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.
originally posted by: theantediluvian
originally posted by: burntheships
a reply to: theantediluvian
Donna Brazile's new book has an account of Robby Mook
crafting the Russia Narrative continuously.
They used this during the election, and you know this.
How crafty to fall back on saying they didn't.
They used what during the election? If the Clinton campaign knew about that meeting before the election. Why wouldn't they have revealed it when it would have mattered?
originally posted by: Grambler
For the dems to scream about russia for a year, knowing they too were working with them to get dirt on trump is a joke.
originally posted by: loam
originally posted by: Grambler
For the dems to scream about russia for a year, knowing they too were working with them to get dirt on trump is a joke.
They thought the money funneled from Clinton/DNC to Elias to Fusion GPS to Christopher Steele to the Russian sources would never be discovered.
originally posted by: jadedANDcynical
"Veselnitskaya hired the law firm BakerHostetler to represent Prevezon..."
originally posted by: jadedANDcynical
a reply to: MotherMayEye
Wow, I knew I had recalled Baker Hostetler but I couldn't quite put my finger on where or the context.
This might be significant.
Writing in The Wall Street Journal, BakerHostetler partners David Rivkin and Lee Casey propose that President Trump “can end this madness” of special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation “by immediately issuing a blanket presidential pardon to anyone involved in supposed collusion with Russia or Russians during the 2016 presidential campaign, to anyone involved with Russian acquisition of an American uranium company during the Obama administration, and to anyone for any offense that has been investigated by Mr. Mueller’s office.”
It’s that simple: If Trump uses his presidential power to pardon whoever has been implicated, Mueller can’t do his job and will have to shut down the investigation. Rivkin and Casey write: “The president himself would be covered by the blanket pardon we recommend, but the pardon power does not extend to impeachment.”
The advice is coldly technical and cynical, but Rivkin and Casey wrap it in noble cloth. They claim that the Mueller’s investigation has been biased from the get-go and that the charges represent “weaponization of criminal law.” Instead of an investigation by special counsel, they propose that questions of interference in U.S. elections by Russia be investigated by Congress.
originally posted by: MotherMayEye
originally posted by: Grambler
Ask Bernie how fairly he was treated.
Bernie is/was a willing stooge. His 2017 Democratic Unity tour, last Spring, is a testament to that.
originally posted by: MotherMayEye
originally posted by: loam
a reply to: Grambler
Hard to enjoy when your wife may go to prison for bank fraud.
I've always wondered if that's how they got Bernie to be their willing stooge. As long as Bernie does their bidding, his wife is going to be A-OK.
Fisrt, there was nothing to it. Had Don Jr. Offered V a quid pro quo, then they would have said something.
Secondly, seeing as how they thought Hillary was winning, why throw up this hail Mary. It only had a chance to blowback on them, as we are currently seeing.
Also, although this specific story wasn't made public, the dems including Obama were going around before the election decrying trump Russian connections. They probably would want to avoid admitting, "and we know that Don Jr Met with Russians cause we met with the same ones".
As you know, it seems that any sort of getting would have revealed to Hillary's team that fusion had a history of working with Russians.
For the dems to scream about russia for a year, knowing they too were working with them to get dirt on trump is a joke.
Further more, as always, if fusion didnt know about v and her meeting with Don Jr why are they being so secretive about their records and finances?
“None of those demands are pertinent to the Committee’s ‘Russia investigation,’ and disclosure of the documents would cause irreparable harm to Plaintiff by destroying the confidentiality of its business with its clients and contractors and by violating Plaintiff’s First Amendment rights to free speech and free association,” Fusion’s lawyers argue.
They called the subpoena “overbroad” and intended “to harm Plaintiff.”