It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Wapo Claims Mueller Changed Investigation to Obstruction of Justice

page: 5
23
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 14 2017 @ 11:01 PM
link   
a reply to: The GUT

You're conflating a lot and you've allowed yourself to believe that the goal posts have been moved all the way down to: "If Donald J Trump didn't collude, case closed."

Except that's all political talking point.

In reality, Trump himself was never even a focus of the FBI's investigation. And here's the kicker, none of that matters now. Through his own ridiculous actions, Trump has actually managed to ensure he would be a focus of investigation — Mueller's investigation. And for that matter, the ongoing OIG investigation into Comey which Chaffetz requested be expanded to include the firing of Comey.

That's the irony here that escapes you. And as I said, the original investigation wasn't focused on Trump anyway. Nor was it concluded. Nor has anyone cleared anyone from the campaign. Nor is it necessary that collusion be proven for vindication of what you believe to be the "Trump Russia narrative."

I can 100% guarantee that the conclusions will be that the Russians meddled in the election. If not a definite conclusion, it will be with an extremely high degree of certainty that the Russians will be found to be responsible for the hacking of the DNC, DCCC and Podesta's emails (and likely others including GOP systems).

That's a foregone conclusion.

Collusion was always just one aspect and honestly, most of us who are serious about this s# haven't been running around saying that Trump himself colluded with anyone, despite the repeated straw man arguments to the contrary.

You need evidence? Did you get wind of the 97 to 2 vote in the Senate that just hamstrung any possible attempts by Trump to ease sanctions on Russia? I'm sure you appreciate the significance of that.




posted on Jun, 14 2017 @ 11:03 PM
link   
a reply to: windword

Debunked how?

He was asked straight up why he leaked his memos to aa friend. He said he needed to get the info out there because Trump tweet about tapes.

Why would he need to get the info out there when the NYT put the info out their a day before the tweet?

This is a lie. You can try to justify it all you want, but it is a lie plain and simple.

As for the recusal thing, Comey said in response to harris at his hearing that there was no letter from the attorney general outlining the parameters from recusal, which there clearly was and has been provided.



posted on Jun, 14 2017 @ 11:06 PM
link   
a reply to: theantediluvian




I can 100% guarantee that the conclusions will be that the Russians meddled in the election. If not a definite conclusion, it will be with an extremely high degree of certainty that the Russians will be found to be responsible for the hacking of the DNC, DCCC and Podesta's emails (and likely others including GOP systems).


Promise?

Should that DNC egg get cracked, the yolk may be too rich for each party to pallet. With the DCCC, we may find that Russians really didn't care about a party or person (my own assumption) and that they were looking for useful tools.



posted on Jun, 14 2017 @ 11:08 PM
link   
a reply to: theantediluvian

Wait, if trump didn't collude with Russia, then why is there significance (pertaining to trump) in a senate vote about Russian sanctions?
edit on 14-6-2017 by Dfairlite because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 14 2017 @ 11:08 PM
link   
a reply to: theantediluvian

You know I respect you. But I find your seeming glee at the fact that trump was never under investigation, but now that doesn;t matter because of this possible obstruction case to be troubling.

Trump was attacked by the media and leaks constantly.

The same media by the way that you pointed to over and over agiant to show how bad Trump was. You personally cited the Feb 14th NYT article many times in conversations with me.

You say you werent saying Trump personally colluded with Russia, but you pushed this article of lies that said Trump or people close to him were caught on tape with Russians.

And we now know that it was a lie.

But that doesn't seem to bother you much. I havent seen one comment from you on this.

Instead, you jump right from collusion with russia to obstruction of justice.

It seems from the outside that you are only interested in seeing Trump brought down, and if you were and unwilling pawn in the media and deep states collusion to spread lies and disinformation to help achieve that, you are ok with it.



posted on Jun, 14 2017 @ 11:11 PM
link   
a reply to: Grambler

Sadly people like AD are incapable of seeing the big picture. They're political hacks.



posted on Jun, 14 2017 @ 11:44 PM
link   
a reply to: Dfairlite

If true, the entire charade is a "fishing expedition".



posted on Jun, 14 2017 @ 11:50 PM
link   

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: Grambler



So it seems it will be Trumps word vs. Comey's.


Too bad Trump has a "tremendous" record of lying!

However, regardless of the "loyalty question", Trump has himself said that he fired Comey because of the Russian thing. It's Trump's own words and action that continue to indict him.



Sure and Comey perjured himself twice in his last testimony.

He lied about why he leaked the memos (the NYT article that showed the details on them was a day before trumps tweet).

He lied about how he heard about sessions recusing himself.

Trumps Russia comments in no way equals obstruction.

As comey has admitted, the investigation will continue unimpeded. Comey admitted Trump said he wanted him to go after satellite people in his campaign.

If Trump fired Comey for the russia investigation, I think it was bad politics, but I don't blame him. Comey found not one leaker (turns out he was fond of leaking himself), and he refused to tell the public that Trump wasn't under investigation.

Again, why are all of the anti trumpers perfectly ok with the FBI leaking info constantly to make trump look bad?


While I agree with everything you said, I think the part about Trump firing Comey "over Russia" is distorted by the media and talking heads. He was upset after Comey telling him 3 times he was NOT being investigated over Russia that Comey would not man up go out and tell the Public that he was not under investigation , creating a great weight over him after being slammed 24/7 by 99% of the fake news media. That's it in the right context. Media and people here just like to say its over Russia, how can it be over Russia when there is no Russia, its all BS. Investigations don't stop at the FBI cause one guy gets fired either, Comey was no gum shoe.

What we have now is Criminal Prosecution in reverse. Just make crazy claim that cant be proven or un proven, and try to get them on something different if they slip up..; Its ass backwards
edit on 14-6-2017 by WhereAreTheGoodguys because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 14 2017 @ 11:55 PM
link   

originally posted by: WhereAreTheGoodguys

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: Grambler



So it seems it will be Trumps word vs. Comey's.


Too bad Trump has a "tremendous" record of lying!

However, regardless of the "loyalty question", Trump has himself said that he fired Comey because of the Russian thing. It's Trump's own words and action that continue to indict him.



Sure and Comey perjured himself twice in his last testimony.

He lied about why he leaked the memos (the NYT article that showed the details on them was a day before trumps tweet).

He lied about how he heard about sessions recusing himself.

Trumps Russia comments in no way equals obstruction.

As comey has admitted, the investigation will continue unimpeded. Comey admitted Trump said he wanted him to go after satellite people in his campaign.

If Trump fired Comey for the russia investigation, I think it was bad politics, but I don't blame him. Comey found not one leaker (turns out he was fond of leaking himself), and he refused to tell the public that Trump wasn't under investigation.

Again, why are all of the anti trumpers perfectly ok with the FBI leaking info constantly to make trump look bad?


While I agree with everything you said, I think the part about Trump firing Comey "over Russia" is distorted by the media and talking heads. He was upset after Comey telling him 3 times he was NOT being investigated over Russia that Comey would not man up go out and tell the Public that he was not under investigation , creating a great weight over him after being slammed 24/7 by 99% of the fake news media. That's it in the right context. Media and people here just like to say its over Russia, how can it be over Russia when there is no Russia, its all BS. Investigations don't stop at the FBI cause one guy gets fired either, Comey was no gum shoe.

What we have not is Criminal Prosecution in reverse. Just make crazy claim that cant be proven or un proven, and try to get them on something different if they slip up..; Its ass backwards


Agree with all of this.

That is what is so frustrating in seeing people gleefully move from the collusion discussion to obstruction.

They are ok with the deep state making constant leaks and the media spinning them to constantly make trump look like a criminal. Then when one story falls, they just make up another, praying that Trump eventually responds to one of their garbage stories in an inappropriate way.

And while the anti Trump people cheer this on, they fail to question why allowing the media and deep state to attempt to overthrow an elected leader may be a bad idea.



posted on Jun, 14 2017 @ 11:58 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Jun, 15 2017 @ 12:00 AM
link   
a reply to: Grambler

it's very frustrating. As for the leakers I trust Sessions will bite down on that. As for Trump and his tweets yeah he seems crazy, maybe crazy like a Fox. Everyone thought it was so strange he put the part in the Comey firing email about the 3 times Comey told him he was clear, but imagine if it wasn't there now. Now if we look at it logically we can see it in the correct context.



posted on Jun, 15 2017 @ 12:42 AM
link   
a reply to: Grambler


You know I respect you. But I find your seeming glee at the fact that trump was never under investigation, but now that doesn;t matter because of this possible obstruction case to be troubling.

Trump was attacked by the media and leaks constantly.


I wouldn't quite call it glee. If I were gleeful about it, I wouldn't be here trying to talk some of you back from the ledge on this Mueller thing.

You see him as a victim of the media but I dsisgree. Trump has had the same sort of relationship with the media since his 20s. It's *identical* to the relationship that his mentor, Roy Cohn, had with the media. In some ways, he was the ideal candidate but it's only obvious in hindsight because so many were blinded by their bias and just couldn't fathom that Trump could become the GOP candidate let alone get elected.

There would be no Trump without the media. He and the media are in a symbiotic relationship. I don't want to get sidetracked here so I'll leave it at that.


The same media by the way that you pointed to over and over agiant to show how bad Trump was. You personally cited the Feb 14th NYT article many times in conversations with me.

You say you werent saying Trump personally colluded with Russia, but you pushed this article of lies that said Trump or people close to him were caught on tape with Russians.

And we now know that it was a lie.

But that doesn't seem to bother you much. I havent seen one comment from you on this.

Instead, you jump right from collusion with russia to obstruction of justice.


I read the article the other day and as I mentioned to you then, I don't recall having ever read it before. Are you familiar with Google "dorking?" Try this search in Google:


site:www.abovetopsecret.com link:www.nytimes.com theantediluvian


That will show you every time there was a link to a NYT article on a page with a post by or to me. (355) I don't see me ever linking it. Now, I probably would have posted it if I had been around but I wasn't posting much at the time. If you notice, I didn't have any threads posted between Feb 22nd and Mar 6th. In fact, if you want to look at my posts, I only had one post on Feb 24th and no more posts until Mar 6th.



So no, I don't believe I did but I do acknowledge that Comey said that the story was "in the main" inaccurate (mostly inaccurate). I suppose I could be wrong but I don't think I am. It's not even in my notes.

Maybe you're thinking of the NY Times article about the FBI contacting the DNC in Sept 2015 about the hack? I have posted that a number of times.

NYT - The Perfect Weapon: How Russian Cyberpower Invaded the U.S.


WASHINGTON — When Special Agent Adrian Hawkins of the Federal Bureau of Investigation called the Democratic National Committee in September 2015 to pass along some troubling news about its computer network, he was transferred, naturally, to the help desk.

His message was brief, if alarming. At least one computer system belonging to the D.N.C. had been compromised by hackers federal investigators had named “the Dukes,” a cyberespionage team linked to the Russian government.


I've also posted about the Russians bragging about contacts? None of that was NYT reporting though.


It seems from the outside that you are only interested in seeing Trump brought down, and if you were and unwilling pawn in the media and deep states collusion to spread lies and disinformation to help achieve that, you are ok with it.


This is not a very good argument imo. You have 1 article discredited by Comey. Which is a little odd considering how Trump supporters want to believe Comey on two things: that single NYT article and him confirming that he told Trump that he wasn't under investigation. Yet everything else Comey says is called into question.

I don't know what's going on with that Feb 14th article but if that's enough for you to toss out everything ever reported in NYT then I don't understand how you can justify to yourself, believing anything that Trump says when you know for a fact that he has lied repeatedly?

If we stack up NYT confirmed stories vs Trump confirmed lies, it's not going to be a pretty picture. At all.
Now fair's fair here. I'm certainly biased AF and I know this. So are you. You want to believe that there's a massive conspiracy by the "deep state" and the media to "spread lies and disinformation" to bring down Trump.

So while you're asserting that I've fallen prey to a false narrative and that's why I blindly want Trump to go down, I assert the complete opposite: You've been unwittingly convinced that Trump is the target of a soft coup by the "deep state" and the media and that he is therefore the anti-evil-globalist and because of that, anything he does wrong is excusable because he's the enemy of the real enemy. (or something along those lines)

I believe that's largely propaganda and that part of Trump's magic is that by sparring with the media the way he does, he uses them to sell this s#.



posted on Jun, 15 2017 @ 12:51 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Jun, 15 2017 @ 12:51 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Jun, 15 2017 @ 01:08 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Jun, 15 2017 @ 01:16 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Jun, 15 2017 @ 01:23 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Jun, 15 2017 @ 01:24 AM
link   
a reply to: thack

what??
no way



posted on Jun, 15 2017 @ 01:27 AM
link   
a reply to: shooterbrody


It transitioned from MATTER to INVESTIGATION to OBSTRUCTION charge. (Fake evidence being manufactured as we speak.)



posted on Jun, 15 2017 @ 01:31 AM
link   
I'm sorry guys, you can't blame this on leaks and fake news. If you feel like blaming anyone, blame political rookie Trump.
Who would have ever thought this would be so complex and difficult?




top topics



 
23
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join