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.

 

Nellie Ohr Just CONFESSED What He Did With Mueller He’s DONE!

page: 7
89
<< 4  5  6    8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 5 2019 @ 02:31 PM
link   
a reply to: Extorris

Lol.

Just a little hint for you... YES... you DO have to determine a crime has been committed before an investigation takes place. That's the point.. and no doubt is why the law is written that way.

I know it's become the in thing on the left to go after political opponents regardless of whether a crime has been committed, but it's still against the law.




posted on Feb, 5 2019 @ 02:32 PM
link   

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: Extorris




BTW - Did you here that Federal Prosecutors served the Trump Inaugural Committee with a ton of Subpoenas this morning? Specifically concerning illegal donations by Russians and Saudis. This Presidency just keeps oozing like a giant cyst.

btw did you know the inaugral committee is a non profit not associated with the president?
lol
keep grasping at the smear attempts

www.inaugural.senate.gov...


Hey sherlock ..You confused

The Joint Congressional Committee

With

The Presidential Inaugural Committee

en.wikipedia.org...

Hint, one funneled illegal funds from Russia and just got served Subpoenas, the other didn't.
edit on 5-2-2019 by Extorris because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 5 2019 @ 02:36 PM
link   

originally posted by: UKTruth
a reply to: Extorris

Lol.

Just a little hint for you... YES... you DO have to determine a crime has been committed before an investigation takes place.


No. The FBI and law enforcement investigates ALL THE TIME to determine if a crime was committed.

Did Joe Blow kill himself or was he murdered by the wife? According to you, no one is permitted to investigate until they know the answer already.

Determining an investigation is warranted does not require the conclusion a crime has occurred come first.

This is a debating with a flat earth believer. I am beginning to worry for you.



edit on 5-2-2019 by Extorris because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 5 2019 @ 02:49 PM
link   
a reply to: Extorris




You deny that the investigation was opened months earlier with George Papadopolis?

drunken comments are enough to start the investigation?
lol
you are naive
nice bubble




All of that before admitting that the FISA warrant was 400 plus pages and included Carter Page having been recruited by Russian spies in the past.

yep which was DENIED by the fisa court until the addition of the steele dossier which we know is crap
which ohr knew was crap
which weissmann was crap

so yeah the investigation is crap
the sc investiagion is crap



posted on Feb, 5 2019 @ 03:01 PM
link   
a reply to: Extorris

docquery.fec.gov...=0
still not the president, but keep slinging the mud
seems Sara Armstrong was the CEO

Was it the fec, you know the federal agency tasked with policing elections, that the subpoenas came from?
More bs
not surprising

and the fact that the mighty SC had to stoop to looking into the inauguration for "illegal donations" when the fec did not ask tells you how far out of bounds this crap is
attempting to connect the president to the inauguration committee is a joke
but that is all you have got

edit on 5/2/2019 by shooterbrody because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 5 2019 @ 03:34 PM
link   
a reply to: Extorris

I can only assume you are being dense on purpose.
You investigate a crime. You don't investigate to see if there was a crime.
Jeez.
As it happens Rosenstein had not determined a crime had taken place (his own words), hence under the law the SC was set up illegally.

edit on 5/2/2019 by UKTruth because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 5 2019 @ 07:30 PM
link   

originally posted by: UKTruth
a reply to: Extorris

I can only assume you are being dense on purpose.
You investigate a crime. You don't investigate to see if there was a crime.


You investigate when you want to determine if a crime was committed.
Every suspicious death is investigated without knowing if a crime was committed.
You seem to be impenetrable to logic.



As it happens Rosenstein had not determined a crime had taken place (his own words), hence under the law the SC was set up illegally.


The appointment of a SC does not require a crime be committed. That is what investigations determine.
Rosenstein only had to determine that an investigation was warranted.

You are proving yourself not credible by persisting in your lie all the while posting excerpts that disprove what you are saying.



posted on Feb, 6 2019 @ 07:07 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Feb, 6 2019 @ 08:43 PM
link   
a reply to: Extorris




Rosenstein only had to determine that an investigation was warranted.


Witch it wasn't. This is just a cover for the real criminal activities. Over one hundred million given to the Clinton foundation by the Russians for example.



posted on Feb, 7 2019 @ 09:09 AM
link   

originally posted by: Extorris

originally posted by: carewemust
a reply to: shooterbrody

Incoming attorney general Bob Barr says he will take control of all of this madness.


Good luck with that. Before him Rosenstein, Before him Sessions.

What does it tell you that every person trump tries to appoint to head this off takes one inside look at the investigation and shouts the word "Warranted!".

Nobody wants to lash themselves to that sinking ship.


There certainly is evidence. If you've read anything at all about Vladimir Putin's dealings with Georgia, Chechnya, or Ukraine, you would know EXACTLY what is happening here.

If your investigation is working off the assumption that the Russians were trying to cover their tracks, and didn't want to get caught up in the scandal, then every "slip up" on Russia's end looks like evidence.

But if you understand Putin, you would know he WANTS it to look like he interfered. If you can track a hack back to a building in Moscow..... you really think the FSB can't cover its tracks? BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAH!!! How stupid to people have to be?

Putin knows he can't be indicted, even if absolute proof were found of a collusion.


edit on 7-2-2019 by bloodymarvelous because: shorten even more. Sorry I didn't realize how long that post was getti



posted on Feb, 7 2019 @ 09:13 AM
link   
We've just put Putin in a position where he can bring down ANY POLITICIAN HE WANTS. (No exceptions).

Just by pretending to help them.



posted on Feb, 7 2019 @ 09:24 AM
link   

originally posted by: Extorris

originally posted by: UKTruth
a reply to: Extorris

Lol.

Just a little hint for you... YES... you DO have to determine a crime has been committed before an investigation takes place.


No. The FBI and law enforcement investigates ALL THE TIME to determine if a crime was committed.

Did Joe Blow kill himself or was he murdered by the wife? According to you, no one is permitted to investigate until they know the answer already.

Determining an investigation is warranted does not require the conclusion a crime has occurred come first.

This is a debating with a flat earth believer. I am beginning to worry for you.




They have strong evidence that your fictional Joe Blow is dead. They have a body.

Where is the 'body' of evidence for this investigation? A more accurate scenario would be you insisting your spouse must be cheating on you and asking the FBI to investigate him/her based only on your feelings.



posted on Feb, 7 2019 @ 09:45 AM
link   

originally posted by: Doctor Smith
a reply to: Extorris




Rosenstein only had to determine that an investigation was warranted.


Witch it wasn't. This is just a cover for the real criminal activities. Over one hundred million given to the Clinton foundation by the Russians for example.


And that too warranted an investigation. The FBI and DOJ conducted an exhaustive investigation into the Clinton Foundation, just like the Special Counsel is conducting an investigation into the Trump Campaign.



posted on Feb, 7 2019 @ 09:53 AM
link   
a reply to: bloodymarvelous

No doubt it is a win-win scenario for Putin.

It was that realization that led the intelligence community under Pres. Obama to not publicly give him credit for interference in the election. They assumed wrongly that Clinton would win and Putin's efforts to interfere and the illicit connections with the Trump Campaign would be irrelevant.

When Trump won and immediately went about working to shut down any investigation into Russia's interference and contacts with his campaign, things pivoted quickly.



posted on Feb, 7 2019 @ 09:54 AM
link   

originally posted by: bloodymarvelous
We've just put Putin in a position where he can bring down ANY POLITICIAN HE WANTS. (No exceptions).

Just by pretending to help them.


Only politicians that seek and receive his help both publicly and covertly.



posted on Feb, 7 2019 @ 10:00 AM
link   

originally posted by: CynConcepts

originally posted by: Extorris

originally posted by: UKTruth
a reply to: Extorris

Lol.

Just a little hint for you... YES... you DO have to determine a crime has been committed before an investigation takes place.


No. The FBI and law enforcement investigates ALL THE TIME to determine if a crime was committed.

Did Joe Blow kill himself or was he murdered by the wife? According to you, no one is permitted to investigate until they know the answer already.

Determining an investigation is warranted does not require the conclusion a crime has occurred come first.

This is a debating with a flat earth believer. I am beginning to worry for you.




They have strong evidence that your fictional Joe Blow is dead. They have a body.

Where is the 'body' of evidence for this investigation?


It is endless, not least of which is the CHIEF of the Trump Campaign for President, The Deputy Chief of the Campaign, Trump's Chief National Security Adviser, Trump's son, and a half-dozen advisers to the campaign ALL having meetings and conversations with known agents of Russia and then LYING to the public, FBI and congress when asked about it.

THAT warrants further investigation. That is something a 5 year old realizes. It does severe damage to Trump Supporters credibility to argue there was no cause to investigate.



posted on Feb, 7 2019 @ 10:23 AM
link   
Where are the real crimes that the process crimes are covering for?
When all the sc has is process crimes it seems there were no real crimes or mueller is a crappy investigator?
Hold tight to those process crimes!



posted on Feb, 7 2019 @ 05:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: shooterbrody
Where are the real crimes that the process crimes are covering for?
When all the sc has is process crimes it seems there were no real crimes or mueller is a crappy investigator?
Hold tight to those process crimes!


What is a process crime?
Lying to congress under oath about conversations with Russians on behalf of the President?

You do realize these are Federal Crimes with consequences?

Yes, they have been reduced in order to inform future indictments for more severe crimes, but lying to the FBI and Congress is a Federal Crime in and of itself.



posted on Feb, 7 2019 @ 05:55 PM
link   
a reply to: Extorris

[snipped]
What is a process crime,lolololol

Nothing to do with ANY russian collusion, that is what a process crime is.

Your boy mueller got exposed yesterday, 75 previous fisa violations.
Bet he gets more after this.
The whole bs investigation is about to get blown up.

They LIED to get the warrants.
The convictions wil be vacated.




edit on Fri Feb 8 2019 by DontTreadOnMe because: Community Announcement re: Decorum



posted on Feb, 7 2019 @ 09:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: Extorris

originally posted by: bloodymarvelous
We've just put Putin in a position where he can bring down ANY POLITICIAN HE WANTS. (No exceptions).

Just by pretending to help them.


Only politicians that seek and receive his help both publicly and covertly.


That's pretty naive.

Since when do you actually have to do something in order to be accused of it in the court of public opinion?

I guess if something gets repeated in the press enough times, it must therefore be true. Because would they repeat it again and again if it wasn't?



The main problem with this whole story is :

1 - It's no secret Putin hated Clinton.

2- It's no secret that Trump is fond of Russia.

So Putin would have aided Trump's campaign with or without being asked to do so. Trump would have to be pretty stupid to ask for help he already knows he's going to get. Does he seem particularly stupid to you?

It turns out he kind of was. Naive anyway. To think Putin wouldn't try and blackmail him by making it look like there had been collusion.

Putin is the only one that wins here. The Dems are playing right into his hands. So blinded by hatred they can't help hanging themselves out to dry in the process.




top topics



 
89
<< 4  5  6    8 >>

log in

join