Michael Flynn sentencing delayed as judge tells ex-Trump official: 'You sold your country out'

a reply to: Sillyolme

Supreme Court says mystery company must pay fines while it challenges Mueller-related subpoena
www.cnn.com...

a reply to: Extorris


this article is interesting. makes you wonder about that art collector who died in a trump tower fire a few years ago.

LINK

originally posted by: knoxie
a reply to: Extorris


this article is interesting. makes you wonder about that art collector who died in a trump tower fire a few years ago.

LINK

That is a fascinating read.

Meanwhile a question that was being asked last year, just got answered.

Warner: 'Million-dollar question' how Russians knew who to target on Facebook?
"Did they know this just by following political news in America? Did they geo-target both geography and by demographics in ways that at least at first blush appear pretty sophisticated? ?
www.cnn.com...

The Chief of Trump's Campaign for President secretly flew to Madrid and gave them all the campaigns confidential internal polling data so they would know what states and demographics to focus the Russian Pro-Trump Propaganda Operation on.

PAUL MANAFORT LIED ABOUT SHARING POLLING DATA WITH SUSPECTED RUSSIAN INTELLIGENCE MEMBER
www.newsweek.com...

He also discussed Ukraine

What would you call it when the Chief of a Presidential Campaign secretly meets with an agent of the Russian GRU, the same people that would conduct an expansive election interference campaign and shares confidential internal polling data so that they could best target their efforts while discussing Ukraine sanctions and politics? Where that same Campaign Chief would direct the stripping of language condemning Russia for the Ukraine invasion from the RNC Platform at the convention?

Collusion.

Next question is if President Trump was aware that his Campaign Chief was colluding with Russian Gru on the interference campaign. Did Trump OK the trip? Did he not wonder why his Campaign Chief was off flying to Madrid in the heat of the campaign? Did Trump give the nod to stripping the RNC platform of the Russia/Ukraine language?

originally posted by: shooterbrody

originally posted by: carewemust
a reply to: Extorris

The Cohen-Prague cell tower signal thing was debunked by the very reporter who reported it. "I don't have much confidence in what I reported".

you can tell them until the cows come home they are not listening

The poster didn't tell anyone anything.

He made a specific unsupported claim and has failed to provide any link to back it up.

This is something you accept as factual in that context?

Perhaps you can help, where did the McClatchy Reporter of this article say " "I don't have much confidence in what I reported"
www.mcclatchydc.com...

a reply to: Extorris

There is a search function here.
It has been posted here many many times.
You go right ahead and make up stories with your partner, you can have crow with her as wel.
She is a crow connoisseur.

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: Extorris

There is a search function here.
It has been posted here many many times.

Just searched ATS for the quote below. No results.

You seem unable to support the claim as well?

But certainly eager to defend it as true.

originally posted by: carewemust
a reply to: Extorris

The Cohen-Prague cell tower signal thing was debunked by the very reporter who reported it. "I don't have much confidence in what I reported".

a reply to: Extorris

That couldn't be wikileaks could it?

I say that because the house has just agreed to give over Roger Stones testimony to Robert Mueller and he has close ties within the story with Wikileaks.

a reply to: shooterbrody

Also curious if you think Trump's Campaign Chief sharing proprietary polling data in a secret meeting with Russian Gru so that they could precisely target their influence/propaganda campaign would meet the layman's definition of "collusion"?

a reply to: Extorris

Interesting mueller nor the state of new york charged him with that lie?
2 others very specifically but nt that one.
Believe what you like.
Let me know when any us citizen is charged with your so called "collusion".
Process crimes are all the witch hunt has birthed so far; imo that is sll there is to see.

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: Extorris

That couldn't be wikileaks could it?

State owned.

Deep pockets to fight something up through to the SCOTUS and keep it sealed the whole way.

Wikileaks is not that and they are already indicted by the USA, albeit under seal.

Justice Department mistakenly reveals indictment against Wikileaks’ Julian Assange
www.cnbc.com...

This is a bank or energy company.

My bet remains Srebank.

a reply to: shooterbrody

Still no link for something that was posted everywhere according to you?

How did you put it?

"There is a search function here.
It has been posted here many many times. "

Should be easy.

a reply to: Extorris

Was that the 100k spent on facebook?
What a joke.
Thst has legs, run with that one.

Anything but hillary was a crappy candidate right?

a reply to: Extorris

No charge just a hack and a story.
Steele testified under oath in court it was not true.
Dream on.

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: Extorris


Let me know when any us citizen is charged with your so called "collusion".
Process crimes are all the witch hunt has birthed so far; imo that is sll there is to see.

Collusion is not a crime.
That said, the Special Counsel was tasked with uncovering any collusion and to prosecute any associated crimes.

Thus far he has indicted or gotten guilty pleas from 33 people thus far, including 5 Trump Campaign Members, 26 Russian nationals, a California native and a lawyer in London plus 3 Russian Companies.

Plea deals from multiple former Trump Aides, his personal attorney and former national Security Advisor and deputy Campaign Chief.

"Organized Crime" is not a crime it is a description of crimes like racketeering and murder.
Ditto Collusion.

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: Extorris

No charge just a hack and a story.
Steele testified under oath in court it was not true.
Dream on.

You seem gullible to propaganda.

You said that Carewemust's post claiming the McClatchky author said ""I don't have much confidence in what I reported".
was true.

I asked for a link and you said:
"There is a search function here.
It has been posted here many many times."

I searched and found nothing.

You still can't provide me a simple link?

Did Carewemust fool you?

Gullibility is an unfortunate state to be in.

a reply to: Extorris

None for anything asdociated with the campaign bub.
Indicting foreigners is actually funny, even funnier when their attorneys showed and mueller fights the discovery process.
Cheer on the process crimes for lying.
Hope you keep cheering when others from the opposite political persuasion are later charged.

Whoo hoo process crimes you got him on the run bobby.

a reply to: Extorris

And you didnt look up that steele told a court in England that his dossier was poop.

Or was there another origin to that fary tale ?

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: Extorris

None for anything asdociated with the campaign bub.
Indicting foreigners is actually funny, even funnier when their attorneys showed and mueller fights the discovery process.
Cheer on the process crimes for lying.
Hope you keep cheering when others from the opposite political persuasion are later charged.

Whoo hoo process crimes you got him on the run bobby.

That post seems emotional and not well tethered to simple logic.

You remain unable to directly answer any questions.

The people charged with "process crimes" are the same people cooperating. That is because process crimes are what defense attorneys negotiate for when a client needs to plea guilty to something before cooperation.

Manafort was not convicted of "process crimes" and he has another trial scheduled and undoubtedly more indictments coming his way.

The Russians were not charged with Process crimes.

Maybe you just have a limited understanding of plea negotiations.

a reply to: Extorris

Nothng assocated with collusion during the 16 election with resect to smerican citizens.
Rosenstein himself stated that.
You are so far behind you think you are in the lead.

Retread charges previously investigated on manafort are much less than impressive and in No way associated with the election.

All you got are process crimes.
What a joke.

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: Extorris

And you didnt look up that steele told a court in England that his dossier was poop.

Or was there another origin to that fary tale ?

Maybe you will examine the facts more closely when you grow up or sober up.