Republican Activist Tried to Pay Women to Make False Allegations Against Mueller?

originally posted by: Boadicea
a reply to: Justoneman

Ok but where were you on the COTUS BK?

 

I'm assuming you mean "SCOTUS" and Brett Kavanaugh?

I don't recall. I will not put words in your mouth but I would think I know it was 'rapey rapist'. Tell me I am wrong. I can handle the truth.

Wow. I post a link with info on the OP with no opinion whatsoever and somehow you discern that I'm of the "rapey rapist" opinion???

Well... No. Just no. Generally speaking, every accuser must be heard and their accusations investigated to the greatest extent possible... And every accused person is innocent until proven guilty. Period.

Regarding the accusations against Kavanaugh specifically, there were not enough specific details to even effectively investigate, much less prove anything, and no corroborating witnesses to confirm anything.

Add the very manipulative and shady way by which this became public, and how it played out, and the motives of those behind the accusations become more suspect than Kavanaugh.

So yes, you were wrong. Very wrong. No "rapey rapist" here.

Ok thanks for clearing that up. I don't like to accept hearsay as we have had in the BK situation and would give Mueller the benefit of the doubt. The leftist didn't do that for BK nor any other conservative or non Democrat and that is the real story here. That is why Mueller will have to deal with it by proving a negative and will surely have his reputation drug thru the mud.

We need to stop this in the future but for now we have to face the fact that just a few weeks back the entire leftist media operation were calling him a serial rapist with no proof. That is where we are and we will have to reign it all back in after the reality finally sinks into the left leaning accusers with zero proof did this to us all.

a reply to: AndyFromMichigan

yeah they did and this whole thing is one big fat lie hoax. I didnt get that information from that post which is not a source of anything but someones take on the situation.

a reply to: Sillyolme

Here is a possibility... since we (you included) don't know anything, and all we can do is speculate.

WHAT IF, they really were only looking and willing to pay for dirt, and not create a false accusation. I highly doubt anyone is dumb enough to try and make false accusations against a former FBI Director and Attorney whom is currently in the world spotlight, and even more dumb to think you will find someone who knew/knows Mueller to do it with you.

WHAT IF, they found someone still friends with Mueller during their cold calls, and that person trolled them hard (with or without the help of Mueller). What if that person took their money then lied to them and said "yes, Mueller sexually assaulted me, lets go public", and made them think it was a legitimate accusation. Then the person (and maybe Mueller) just sat back and waited for them to break the accusations on social and mainstream media so they can turn around and start telling the media that "they payed me to make false accusations, here is the proof", and Mueller can request an investigation.

So what started out as opposition research ended in a political hit ricochet. Hardball politics.

originally posted by: lakenheath24

I wish I was clever enough to make this a meme....or post vids on ATS.

www.youtube.com...

Made using Giphy.com

a reply to: Justoneman

That is where we are and we will have to reign it all back in after the reality finally sinks into the left leaning accusers with zero proof did this to us all.

We'll find out this morning what -- if any -- proof they offer... Given that some folks have already produced records Mueller was serving jury duty in D.C. at the time, they have quite the challenge before them.

Also interesting is that the state of New York has no statute of limitations on rape crimes , unlike Maryland. They can still file criminal charges... So why haven't they? Unless they know better than to file false criminal charges of course.

Has anyone asked Burkman who hired him? I've read a dozen different articles about this and no one seems even a little curious about who is behind this. I seriously doubt the alleged victim thought, "I think I'll hire a Republican lobbyist to handle my rape... He's the best guy for the job by golly gee!"

Maybe we'll find out at this morning's press conference -- IF it even happens. I'm not holding my breath.

a reply to: Sillyolme

The part about the email to Taub not asking to lie about Mueller is specifically from on of the primary sources that said they saw the actual email (which as far as I know has still not been released online)...

Twitter Link

originally posted by: More1ThanAny1
This thread is proof positive that too many people take what the Media and random people on Social Media say at face value.

If you do one of the following:
A: Believe Mueller sexually assaulted someone.
B: Believe this is a hoax and Mueller is innocent.

You are what is wrong with today's society.

The lot of you are in no position to prove or disprove any of it. You don't know what is really going on. You were not involved in any of it. All you know is the information you are spoon fed through your screens. That information can be accurate, inaccurate, or a combination of the two, so the only wise position to take is:

C: I don't know, you don't know, and we likely will never know the full truth, only what the winning side says is true.

So stop fighting each other. Just gather info and bring it back here, and discuss the possibilities without jumping to a conclusion. In the end, that is all anyone can do.

It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it. - Aristotle

1: You don't know what Mueller did.
2: You don't know what Surefire Intel said or did, maybe they were only asking for dirt, not asking to make it up.
3: You don't know that the people who came forward are even real, let alone talking the truth.
4: You don't know anything.

Stay on the fence.

Quoted for Truth!

Some applause for the much needed reality check.

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: shooterbrody

They are investigating. You dont need charges to investigate.

What are they "investigation"?
attempted smear isn't a crime is it?

a reply to: SonOfThor

I have a very similar thought process with this whole mess.

None of us KNOWS the truth from the available information.

I will be curious what comes of the press conference as well, IF it happens.

a reply to: Boadicea

I appreciate your well reasoned thoughts in this thread as well.

a reply to: shooterbrody

As Mueller is working for the US government as Special Counsel, if it could be shown that these people were trying to use these false accusations as a way to interfere with Mueller from performing his legitimate governmental functions then a case could potentially be made for Conspiracy to Defraud the United States.

a reply to: Xcalibur254

Wow
ok stretch armstrong........

a reply to: shooterbrody

Not really. To quote the majority decision of Hammerschmidt v. United States:

To conspire to defraud the United States means primarily to cheat the Government out of property or money, but it also means to interfere with or obstruct one of its lawful governmental functions by deceit, craft or trickery, or at least by means that are dishonest. It is not necessary that the Government shall be subjected to property or pecuniary loss by the fraud, but only that its legitimate official action and purpose shall be defeated by misrepresentation, chicane or the overreaching of those charged with carrying out the governmental intention.

If these false accusations interfere with Mueller from doing his job that would seem to fit right in with Chief Justice Taft's definition of defraud.

a reply to: Xcalibur254

Wow
Guess you better not get in his way on his daily commute, you could be "interfering" with his "job".

It is going to be hilllaryious seeing this turned back on those who used the lies in the dossier to "conspire to defraud" the Government of the USA. It hasn't effected the jobs of the DA, congressmen and senators. You know as long as we are discussing loss of time, fraud and misrepresentation.

a reply to: shooterbrody

Intent plays a large part. By paying women to lie about Mueller the intent becomes pretty clear. With the dossier Steele was paid to compile information on Candidate Trump. He was not paid to create lies and then pass them off as truth. So while the intent of the dossier may have been to derail Trump's campaign, those who used it had no reason to believe it contained any untruths.

Thus it does not meet the definition of Conspiracy to Defraud the United States. I'm not even sure I would say the Mueller case fits the definition either but that's why it was given to the FBI to investigate. To determine whether a crime had been committed or not.

You wanted to know what these people could be investigated for and I gave you a reasonable answer. You're welcome.

a reply to: stosh64

Thank you for also being a voice of thoughtful reason -- we can't have too many these days!

Thanks to everyone trying to focus on facts and truth... Not opinions and beliefs which have no place in such serious allegations.

a reply to: shooterbrody

I understand your derision and even share your contempt, but ExCalibur is right... The Feds have all kinds of laws in place to protect themselves from we the people. And they are very creative in applying them.

Just ask the Bundys and Finicums...

My concern going forward is that an official "investigation" provides cover of darkness for the guilty from the public, and allows for all manner of nefariousness.

a reply to: Boadicea

FYI - here is an interview with Wohl and Burkman.

They basically say that Lorraine Parsons doesn't exist (she is the supposed person who emailed different media people saying she was offered to payment to lie), and they Burkman also said the supposed person who emailed Taub also doesn't exist...

The media online has said publicly on twitter etc. that they can't corroborate the existence of Parsons, and I still haven't seen an email showing someone from Surefire Intelligence actually emailed Taub offering payment for talking to them on the phone.

Press Conference is in 2 hours - I think it is worth tuning in...

a reply to: SonOfThor

Looks like Wohl also admitted his cell phone is on a family plan, and he didn't go into tons of detail, but he seemed to be saying the linked in employees of "surefire intelligence" were fake (at least some of them). I'd like to hear him discuss in more detail the whole celebrity pictures thing to clarify his defense - i.e. is he saying those were somehow faked?

Also, I only watched once, but I didn't catch him rebutting his email being in the code of Surefire Intelligence, but it seemed that he was saying these 'fake people claiming he tried to pay them off' may have been using proton mail and impersonating him or pretending to be a Surefire Intelligence employee...

They also said their accuser is apparently a well networked, well respected individual in fashion design, and the Mueller was in fact in NYC at the approximate timeframe for a cyber security type conference.

Meh - at this point I say tune into the press conference and see what happens??

a reply to: Xcalibur254

reasonable

a reply to: SonOfThor

Thank you for the video. I believe that's the first Wohl has publicly stated that Surefire Intelligence is his company.

Do you happen to know where we can watch the press conference live? I looked, but didn't find anything.

I did find this tho:

The woman accusing Mueller of rape was slated to detail her encounter with the special counsel at a press conference Burkman and Wohl are hosting in Arlington, Virginia Thursday at noon.

However, upon arriving in Washington, DC, Wohl said she panicked and boarded a flight to another location. Below is a photo of Wohl and the accuser, who at this time is fearful for her life and requests to remain anonymous.

Source: Gateway Pundit

Something else curious to me is that this Jennifer Taub forwarded the email soliciting her Mueller stories directly to the Special Counsel's office rather than to the FBI or another law enforcement agency.