Mueller’s Latest Indictment Ignores Evidence In The Public Domain

originally posted by: face23785

originally posted by: scauma
a reply to: Xcathdra


Lol, let it go already. Thankfully this will all be done soon and Trump will be gone, and you clowns can go away with him. Don't know what else you'd need to hear or see to make this all obvious to you. Trump blew it yesterday, and the world will be better off for it.

You actually believe Trump is going away?

Asking Trump's allies in congress to defend a President that groveled in front of and praised Vladmir Putin in from of the world's press pool on foreign ground while calling the USA foolish and stupid and describing Putin as "strong' and "powerful" is untenable.

He is working for Putin's interests. There is no question anymore about it.

Congress will turn on him in coming months.

I don't trust this 'public domain' evidence.
You know that the NSA has more reliable sources.
The NSA ownz the Internet.

a reply to: soberbacchus

Congress will turn on him in coming months.

They won't. Congress has learned to stay in line. Otherwise, they face absolute defeat through the primary process.

Ask the tea party, we have no problem sacrificing seats in order to make a point/do what is right. So yes, if they want to be standing in the unemployment lined as a ruined loser, they should oppose MAGA's policy shifts RE: Russia.

Its policy. Get behind it or come up with a valid argument - this fake outrage BS won't fly though. Never has never will.

a reply to: osaitax

Then where is this mythical evidence?

Public domain evidence is far more credible than amorphous claims made by ultra-minorities within USIC based on classified information not subject to scrutiny or peer review.

Public domain evidence is available for actual scrutiny.

The point is, most of us aren't taking someone else's mere word for this. Evidence or it never happened.

And as far as I'm concerned, as of now, it never happened.

Prove me wrong. Prove otherwise.

And don't try that lazy shi# of citing "indictments" as your evidence. Indictments aren't evidence. Indictments are just fancy allegations.

originally posted by: JBurns
a reply to: soberbacchus

Congress will turn on him in coming months.

They won't. Congress has learned to stay in line. Otherwise, they face absolute defeat through the primary process.

After this weeks performance by Trump groveling to Putin in front of camera's and add to it whatever Mueller's final report will outline?

No GOP running for office will survive backing Trump.

Nothing Nationalistic about choosing Putin over your own country.

a reply to: soberbacchus

Nothing Nationalistic about choosing Putin over your own country.

Not cheering Putin, I am cheering Trump. I am cheering common sense. I am cheering Trump's decision to generally echo the findings of veteran intelligence professionals and independent forensic examinations (ie: unbiased, zero conflicts of interest, etc)

Am also merely stating a fact as it pertains to the Obama administration's involvement in the Ukraine coup as well as the Obama administration's contradicting statements RE: Russian "meddling."

We've seen zero evidence that such "meddling" even occurred. I am just asking for some proof.

Again, have you learned nothing from Iraq WMD fiasco?

originally posted by: JBurns
a reply to: soberbacchus

Nothing Nationalistic about choosing Putin over your own country.

Not cheering Putin, I am cheering Trump.

you are cheering Trump licking Putin's boots? (As a Conservative Fox News Analyst described it yesterday)

I am cheering Trump's decision to generally echo the findings of veteran intelligence professionals and independent forensic examinations (ie: unbiased, zero conflicts of interest, etc)

BS. Choose a single source of evidence and claim and I will show you the BS.
Will wait for the link.

No exhausting laundry lists of BS, just your best specific evidence and source "veteran intelligence professionals and independent forensic examinations (ie: unbiased, zero conflicts of interest, etc)"

Will wait.

a reply to: soberbacchus

As a Conservative Fox News Analyst described it yesterday

Fox news doesn't speak for me. Nor do I get any appreciable amount of information from that source. I've never found them particularly reliable as a news source (too biased toward the right)

you are cheering Trump licking Putin's boots?

No, I am cheering Trump's effort to mend relations with our World War 2 ally: Russia.

No exhausting laundry lists of BS, just your best specific evidence and source "veteran intelligence professionals and independent forensic examinations (ie: unbiased, zero conflicts of interest, etc)"

Will wait.

Sure, here you go. VIPS: en.wikipedia.org...

And before you reactionally claim they're partisan hacks, you should know they oppose ~95% of what Trump/says and does and were very outspoken against the Iraq war WMD farce. This is an a-political group of veteran intelligence professionals with years of collective knowledge/experience.

Please read their findings on the "hacking" and I think you'll see there are very credible challenges to the MSM narrative. Its simple: VIPS presents credible evidence while the folks alleging "Russian hacking" present absolutely zero.

In fact, they usually attempt to erroneously cite indictments as evidence (which they aren't, since they are themselves merely accusations)

originally posted by: soberbacchus

originally posted by: JBurns
a reply to: soberbacchus

Congress will turn on him in coming months.

They won't. Congress has learned to stay in line. Otherwise, they face absolute defeat through the primary process.

After this weeks performance by Trump groveling to Putin in front of camera's and add to it whatever Mueller's final report will outline?

No GOP running for office will survive backing Trump.

Nothing Nationalistic about choosing Putin over your own country.

Those are the same methods of thinking that caused all the Hillary voters to be flabbergasted when she lost. (If you think it, then everyone else must also think that way, and it must be true).
Fortunately for everyone who isn't compromised intellectually from MSM bombardment, it is easy to see for what it really is, which is phony outrage based on misplaced idealism and a complete lack of logical reasoning. Just look at who is jumping on this bandwagon to know what is really going on here. John Kerry for one, a guy who has done nothing but fail at foreign policy and help give billions of dollars and weapons to our real enemies.

Even Obama came out after the election and very confidently stated that Russia did not interfere with our election process, but now it seems the best way available to trash Trump. This is really called "Bearing false witness" A deadly sin. You might want to keep that in mind from now on.

a reply to: face23785

its like they dont realize how much worse mike pence would be for pretty much all the things they care about ,he is almost the perfect insurance policy www.vanityfair.com...

But according to former White House aide Omarosa Manigault Newman, the idea that Pence—who is, conveniently, the only person in the administration Trump can’t fire—would be an improvement is sorely misguided. “As bad as y’all think Trump is, you would be worried about Pence,” Newman said on the latest episode of Celebrity Big Brother. “I’m just going to say that. So everybody that’s wishing for impeachment, might want to reconsider their life.” Newman, whose relationship with Trump dates back to the Apprentice and who was fired by White House chief of staff John Kelly last year, went on: “We would be begging for days of Trump back if Pence became president, that’s all I’m saying.”

thetylt.com...

But while critics continue to make a case for the impeachment of President Trump, others grow increasingly skeptical of the prospect. The impeachment of Trump would mean welcoming a President Pence, who many still believe is much worse than Trump. Jane Mayer argues in The New Yorker that a Pence presidency could be significantly more damaging due in part to Pence's loyalty to the Republican billionaire donor class. Pence has the political experience, the connections, the discipline, and the ideological mooring that Trump lacks. He also has a close relationship with the conservative billionaire donors who have captured the Republican Party’s agenda in recent years. Beyond his deep connections to dark money, Pence also poses a unique threat to women and the LGBT community due to his religiosity. Even as Pence argued for less government interference in business, he pushed for policies that intruded on people’s private lives. In the early nineties, he joined the board of the Indiana Family Institute, a far-right group that supported the criminalization of abortion and campaigned against equal rights for homosexuals. And, while Pence ran the Indiana Policy Review Foundation, it published an essay arguing that unmarried women should be denied access to birth control.

www.newyorker.com...

and getting rid of pence would not be easy in the slightest if he replaced trump ,and if he timed it right he would still be eligible for two full terms www.huffingtonpost.com... so by all means keep screaming impeachment but careful what you wish for.

a reply to: RalagaNarHallas

The thinking on the left is to impeach Trump. They also expect Pence to resign since they claim his election with Trump was because of foreign interference and so he is not legitimate either. They expect Paul Ryan to be sworn in and then expect him to nominate Clinton as the Vice President. They then expect Ryan to resign so Clinton will be President because in their land of make believe and delusion she is the winner of the 2016 election.

In the 240+ years of existence of our nation we have had an unelected Vice President and an unelected President once and it was an absolute cluster.

How Hillary Clinton Still Can, and Should, Become President After the Trump-Russia Investigation

If number 1: If Trump is definitively found to have colluded directly with Russia, he would be forced to resign or be impeached.

If number 2: If Trump is removed, Vice President Mike Pence would become president.

If number 3: If Pence becomes president, he should resign too, given that he benefited from the same help from Mother Russia.

If number 4: If Pence resigns before appointing a vice president, Ryan would become president.

If number 5: If Ryan becomes president, he should do the right thing and choose Clinton for vice president. Then he should resign.

This is also the reason Democrats are trying to back door legislation at the state level for a defacto national popular vote once again demonstrating their disdain for the rule of law and the US Constitution.
Agreement Among the States to Elect the President by National Popular Vote


Trump is not going anywhere. Democrats are in a panic since their house of cards has collapsed and are being exposed. Lisa Page is seeking an immunity deal after her testimony in Congress. The Democrats are out in force after the Trump Putin summit while once again demonstrating their ignorance on the point of the meeting.

The actions by the left have not only endangered the Republic (yes, we are a Constitutional Representative Republic and NOT a Democracy as Democrats claim) but have actively started destroying the United States with identity politics, socialism and an elite who is not subject to the rule of law.

originally posted by: JBurns
a reply to: soberbacchus

As a Conservative Fox News Analyst described it yesterday

Fox news doesn't speak for me. Nor do I get any appreciable amount of information from that source. I've never found them particularly reliable as a news source (too biased toward the right)

you are cheering Trump licking Putin's boots?

No, I am cheering Trump's effort to mend relations with our World War 2 ally: Russia.

No exhausting laundry lists of BS, just your best specific evidence and source "veteran intelligence professionals and independent forensic examinations (ie: unbiased, zero conflicts of interest, etc)"

Will wait.

Sure, here you go. VIPS: en.wikipedia.org...

Thought so. I have researched them before.

And before you reactionally claim they're partisan hacks, you should know they oppose ~95% of what Trump/says and does and were very outspoken against the Iraq war WMD farce. This is an a-political group of veteran intelligence professionals with years of collective knowledge/experience.

They have purported Hoaxes and Propaganda in the past.

EXAMPLE:

consortiumnews.com...

The team includes Larry Johnson who created a hoax that Michelle Obama went on a racist rant caught on video and that John Kerry raped a woman in Viet Name etc. etc. He is a political operative in the world of lies and dirty politics.


William Binney (Alex Jones regular guest, Trump loyalist and self-avowed Clinton hater)


The list goes on, so don't tell me about them being unbiased or without agenda or honest, they have repeatedly proven they are the opposite.

Please read their findings on the "hacking" and I think you'll see there are very credible challenges to the MSM narrative. Its simple: VIPS presents credible evidence while the folks alleging "Russian hacking" present absolutely zero.

In fact, they usually attempt to erroneously cite indictments as evidence (which they aren't, since they are themselves merely accusations)

That sounds like BS.

You talked about a tonnage of evidence, but still aren't citing a singular piece of evidence, but referring me to a group (VIPS) that launched a campaign to convince the world the Russia actually hadn't invaded Crimea and all was well.

VIPS regularly posts false or inaccurate information and seems to do so with agenda.

They are guests on Hannity and Alex Jones Infowars when those people need backing for their own outrageous BS claims.

VIPS is not now, nor ever has been credible.

originally posted by: NoCorruptionAllowed

originally posted by: soberbacchus

originally posted by: JBurns
a reply to: soberbacchus

Congress will turn on him in coming months.

They won't. Congress has learned to stay in line. Otherwise, they face absolute defeat through the primary process.

After this weeks performance by Trump groveling to Putin in front of camera's and add to it whatever Mueller's final report will outline?

No GOP running for office will survive backing Trump.

Nothing Nationalistic about choosing Putin over your own country.

Even Obama came out after the election and very confidently stated that Russia did not interfere with our election process, but now it seems the best way available to trash Trump. This is really called "Bearing false witness" A deadly sin. You might want to keep that in mind from now on.

Working for the benefit of foreign governments who wish us ill is called treason.
Trump is the Manchurian candidate the right wing used to claim Obama was.
Those who support and abet such acts are traitors to the United States of America.

You might want to keep that in mind from now on.

a reply to: soberbacchus

* - Cyber Firm Rewrites Part of Disputed Russian Hacking Report

WASHINGTON —

U.S. cybersecurity firm CrowdStrike has revised and retracted statements it used to buttress claims of Russian hacking during last year's American presidential election campaign. The shift followed a VOA report that the company misrepresented data published by an influential British think tank.

In December, CrowdStrike said it found evidence that Russians hacked into a Ukrainian artillery app, contributing to heavy losses of howitzers in Ukraine's war with pro-Russian separatists.

VOA reported Tuesday that the International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS), which publishes an annual reference estimating the strength of world armed forces, disavowed the CrowdStrike report and said it had never been contacted by the company.

Ukraine's Ministry of Defense also has stated that the combat losses and hacking never happened.

Some see overblown allegations

CrowdStrike was first to link hacks of Democratic Party computers to Russian actors last year, but some cybersecurity experts have questioned its evidence. The company has come under fire from some Republicans who say charges of Kremlin meddling in the election are overblown.

* - "Something Stinks Here" - CrowdStrike Revises, Retracts Parts Of Explosive Russian Hacking Report

* - Credibility of Cyber Firm that Claimed Russia Hacked the DNC Comes Under Serious Question

originally posted by: NoCorruptionAllowed

originally posted by: soberbacchus

originally posted by: JBurns
a reply to: soberbacchus

Congress will turn on him in coming months.

They won't. Congress has learned to stay in line. Otherwise, they face absolute defeat through the primary process.

After this weeks performance by Trump groveling to Putin in front of camera's and add to it whatever Mueller's final report will outline?

No GOP running for office will survive backing Trump.

Nothing Nationalistic about choosing Putin over your own country.

Those are the same methods of thinking that caused all the Hillary voters to be flabbergasted when she lost.

By 70k votes spread out over 3 states, whilst democrats stayed home and idiots not paying attention thought Trump was something different.

NO DEMOCRAT is staying home in 2018 or 2020 and NO ONE is not paying attention anymore.

The worst Democrat Pres. Candidate in a generation and Trump only won by 70k votes over 3 states.
3 States he has hammered with his trade war when not licking Putin's boots.

Good luck in the next two elections. He will be lucky to survive long enough to lose in disgrace. I still think congress will impeach out of self interest.

Mueller seeking immunity for up to 5 people to testify in Manafort trial

Attorneys working with special counsel Robert Mueller on Tuesday submitted a request for immunity for up to five witnesses his team has asked to testify in the trial against Paul Manafort, the former chairman of the Trump campaign.

Mueller made the request in a court filing Tuesday afternoon, which also requests that the identity of the potential witnesses remain under seal.

According to the filing, the potential witnesses have yet to be publicly identified with the ongoing investigation into the Trump campaign's alleged ties to Russia and the office wishes to shield them from "undue harassment."

"The five individuals identified in the motions at issue are third parties who have not been charged in this matter, and who have not been identified publicly with the case," the filing reads. "Disclosing the motions would reveal those individuals’ involvement in the investigation and the trial, thereby creating the risk of their undue harassment."

Dollars to donuts 2 of those people are the Podesta Brothers.

a reply to: Xcathdra

Holy crap...are you citing VOA? Voice of America??

Literally Trumps only legal media propaganda outlet that he decimated and rebuilt after taking office?

And Zerohedge? Tyler Durden?

You make it impossible to take you seriously. It's like barfing BS and fake news every day.

originally posted by: Xcathdra
Mueller seeking immunity for up to 5 people to testify in Manafort trial

Attorneys working with special counsel Robert Mueller on Tuesday submitted a request for immunity for up to five witnesses his team has asked to testify in the trial against Paul Manafort, the former chairman of the Trump campaign.

Mueller made the request in a court filing Tuesday afternoon, which also requests that the identity of the potential witnesses remain under seal.

According to the filing, the potential witnesses have yet to be publicly identified with the ongoing investigation into the Trump campaign's alleged ties to Russia and the office wishes to shield them from "undue harassment."

"The five individuals identified in the motions at issue are third parties who have not been charged in this matter, and who have not been identified publicly with the case," the filing reads. "Disclosing the motions would reveal those individuals’ involvement in the investigation and the trial, thereby creating the risk of their undue harassment."

Dollars to donuts 2 of those people are the Podesta Brothers.

I'll take that bet.

If any Podesta is on the list I don't post for six months.

If no Podesta is on the lsit you don't post for six months.

You just BS a lot or willing to back your BS up?

a reply to: soberbacchus

I provided my opinion based on the article and the fact the Podestas dropped out of news cycles.

As for the rest as much as I would love for you to go away for 6 months whats the point? You would only come back and attack everyone at 6months plus 1.

You dont like the source or info thats your issue. As of yet 'I have never seen you back up any of your posts wit anything remotely looking like a fact.

Feel free to cite your sources that support your comments.

a reply to: Xcathdra

That's what I thought.

You don't even believe your own BS.