Comey and Mueller

"Hey, about those indictments... Ummmm... well, here's the thing, Your Honor..."

https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/05/robert-mueller-tough-week-court-manafort/

"First, in the Eastern District of Virginia, where Paul Manafort is facing one of the two indictments against him, Judge T. S. Ellis hammered Mueller’s prosecutors over the issues we have been hammering for a year:

(a) In appointing Mueller on May 17, 2017, Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein failed to comply with federal regulations that control special-counsel investigations; and

(b) The secret August 2 memo, by which Rosenstein attempted to paper over this dereliction, is so facially uninformative and heavily redacted that the subjects of the investigation, the courts, and the public are still in the dark. The factual basis for a criminal investigation is still unknown, as are the boundaries of Mueller’s jurisdiction — with Mueller’s prosecutors paying lip service to the notion of limits, even as they argue that, essentially, there are none.

Judge Ellis was ornery with prosecutors at Friday’s hearing (Power Line’s Scott Johnson has posted the transcript here). He was particularly blunt about two other issues we’ve repeatedly highlighted:

(1) The two Manafort indictments (the one in Virginia and the other in Washington, D.C.) have nothing to do with the special counsel’s mandate to probe Russia’s meddling in the 2016 election, so one can only conclude that Mueller is squeezing Manafort, the former campaign manager, to get him to cooperate against President Trump; and

(2) Mueller’s investigation is really about seeking a basis to impeach Trump.

We’ve been asking the hard questions for a long time. Now, however, the special counsel and the Justice Department are dealing with a federal judge — i.e., a skeptic they can’t afford to ignore. And for those (myself included) who are inclined to believe Manafort is a sleazeball, it bears mention that he is unlikely to benefit from Judge Ellis’s doubts about Mueller’s authority. In the end, Mueller will probably be able to keep his case on track even if he is bruised along the way.

It could be that the Justice Department relied on the unverified Steele dossier in describing the factual basis for the special counsel’s investigation. That’s something we should know."


"When prosecutors are serious about nabbing law-breakers who are at large, they do not file an indictment publicly. That would just induce the offenders to flee to or remain in their safe havens. Instead, prosecutors file their indictment under seal, ask the court to issue arrest warrants, and quietly go about the business of locating and apprehending the defendants charged. In the Russia case, however, the indictment was filed publicly even though the defendants are at large. That is because the Justice Department and the special counsel know the Russians will stay safely in Russia.

Mueller’s allegations will never be tested in court. That makes his indictment more a political statement than a charging instrument. To the extent there are questions about whether Russia truly meddled in the election, the special counsel wants to end that discussion (although his indictment will not satisfy those skeptical about Russia’s responsibility for hacking Democratic accounts, or who wonder why the FBI and Justice Department never physically examined DNC servers).

Alas, figuring that he was playing with the house money, Mueller made a reckless bet: He charged not only Russian individuals but three Russian businesses. A business doesn’t have the same risks as a person. A business can’t be thrown in jail. And while members of Mueller’s prosecutorial stable have a history of putting real businesses out of business, a business that is run by a Putin crony and serves as a front for Kremlin operations is not too worried about that either.

So . . . guess what? One of those Russian businesses, Concord Management and Consulting, wants its day in court. It has retained the Washington law firm of Reed Smith, two of whose partners, Eric Dubelier and Katherine Seikaly, have told Mueller that Concord is ready to have its trial — and by the way, let’s see all the discovery the law requires you to disclose, including all the evidence you say supports the extravagant allegations in the indictment.

Needless to say, Mueller’s team is not happy about this development since this is not a case they figured on having to prosecute to anything more than a successful press conference. So, they have sought delay on the astonishing ground that the defendant has not been properly served — notwithstanding that the defendant has shown up in court and asked to be arraigned.

Understand, service of process is simply the means by which a party seeks what Mueller has already got: the opposing party’s appearance in the lawsuit. But Mueller’s argument is so priceless we can’t let it go unstated: In order to serve the defendants in a criminal case in which Mueller alleges that Russia is an adversary government that conducted espionage operations against the American election, the Justice Department sought the assistance of . . . yes . . . the government of Russia. I know you’ll be shocked to hear this, but DOJ says Russia never got back to them.

Something tells me that Concord’s appearance in court is Russia’s way of getting back to them.

Mueller risked exactly what has happened: one of the businesses showing up to contest the case at no risk, in effect forcing Mueller to show this Kremlin-connected defendant what he’s got.

The federal court in the District of Columbia has scheduled Concord’s arraignment for Wednesday, so Mueller filed his papers late last Friday to try to get the matter postponed. But, as Politico’s Josh Gerstein reports, on Saturday evening, Judge Dabney Friedrich curtly denied Mueller’s request. Mueller’s prosecutors had suggested that weeks of briefing were necessary to probe the question of whether Concord had been served properly. As Concord has voluntarily appeared, however, it is not apparent why that question needs examination — if he wants to stand on ceremony, Mueller could just hand the lawyers a copy of the indictment when they see each other in court this week.

In fact, though, Concord’s lawyers have been scrutinizing the indictment very carefully, and making demands for discovery that they say Mueller has ignored for weeks. To put it mildly, this is not a case the special counsel is anxious to try; he is even less thrilled at the prospect of disclosing his evidence and investigative files to a business controlled by Yevgeny Prigozhin. Apart from being close to Putin, Prigozhin is personally charged as a defendant in the case — he controls not just Concord but all three businesses charged in the indictment."

I'm sure our Russian collusion proponents are very excited that all this is finally going to see the inside of a courtroom, so that we can all see some of the "mountain of evidence" that apparently is out there.
 
Mueller just got called out. I really hope all the facts get shown to the public. He is a retread of Comey, a political activist of sorts doing things so that they will get reported and make Trump to look bad instead of actually building a case of collusion. All the while assuming that he is insulated from any consequences. He still may be, but it will be interesting to see what he does in response to the Concord case. I predict he cancels the indictment.
 
DcwuFPkW4AEvqp8.jpg
 
Kimberley Strassel of the WSJ reports that the FBI may have engaged in outright spying on the Trump campaign. The FBI may have had a spy planted in Trump's organization! That would be a shocking abuse of power by the FBI.

Strassel says that she's pretty sure she knows who the spy is/was, but won't release the name because she can't confirm it (wow, she must be like a real journalist).

Also, the FBI outright hid critical information from Congress, not because it compromised national security, but because it exposed their dirty deeds.

https://www.americanthinker.com/blo...ll_on_probable_fbi_spy_in_trump_campaign.html
 
Kimberley Strassel of the WSJ reports that the FBI may have engaged in outright spying on the Trump campaign. The FBI may have had a spy planted in Trump's organization! That would be a shocking abuse of power by the FBI.

Strassel says that she's pretty sure she knows who the spy is/was, but won't release the name because she can't confirm it (wow, she must be like a real journalist).

Also, the FBI outright hid critical information from Congress, not because it compromised national security, but because it exposed their dirty deeds.

https://www.americanthinker.com/blo...ll_on_probable_fbi_spy_in_trump_campaign.html
I'd say if a campaign is actively coordinating with a foreign government/hostile power in a criminal way having assets internal is smart.

So, Michael Cohen funneling (Rudy's terminology) Russian oligarch money on behalf of Trump is kosher?
 
The Trump Tower meeting is the Ace of Spades to anyone saying collusion didn't happen. So, there's that.

Cohen also seems to have accepted $500k from Russians.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/do...rch-linked-trump-lawyer-michael-cohen-n872716

The troubling thing is Trump's history. His business model for decades was built on his claiming to be the king of debt. He grew through debt. In about 2006 his business model became cash spending and then in 2011/2012 it exploded. https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...ory.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.6b0a7ae7ab42

https://www.cnn.com/2018/04/27/politics/nra-documents-russian-banker/index.html

Torshin? Former Russian senator now Dept Governor of Russia's central bank. Implicated in money laundering in Spain. Seems Mueller wants to know about him. He's met publicly with Trump Jr. and others.

Should be fun!
 
New cover (although I admit dont know if they even still publish an actual magazine)
This is in anticipation of the IG report, due soon


Dc7QdvzXUAAFUEK.jpg
 
Last edited:
It is starting to look like Obama weaponized the DOJ, FBI and IRS. Maybe he needs to be investigated and put before a grand jury for testimony?

And once again, regardless of party, the fact that those entities have gone rogue should scare everyone.
 
I'd say if a campaign is actively coordinating with a foreign government/hostile power in a criminal way having assets internal is smart.

So, Michael Cohen funneling (Rudy's terminology) Russian oligarch money on behalf of Trump is kosher?
Uranium One ring a bell? Additionally, the Clinton Foundation took in some $100 million in donations from a variety of Gulf sheikhs and billionaires who no doubt expected to reap political benefits from a future Hillary Clinton presidency, with Bill serving not just as first gentleman in the White House but also possibly as bagman. Among donors dumping bags of cash on the Clintons include Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar and the United Arab Emirates. Let's really look at everyone.
 
The Trump Tower meeting is the Ace of Spades to anyone saying collusion didn't happen. So, there's that.

Nope
The Trump Tower meeting is the Ace of Spades to anyone saying collusion didn't happen. So, there's that.

Cohen also seems to have accepted $500k from Russians.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/do...rch-linked-trump-lawyer-michael-cohen-n872716

The troubling thing is Trump's history. His business model for decades was built on his claiming to be the king of debt. He grew through debt. In about 2006 his business model became cash spending and then in 2011/2012 it exploded. https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...ory.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.6b0a7ae7ab42

https://www.cnn.com/2018/04/27/politics/nra-documents-russian-banker/index.html

Torshin? Former Russian senator now Dept Governor of Russia's central bank. Implicated in money laundering in Spain. Seems Mueller wants to know about him. He's met publicly with Trump Jr. and others.

Should be fun!

Yet, Mueller will announce he found nothing when the time comes. Prepare to be disappointed.
 
Nope


Yet, Mueller will announce he found nothing when the time comes. Prepare to be disappointed.

"Found nothing" yet we already have 19 indictments with 5 pleading guilty. The investigation isn't over yet thus broad statements like this are not remotely based in any sort of reality.
 
"Found nothing" yet we already have 19 indictments with 5 pleading guilty. The investigation isn't over yet thus broad statements like this are not remotely based in any sort of reality.

The only thing we have are a few corrupt individuals(most occurring before their association with Trump) and process crimes. Nothing to do with Russia. The fact that you buy into this corrupt investigation(the insurance policy) by Mueller tells me that you don't live in reality.
 
Uranium One ring a bell? Additionally, the Clinton Foundation took in some $100 million in donations from a variety of Gulf sheikhs and billionaires who no doubt expected to reap political benefits from a future Hillary Clinton presidency, with Bill serving not just as first gentleman in the White House but also possibly as bagman. Among donors dumping bags of cash on the Clintons include Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar and the United Arab Emirates. Let's really look at everyone.
Uranium One is such a joke. 9 different levels of government approved it. It kind of shows how weak things are.

Facts, yo: https://www.factcheck.org/2017/10/facts-uranium-one/

The highlights:
*9 people had to vote yes. Including Sec State, Sec Treasury, Sec Defense, Sec Homeland Security, Sec Commerce, Sec Energy, AG and two others.
*Then the NRC had to approve it.
*No UO uranium was shipped to Russia or re-transferred.

Benghazi: 4 years. $7 mill. 0 indictments.
Emails: 2 year investigation. 0 indictments.
 
Uranium One is such a joke. 9 different levels of government approved it. It kind of shows how weak things are.

Facts, yo: https://www.factcheck.org/2017/10/facts-uranium-one/

The highlights:
*9 people had to vote yes. Including Sec State, Sec Treasury, Sec Defense, Sec Homeland Security, Sec Commerce, Sec Energy, AG and two others.
*Then the NRC had to approve it.
*No UO uranium was shipped to Russia or re-transferred.
All of those cabinet members were corrupt Obama Democrats. Since some of the deal money would be returned to Democrat campaign coffers, of course they approved the deal.
Benghazi: 4 years. $7 mill. 0 indictments.
Benghazi - 4 Americans killed when they should not have been in a war zone.
Emails: 2 year investigation. 0 indictments.
David Petraeus was indicted and convicted for letting his gf see classified materials. Hitlery put top secret documents on an unsecure server that she had no business having. Hitlery could have been indicted for setting up an unsecure server strictly to circumvent the FOIA.
 
Uranium One is such a joke. 9 different levels of government approved it. It kind of shows how weak things are.

Facts, yo: https://www.factcheck.org/2017/10/facts-uranium-one/

The highlights:
*9 people had to vote yes. Including Sec State, Sec Treasury, Sec Defense, Sec Homeland Security, Sec Commerce, Sec Energy, AG and two others.
*Then the NRC had to approve it.
*No UO uranium was shipped to Russia or re-transferred.

Benghazi: 4 years. $7 mill. 0 indictments.
Emails: 2 year investigation. 0 indictments.
Facts are that the group was made up of Obama appointees. Did they meet on the Las Vegas tarmac to agree?

Are you disputing that the Clinton Foundation received hefty donations after that?
 
Benghazi: 4 years. $7 mill. 0 indictments.
Emails: 2 year investigation. 0 indictments.

When malfeasance is found, acknowledged, and then dismissed, then that's kind of how it works. Comey literally changed the law in order not to charge Hillary Clinton. So I guess if your goal is to make sure no Democrat gets indicted, then mission accomplish. Good for your team.
 
The only thing we have are a few corrupt individuals(most occurring before their association with Trump) and process crimes. Nothing to do with Russia. The fact that you buy into this corrupt investigation(the insurance policy) by Mueller tells me that you don't live in reality.

Have you now redefined the word "most" too? Of the 19, 2 predate Trump association for now (Manafort and Gates) based on charges. Process crimes equal perjury about activities directly related the the investigation, specifically Russia. That's reality despite all attempts to ignore it.

Meanwhile, the investigation continues as it should all the while being instigated and lead by lifelong Republicans (Comey, Mueller and Rosenstein).
 
Husker, put you money where your mouth is. Let's do a bet. I say there is no Russian collusion by Trump or anybody on his team. Loser leaves West Mall for six months. Deal?
 
Oh yeah. My bad. i forgot about those 13 Russians indictments.:lmao:

Apparently one of the companies Muller indicted did not even exist

This week, one of the Russian companies accused by Special Counsel Robert Mueller of funding a conspiracy to meddle in the 2016 U.S. presidential election was revealed in court to not have existed during the time period alleged by Mueller's team of prosecutors, according to a lawyer representing the defendant.
* * *
"We're not," Dubelier responded. "And the reason for that, Your Honor, is I think we're dealing with a situation of the government having indicted the proverbial ham sandwich."

https://www.dailywire.com/news/30556/disaster-mueller-indicted-russian-company-didnt-ryan-saavedra
 
Husker, put you money where your mouth is. Let's do a bet. I say there is no Russian collusion by Trump or anybody on his team. Loser leaves West Mall for six months. Deal?

First, I've never claimed Trump was explicitly tied into Russia collusion. That's for the Mueller investigation to determine. While you claim "FBI conspiracy" I take comfort that saner heads are prevailing in letting the investigation play out like it should, career Republican heads.

I did say that it was more likely that Trump simply used the Russian interference as wind at his sails. Now, that doesn't mean that people on his campaign weren't aware as the known evidence has already shown. Then again, I'm sure you have a useful excuse why Papadopolous knew that the DNC had been hacked long before even the DNC knew. FBI conspiracy, right? 'P' has already admitted guilt, btw.

Second, you've been on this board for 2.5 years. I've been here for 19yrs. The bet is worthless. You won't even acknowledge reality that has already occurred so why would I think you wouldn't weasel out of a bet?
 
First, I've never claimed Trump was explicitly tied into Russia collusion. That's for the Mueller investigation to determine. While you claim "FBI conspiracy" I take comfort that saner heads are prevailing in letting the investigation play out like it should, career Republican heads.

I did say that it was more likely that Trump simply used the Russian interference as wind at his sails. Now, that doesn't mean that people on his campaign weren't aware as the known evidence has already shown. Then again, I'm sure you have a useful excuse why Papadopolous knew that the DNC had been hacked long before even the DNC knew. FBI conspiracy, right? 'P' has already admitted guilt, btw.

Second, you've been on this board for 2.5 years. I've been here for 19yrs. The bet is worthless. You won't even acknowledge reality that has already occurred so why would I think you wouldn't weasel out of a bet?

We can have a moderator enforce it. You don't even know what reality is. If you think this investigation is an honest one you're crazier than I thought you were. You're setting yourself up for another IRS type of mea culpa and I'm going to laugh my *** off when it happens.
 

Weekly Prediction Contest

* Predict HORNS-AGGIES *
Sat, Nov 30 • 6:30 PM on ABC

Recent Threads

Back
Top