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.

 

For the 1st time Trump has been linked to Russia in court documents

page: 4
17
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 27 2018 @ 10:28 PM
link   
a reply to: DBCowboy

Hate to be the schmuck who has to pay that bill!!




.....err...wait.




posted on Nov, 27 2018 @ 10:30 PM
link   
a reply to: six67seven

Supposedly Corsi leaked the documents not Mueller



posted on Nov, 27 2018 @ 10:31 PM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

Either way, Trump supporters won’t see it as devastating unless criminality is attributed directly to Trump - for two reasons.

1. They believe it IS a witch hunt because HRC’s campaign are the actual colluders with Russia
2. The political climate in tandem with Trump’s direct & strategic public verbal sabotage of Mueller’s investigation

Trump supporters lost confidence in the government and MSM long ago and will not believe anything they put forth. And they especially won’t give two sh!ts about ‘political devastation’. The attitude towards big government which led to Trumps election has not improved - in fact, you and I probably agreethat it has become much more polarized.



posted on Nov, 27 2018 @ 10:34 PM
link   
If true, this means someone Trump knew met with Assange. There is nothing in the article that says Russia Collusion or even insinuates it. Nobody even knew that Assange was getting information from a Russian informant at that time...except Assange and a few other close associates. Assange collected his information from many sources.

The article from CNN does not state russian collusion. It does say that assange received some info from Russian hackers but it does not that anyone he gave this information knew about it. This information was only found to have come from Russian hackers after the election according to some documents. There has still not been any evidence of the Trump campaign colluding with Russians, just because they received info from Assange, doesn't mean they were working with Russia. In fact the blabber that the guy even met with Assange is not even verified. When Meuller comes right out and directly says that there was possitive collusion, I will probably accept it.

The OP is not correct when it insinuates collusion.



posted on Nov, 27 2018 @ 10:54 PM
link   

originally posted by: xuenchen

originally posted by: six67seven
a reply to: BlackJackal

I don’t think even you believe that is a possibility. There has to be evidence of a crime committed by Trump. That’s just highly unlikely.

As you know, Dershowitz thinks the final report may be devastating to Trump.....politically, not criminally.

Could it affect his re-election? Maybe but will it sway Trump supporters?? I wouldn’t bank on it because the right vs left climate over the past several years has forced people to take sides and I just don’t see Trump supporters bailing on him for anyone the left puts up against him. Trump is already out in front of this final report, calling the Mueller investigation a witch hunt, etc., mentally preparing his base for its release. Its been a strategic move from the start.


Actually Dershowitz said Mueller would make reports look devastating for Trump.

😯


You have a source for that? Because what he actually said was:


I think the report is going to be devastating to the president and I know that the president's team is already working on a response to the report

When I say devastating, I mean it's going to paint a picture that's going to be politically very devastating. I still don't think it's going to make a criminal case


No where in that quote does he mention Mueller willfully writing the report in such a way to be devastating. He doesn't even mention Mueller or any author of the report.

LINK



posted on Nov, 27 2018 @ 10:57 PM
link   
a reply to: BlackJackal

Umm, what?

Title of article is: Mueller report will be 'devastating' for the president: Frequent Trump defender


Alan Dershowitz, a frequent defender of President Donald Trump, said special counsel Robert Mueller’s report will be “devastating” for the president.


From your source.



posted on Nov, 27 2018 @ 11:07 PM
link   

originally posted by: xuenchen

originally posted by: six67seven
a reply to: BlackJackal

I don’t think even you believe that is a possibility. There has to be evidence of a crime committed by Trump. That’s just highly unlikely.

As you know, Dershowitz thinks the final report may be devastating to Trump.....politically, not criminally.

Could it affect his re-election? Maybe but will it sway Trump supporters?? I wouldn’t bank on it because the right vs left climate over the past several years has forced people to take sides and I just don’t see Trump supporters bailing on him for anyone the left puts up against him. Trump is already out in front of this final report, calling the Mueller investigation a witch hunt, etc., mentally preparing his base for its release. Its been a strategic move from the start.


Actually Dershowitz said Mueller would make reports look devastating for Trump.

😯


Dershowitz was referring to what I call the "Soap Opera" aspects of Trump's world. The non-important crap that CNN drools over:
"Trump turns red with anger!"
"Trump ignores his advisors!"
"Trump puts catchup on his steaks!"
"Trump's rhetoric endangers our nation!"

But there's no criminal or impeachable wording in the report, directed at President Trump. That was published by REAL news organizations, right around Halloween.



posted on Nov, 27 2018 @ 11:11 PM
link   
a reply to: BlackJackal

Ass Backwards.

Love it
🎏



posted on Nov, 28 2018 @ 08:48 AM
link   

originally posted by: BlackJackal

originally posted by: xuenchen

originally posted by: six67seven
a reply to: BlackJackal

I don’t think even you believe that is a possibility. There has to be evidence of a crime committed by Trump. That’s just highly unlikely.

As you know, Dershowitz thinks the final report may be devastating to Trump.....politically, not criminally.

Could it affect his re-election? Maybe but will it sway Trump supporters?? I wouldn’t bank on it because the right vs left climate over the past several years has forced people to take sides and I just don’t see Trump supporters bailing on him for anyone the left puts up against him. Trump is already out in front of this final report, calling the Mueller investigation a witch hunt, etc., mentally preparing his base for its release. Its been a strategic move from the start.


Actually Dershowitz said Mueller would make reports look devastating for Trump.

😯


You have a source for that? Because what he actually said was:


I think the report is going to be devastating to the president and I know that the president's team is already working on a response to the report

When I say devastating, I mean it's going to paint a picture that's going to be politically very devastating. I still don't think it's going to make a criminal case


No where in that quote does he mention Mueller willfully writing the report in such a way to be devastating. He doesn't even mention Mueller or any author of the report.

LINK


Words from Dershowitz’s mouth




posted on Nov, 28 2018 @ 09:27 AM
link   
Lol, trump's 8 years will be up before anybody will find anything on him, and when they do it'll probably be doctored up hype.


At least Trump is helping out the liberals by filling up the empty space between their ears with his presence.



posted on Nov, 28 2018 @ 09:33 AM
link   
a reply to: BlackJackal

So you're saying that Russia did some spying on the DNC, passed on the information to wikileaks, which then forwarded it to the Trump campaign via Stone and Corsi?

Exactly how is this different to British intelligence doing some spying on the Trump campaign, and passing on the information to Fusion GPS, which then forwarded it to the Clinton campaign???



posted on Nov, 28 2018 @ 09:46 AM
link   

originally posted by: BlackJackal
a reply to: JinMI

Here is some more proof since you are having problems with the first link

How the Russians hacked the DNC and passed its emails to WikiLeaks


What are we talking about here? DNC emails or John Podesta's emails? Trump supposedly called on Russia to find Hillary's 33,000 missing emails on July 27, 2016, but the targeting of John Podesta's emails happened in March 2016.


The AP’s reconstruction— based on a database of 19,000 malicious links recently shared by cybersecurity firm Secureworks — shows how the hackers worked their way around the Clinton campaign’s top-of-the-line digital security to steal chairman John Podesta’s emails in March 2016.


www.apnews.com...


edit on 28-11-2018 by Deetermined because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 28 2018 @ 09:50 AM
link   
Ok, this is just getting ridiculous...... Another Orange man bad thread from the same person, links that go to off the wall information and assumptions with zero evidence, followed by a major assumption based on stretches and mental gymnastics, and some sort of internalized hatred.

Just like the other threads you've posted - it's entertaining, the replies and comments are fantastic, but it's about as made up as a Dr. Seuss story



posted on Nov, 28 2018 @ 01:03 PM
link   
a reply to: BlackJackal

So, what you're trying to say is that if a campaign acquires information from a source that got said information from a Russian source, that automatically makes the campaign, and therefore the candidate, guilty of the made-up charge of collusion?

Enter the Steele Dossier, and let's see how you apply the same logic.

Aaaaaaaaaand, go!


edit on 28-11-2018 by SlapMonkey because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 28 2018 @ 03:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: xuenchen
This entire "statement of the offense" looks suspicious.

Of course no actual "confirmation" it really exists 😎

Big MSM push as a last-ditch effort I think it is 😆


Lelz, what is that now? 15th last ditch effort?
And still the Mueller train is getting win after win.
Maybe try a lame meme next time, words don't suit you xu.

Guess Ohio is super happy about tariffs today as well.



posted on Nov, 28 2018 @ 03:22 PM
link   

originally posted by: SlapMonkey
a reply to: BlackJackal

So, what you're trying to say is that if a campaign acquires information from a source that got said information from a Russian source, that automatically makes the campaign, and therefore the candidate, guilty of the made-up charge of collusion?

Enter the Steele Dossier, and let's see how you apply the same logic.

Aaaaaaaaaand, go!

Are you going to actually sit here and say that actual russian collusion by the DNC and HRC is MORE important that a friend of a friend in a bar overhearing someone say that trump peed a hooker?! Unbelievable...



posted on Nov, 28 2018 @ 03:46 PM
link   
a reply to: BlackJackal

I actually feel sorry for you. Even if you're following a command. This is sad. Years of this and it's all for naught because it's a poorly crafted lie.

This is pitiful.

edit on 11 28 2018 by tadaman because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 28 2018 @ 04:22 PM
link   

originally posted by: BlackJackal
a reply to: JinMI

Here is some more proof since you are having problems with the first link

How the Russians hacked the DNC and passed its emails to WikiLeaks


I thought that article was going to tell me how the Russian's did it. It doesn't, it basically says "Trust us, they did it, we've got details on how too, but we're not going to publish those."

Like for real dude, this is a big nothing burger. Anybody could have accessed those emails, because they were public domain once released by Wikileaks.

I looked at them, ffs. Many people on this board did too. How could a presidential candidate NOT, even if they were actively avoiding it, it would have been difficult to not have someone tell you like a spoiler... Han dies? Get it?

Also, it's been proven that the DNC "Hack" wasn't a hack, it was a local theft taken on a USB thumb drive. Which means it wasn't a Russian hack, but a DNC leak. The recorded file write speed was faster than internet.

This is confirmed by wiki leaks themselves who said the emails weren't given to them by Russia; and is why Seth was murdered. Because he's the one who did it. Assange confirmed he was the source.

Wake the # up. For real.


edit on 28-11-2018 by SRPrime because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 28 2018 @ 05:22 PM
link   
Yeah, And experts found that the data transfer was too large for a network, and thus had to have been done on site, with a thumbdrive.

Seth Rich everyone. Your favorite Russian hacker.



posted on Nov, 28 2018 @ 07:18 PM
link   
Wow..... He thinks that Mueller should hold the report until Trump's team has time to come up with a rebuttal? Seriously, when has anything like that ever taken place in this country before? When has an investigator said "Hey you, the guy I have been investigating, I just conducted this investigation into you, but before I release my findings you read over this and release your rebuttal".

Insanity.




top topics



 
17
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join