, I fully expect this to last the length of Trump's term. Ken Starr took 3 years and $56M on a vastly more simple investigation.
If you're just talking about the Lewinsky matter, I'd agree that it was much simpler than what's being looked at now - both from a factual and legal standpoint. However, a large amount of Starr's time was spent on the Whitewater investigation, which was a fairly complex matter.
There is no actual crime for "collusion" because it isn't illegal. Right. So why then is there a special prosecutor at all? Please remind me again?
Seattle Husker
10,000+ Posts
I've included the Whitewater investigation in my analysis. That was a real estate transaction that had a paper trail with limited witnesses. Yes it was complex but didn't cross international boundaries, include state actors nor dozens of major companies. If you look at the potential scope for Mueller it's in another stratosphere than Starr. Of course, I think Mueller is much more qualified to lead this investigation than Starr was.
I35
5,000+ Posts
Really? But some how the Russians only got paid by the Clinton Foundation. You can't make this stuff up.
I'm guess that last small fraction of a fraction of the 8 years comes from when Obama told Putin to "cut it out"
So remind us why the tax payers are paying a ton of money for this special council for collusion?
It likely had an incomplete paper trail, and of course, two of the most important witnesses were "unavailable," which significantly added to the complexity of effort required. (One witness was dead, and the other preferred to go to the slammer for contempt rather than testify against the Clintons.)
That may be true. We're not even totally sure what body of law, if any, is applicable to Mueller's work. A lot of what is going on is "smell test" stuff. So yes, that can get very complicated in a hurry.
I've heard plenty of people criticize how Starr did his work. I never heard anyone question his qualifications - certainly not at the time of his appointment. He had a pretty distinguished legal career, had been Solicitor General, had been on DC Circuit, and was on the short list for the US Supreme Court. He was one of the top lawyers in the United States and didn't have a reputation for being particularly partisan or conservative. People forget about that now because of independent counsel battles, but at the time, he was considered pretty fair-minded.
I'd rather be in jail than be on the Clintons "to be murdered" list too.
ProdigalHorn
10,000+ Posts
I do. And most conservatives do as well. We're not the ones foaming at the mouth every day about proving "collusion" and impeaching Trump because he "colluded with the Russians." I'm glad you're not on that train, because that puts you way ahead of most of the people out there.
But that doesn't change the fact that it hasn't been brought out in any of the previous actions. Your statement was that the previous indictments somehow contradicted the argument that there was no collusion. That just doesn't make any sense.
Except they've already been indicted. The DA isn't saving extra charges in his back pocket just in case. We know what they're being charged with, and none of it relates to collusion.
Cohen is clearly a scumbag. I guess I'm judgmental for assuming that if you're in New York real estate, there's a good chance you're dealing with scumbag lawyers, but anyway, there's no surprise there. I have no illusions that Trump's organization has never EVER done anything wrong, and I'm sure that if they keep working, they can find something. That's what people mean when they say they think Cohen will "flip" - that or he'll just make something up, or divulge something that's harmful but not really illegal. (People have argued that the talk of Cohen flipping or not flipping means that Trump knows he broke the law, which is stupid.)
Joe Fan
10,000+ Posts
After nearly two years of lefties obsessively pushing the Russia-Trump Collusion Theory, are they really in a position to say anything at all about other people supposedly holding conspiracy theories?
At the time, I was suspicious of his death. However, the Independent Counsel looked into it, and the evidence overwhelmingly supported a finding of suicide, not murder. Having said that, it did happen at a remarkably convenient time for the Clintons.
Last edited:
ProdigalHorn
10,000+ Posts
A friend of mine is an attorney and is actually working on the Seth Rich case. He's pretty confident that there's something there, although he may be optimistic about actually being able to shed light on it in court.
Weekly Prediction Contest
* Predict HORNS-AGGIES *
Sat, Nov 30 • 6:30 PM on ABC
Recent Threads
-
New Jaguar TV Commercial!?
- Started by WorsterMan
- Replies: 1
- West Mall
-
Black Lives Matter; The Cerebral Warlords of Our Time
- Started by iatrogenic
- Replies: 1K
- West Mall
-
The Media Industry
- Started by texas_ex2000
- Replies: 8K
- West Mall
-
President Biden Accountability Thread
- Started by 2003TexasGrad
- Replies: 4K
- West Mall
Prediction Results Threads
