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.

 

Mueller withheld Exculpatory Evidence from Court to Exonerate Trump – Mueller LIED to the Court!

page: 5
49
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 4 2018 @ 03:04 PM
link   
a reply to: Extorris


The government said Mr. Cohen lied in part to conceal discussions he’d had with Trump family members about the project.

Investigators obtained emails about the project from late 2015 and January 2016, according to people familiar with the matter, in which Mr. Cohen communicated with or copied Mr. Trump’s son, Donald Trump Jr., and his daughter, Ivanka Trump, both of whom were executives at Trump Organization.


www.wsj.com...




posted on Dec, 4 2018 @ 04:00 PM
link   
Gatewaypundit? xD

You people are insane.

Come back when you have an actual source.

If the shoe was on the other foot, you'd call this fake news.

It's propaganda. You people have completely lost your way.
edit on 4-12-2018 by fencesitter85 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 4 2018 @ 04:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: fencesitter85
Gatewaypundit? xD

You people are insane.

Come back when you have an actual source.

If the shoe was on the other foot, you'd call this fake news.

It's propaganda. You people have completely lost your way.


Again, like so many in this thread, you don't seem to have read the article or other information posted before making a snarky drive-by comment.

The article and subsequent discussion here is relating to the supporting documentation signed and lodged by Mueller . I believe that might constitute what you refer to as "an actual source".

Other following information provided in this thread is provided from Daily Mail, Bloomberg, Wall Street Journal, among others. I believe these also might satisfy your request for "an actual source".

Otherwise, feel free to do a drive-by if it makes yourself feel better.



posted on Dec, 4 2018 @ 04:50 PM
link   

originally posted by: Deetermined

originally posted by: Rewey

originally posted by: Rewey
as Mueller claims



originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: Rewey


where did Mueller make this claim? You do know that Mueller has not made any public statements about this case dont you?
You know that there have not been any leaks from his team or investigation dont you? And if you know those things then you know that none of this has come from the Mueller investigation.
And its probably all another made up story.


Your reading is up to its usual standard. My “as Mueller claims” line is in reference to Mueller’s assertion that Cohen sent an email and then had to follow up with it two days later. As per Grambler’s earlier post, this is from the documentation lodged by Mueller in support of Cohen’s plea agreement. Let’s check, shall we?



Hmmm… seems to concur that Cohen wrote an email, and followed up with it two days later, exactly as I stated . Let’s check whose signature is on the document, shall we?



Hmmm… that certainly looks like Mueller’s signature to me, especially given that his name and role is typed underneath it. So, YES, Mueller is making that claim.

It seems you’d rather not bother reading the bountiful information spread throughout this thread before throwing out your usual snarky comments. I guess Mueller’s supporting documentation is “another made up story”, is it? How interesting.

And while we're at it - if Cohen is emailing 'asking for assistance', and 'trying to reach a high-level official', and 'hoping someone who speaks English can get back to him', does that sound like a secret back channel of communication between conspirators to you?


Obviously, this post needs to stated again.

Bump.


Thanks. Although I knew when I was typing it that I was wasting my time. As if Silly was actually going to come back and respond to the content of the post... *facepalm*



posted on Dec, 4 2018 @ 04:51 PM
link   

originally posted by: Rewey

originally posted by: fencesitter85
Gatewaypundit? xD

You people are insane.

Come back when you have an actual source.

If the shoe was on the other foot, you'd call this fake news.

It's propaganda. You people have completely lost your way.


Again, like so many in this thread, you don't seem to have read the article or other information posted before making a snarky drive-by comment.

The article and subsequent discussion here is relating to the supporting documentation signed and lodged by Mueller . I believe that might constitute what you refer to as "an actual source".

Other following information provided in this thread is provided from Daily Mail, Bloomberg, Wall Street Journal, among others. I believe these also might satisfy your request for "an actual source".

Otherwise, feel free to do a drive-by if it makes yourself feel better.


It's propaganda like virtually everything else on ATS these days.

Oh and no, the daily mail is never a legitimate source. It's a clickbait rag designed to inflame arguments in comment sections to maximise ad revenue. Nothing more.
edit on 4-12-2018 by fencesitter85 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 4 2018 @ 04:55 PM
link   
a reply to: Deetermined

That does not demonstrate that Cohen ceased communicating with President Trump's family members about the deal in January.

It shows that he lied about that and provided emails only up until January to support that lie.



posted on Dec, 4 2018 @ 04:57 PM
link   
a reply to: Rewey

Under what law should Mueller be punished?

As I've stated above if he was withholding exculpatory evidence it could potentially fall under the Brady rule. However as there is currently no court case proceeding against Trump the Brady rule doesn't apply.

Gateway Pundit is just playing to their base by publishing misinformation and lies. Again.



posted on Dec, 4 2018 @ 05:22 PM
link   
Thanks for the post op as this site's Liberal posters have forgotten to retract the claws per se until a individual is proven guilty. But hey I digress as anyone with a fourth grade education can figure this is all a (Mueller) dog and pony show; so that Trump does as little damage as possible to the TPTB last decade of sedition to the Public!



posted on Dec, 4 2018 @ 05:24 PM
link   

originally posted by: ErrorErrorError

originally posted by: Arnie123

originally posted by: ErrorErrorError

originally posted by: Aallanon
I have not seen this reported on the mainstream news. I wonder why?



Why? Because it's the usual conservative fan fiction bullcrap from gatewaypundit.
Compared to leftist liberal propaganda you lefties consume daily?

At the very least, alt sites question, while the lib sites ignore.

Enjoy your delusions bruh 😊


Find one thread quoting the gatewaypundit that turned out to be true and I'll terminate my account.
You really want to go there?

Give me a bit and I'll be back 😉

Ya, you better keep your word too.



posted on Dec, 4 2018 @ 06:09 PM
link   
If true I guess Mueller should be charged with perjury and roasted over the coals for it right?



posted on Dec, 4 2018 @ 06:11 PM
link   

originally posted by: ErrorErrorError

originally posted by: Aallanon
a reply to: chr0naut

LOL

Why not just quote snopes?

Nice rebuttal though. cough, cough



But Hillary.... But Obama..


You're the only one talking about those 2 snakes.



posted on Dec, 4 2018 @ 06:24 PM
link   

originally posted by: Carcharadon
If true I guess Mueller should be charged with perjury and roasted over the coals for it right?



A) It is factually untrue that Cohen's plea proves no back-channel connections between the Trump Campaign and Russia.
B) If it was factually true the Brady Act has no application.

Gateway Pundit has far too many fake political stories in it's history to list.

To cite them as a purported legitimate source disingenuous.



posted on Dec, 4 2018 @ 10:30 PM
link   

originally posted by: Xcalibur254
a reply to: Rewey

Under what law should Mueller be punished?

As I've stated above if he was withholding exculpatory evidence it could potentially fall under the Brady rule. However as there is currently no court case proceeding against Trump the Brady rule doesn't apply.

Gateway Pundit is just playing to their base by publishing misinformation and lies. Again.


With respect, I think everything you have said in this post is off the mark, or at least misdirected.

I haven't claimed Mueller did anything wrong, or suggested he hid anything, or claimed a Brady violation. I'm saying that the article is correct in that it suggested that Cohen sent two emails, and documents lodged by Mueller support this. Therefore, arguing about the validity of the source is redundant on that point.

My argument is that simply showing what email address Cohen used would be pretty simple evidence as to how strong ties were between the Trump administration and Putin. Given that Cohen's email was pleading for help to make contact with senior officials , also clearly outlined by several sources, it shows that this magical conspiratorial relationship simply did not exist.

What I find most frustrating is that Mueller's supporting documentation is freely available, yet no MSM source wants to apply any critical assessment of it because it would suggest that this conspiracy and collision clearly did not exist as claimed for the past two years.
edit on 4-12-2018 by Rewey because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 4 2018 @ 11:34 PM
link   

originally posted by: Extorris

originally posted by: Carcharadon
If true I guess Mueller should be charged with perjury and roasted over the coals for it right?



It is factually untrue that Cohen's plea proves no back-channel connections between the Trump Campaign and Russia.



Maybe so, but it deserves some more critical analysis than is currently being applied by the MSM . I've paraphrased below a few excerpts from Wikipedia's 'timeline of the Trump-Russia collusion', which are all referenced and sourced on the Wiki page:


January 14: Cohen sends email to Russian general press email address pleading for help to make contact with a senior Russian official. January 16: Cohen follows up with another email, pleading for someone who speaks English to call him back to help.



May 10: Trump adviser Dearborn receives an email about arranging a "back-channel meeting between Trump and Putin".



Early June: Fusion GPS hires Christopher Steele



June 1: Papadopolous emails Clovis that "Russian MFA asking if Trump is interested in visiting Russia".



June 3: Goldstone emails Trump Jnr about Russian government having dirt on Hillary



June 9: Trump Tower meeting takes place



July 22~26: an undated report submitted claiming "a well developed conspiracy of cooperation" between Trump team and Putin



July 31: FBI's Crossfire Hurricane investigation into collusion between Trump and Russia begins


These points are all undisputed. My queries and thoughts are:

1. If the May 10 email was seeking a back channel of communication between Trump and Putin, it obviously didn't exist before then, which includes during the time of Cohen's emails.

2. FBI must only be basing investigation on evidence from before July 31, but obviously after email of May 10, as no 'back channel' existed before then. This is also after Papadopolous got drunk and blabbed to Downer on May 1.

3. If Russian government had dirt on Hillary on June 3, why didn't Russian government contact Trump directly, instead of going through Agalarov, then Goldstone, then Trump Jnr? Weren't they colluding?

4. If a back channel existed between Trump and Putin, why didn't Trump just call Putin on June 3 after hearing about Hillary dirt? Why did he wait a whole week for the meeting to be held with random others?

5. If Cohen confesses that communications about Trump Tower actually continued until 'at least June 2016', again why did the Russian government go through Agalarov, Goldstone and Trump Jnr regarding Hillary dirt on June 3? And why did Russia ask via Papadopolous, a nobody, if Trump wanted to visit Russia on June 1?

6. If Mueller has copies of the May 10 email seeking to open a back channel, how does this impact Cohen's emails which is being touted as evidence of collusion by the media?

7. If the very convenient report of 22~26 July, just days before the FBI commenced Crossfire Hurricane, found a "well developed conspiracy of cooperation between Trump and Russia", how well developed could it be if no back channel existed as per the May 10 email, or convoluted chain of emails regarding Hillary dirt on June 3-9?

8. Most importantly, why isn't the MSM applying even a modicum of scrutiny to this timeline, none of which is in dispute?



posted on Dec, 5 2018 @ 12:13 AM
link   

originally posted by: Rewey

originally posted by: Xcalibur254
a reply to: Rewey

Under what law should Mueller be punished?

As I've stated above if he was withholding exculpatory evidence it could potentially fall under the Brady rule. However as there is currently no court case proceeding against Trump the Brady rule doesn't apply.

Gateway Pundit is just playing to their base by publishing misinformation and lies. Again.


With respect, I think everything you have said in this post is off the mark, or at least misdirected.

I haven't claimed Mueller did anything wrong, or suggested he hid anything, or claimed a Brady violation. I'm saying that the article is correct in that it suggested that Cohen sent two emails, and documents lodged by Mueller support this. Therefore, arguing about the validity of the source is redundant on that point.

My argument is that simply showing what email address Cohen used would be pretty simple evidence as to how strong ties were between the Trump administration and Putin. Given that Cohen's email was pleading for help to make contact with senior officials , also clearly outlined by several sources, it shows that this magical conspiratorial relationship simply did not exist.

What I find most frustrating is that Mueller's supporting documentation is freely available, yet no MSM source wants to apply any critical assessment of it because it would suggest that this conspiracy and collision clearly did not exist as claimed for the past two years.


So well said a 4th grader could understand thanks:

What I find most frustrating is that Mueller's supporting documentation is freely available, yet no MSM source wants to apply any critical assessment of it because it would suggest that this conspiracy and collision clearly did not exist as claimed for the past two years.



posted on Dec, 5 2018 @ 05:41 AM
link   

originally posted by: Extorris
a reply to: Deetermined

That does not demonstrate that Cohen ceased communicating with President Trump's family members about the deal in January.

It shows that he lied about that and provided emails only up until January to support that lie.


LOL! What do you mean "provided"?! They raided Cohen's office! Give me a break!


edit on 5-12-2018 by Deetermined because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 5 2018 @ 07:10 AM
link   
a reply to: Extorris



Or is it your view that any peaceful resolution involves sacrificing US sovereignty in free elections and allowing foreign interference and cyber-crimes?


No need to ignore cyber crimes or interference. But a public investigation (where you don't even look at the hardware that the cyber crime was committed against) doesn't achieve anything. Be honest, the entire purpose of this investigation is political damage to President Donald Trump.



posted on Dec, 5 2018 @ 08:41 AM
link   
Aallanon, most likely you learn this is fake news. Mueller has no incentive to do anything but reveal the truth wherever that takes the investigation. Why does he care whether or not Trump has done wrongdoing (which he has)? Mueller is simply performing the task he is charged with.



posted on Dec, 5 2018 @ 08:51 AM
link   

originally posted by: Deetermined

originally posted by: Extorris
a reply to: Deetermined

That does not demonstrate that Cohen ceased communicating with President Trump's family members about the deal in January.

It shows that he lied about that and provided emails only up until January to support that lie.


LOL! What do you mean "provided"?! They raided Cohen's office! Give me a break!



"They"

You are conflating (a) documents provided to congressional investigators to accompany his testimony with, (b) evidence seized by the Special Counsel and FBI that led to Cohen entering a guilty plea for lying to and misleading congressional investigators.

Cohen's full email correspondence is not public, nor in the possession of the congressional investigative committees.



posted on Dec, 5 2018 @ 09:01 AM
link   
a reply to: Rewey

There were several known attempts to establish "back-channel" communications between the Russian government and the Trump Campaign during 2016 all the way through December and the transition. Kushner looking to use a secret encrypted station at the Russian embassy strikes me as the most outrageous and the Trump tower meeting being the most ignorant.

That also leaves a lot of room for the definition of "back-channel" depending on the "who", "when", "how" and "why" or specific purpose.

Were any of those attempts successful?

Mueller's final report will obviously look to articulate all of that and reach a conclusion of any of those channels were established, if so by whom and when and for what purpose.

Obviously there would be no reason for an exhaustive investigation to answer those questions if President Trump and his Campaign team had not consistently lied about those interactions.

Whatever the evidence and conclusions show when the final report is issued, the need for the investigation is necessitated by the dishonesty in answers by the Trump Campaign provided publicly, privately and under oath.



new topics

top topics



 
49
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join