Mueller lies by ommission, shady Russian Manafort met was working WITH US intelligence

a reply to: Grambler

all it takes is a couple of these and Mueller's integrity he demanded will be a joke.

I can't believe everyone on the left is a criminal. Surely there are some who care about the law, the constitution, and their name?

originally posted by: Grambler
a reply to: chr0naut

Mueller was supposed to give us a complete picture

He knew Kliminik was a state dept spy and was meeting with Obama’s state dept, but left that info out of his report

So do you think that the situation isn't ever changeable?

Manafort charges had nothing to do with the 2016 election

But it has everything to do with Russian conspiracy... and he was Trump's campaign manager.

Paul Mannafort indictment.

This Kliminik as a co-conspirator claim is not sourced and is irrelevant

Looks like Mannafort implicated him:

DEFENDANT PAUL J. MANAFORT JR.’S RESPONSE TO THE SPECIAL COUNSEL’S SUBMISSION IN SUPPORT OF ITS BREACH DETERMINATION

If he was conspiring to harm the us, why was the Obama state dept still engaged in a working relationship with him in August of 2016, after the Russia investigation had begun?

Perhaps they were aware he was a double agent and were using him to gather some intel while relaying controlled information back to his handlers, to manipulate the Russians at their game? - Fairly standard procedure for handling a compromised agent who doesn't realize they have been 'burned'.

Mueller withheld this info because he knew it could diminish the optics of Trump Russia

I doubt it. Even if it was true, there was already many other things that are more publicly relevant. Like Trump's denial, then admission, of business with the Russians (and, like, Soviet wives).

a reply to: chr0naut

You mean like the Sater "Our boy could be President, I'll get the Russians/Putin on board with Trump Tower"-emails?

For the first time, BuzzFeed News has verified the surprising sweep of Sater’s undercover work and many of his specific exploits. He worked as an asset for the CIA and the Defense Intelligence Agency (or DIA) and tracked Osama bin Laden. Then he worked for more than a decade for the FBI, providing intel on everything from the mob to North Korea’s drive for nuclear weapons. He still operates as a source for the bureau, according to two current FBI agents.

Today, as he is being questioned about Trump's business deals and ties to Russia, he has built relationships with at least six members of special counsel Robert Mueller’s team, some going back more than 10 years.

Curious example for you to choose...

originally posted by: xuenchen

originally posted by: chr0naut

Paul Mannafort pled guilty to “conspiracy against the United States.” Conspiracy implies that there must have been conspirators.

The "conspiracy" was against the IRS specifically.

According to the actual plea 😎

No, count 1 in the indictment "conspiracy against the United States" was against the Department of Justice, the Department of Treasury and violations of various laws mentioned in other paragraphs of the indictment, as per Paragraph 38.

I think you are possibly confusing Mannafort's charges, with Cohen's.

a reply to: chr0naut

Link and Quote for clarity ?

😎didn't think so.

a reply to: chr0naut

No One was charged with conspiring with Russians in the election

Kliminik amd manafort we’re charged with tax issues and process crimes

You trying to spin this as Manafort or Kliminik conspiring to affect the us with Russia is absurd

Meanwhile the article I source shows Kliminik was still a state dept course for Obama’s admin in 2016

You can spin all you want, but mueller leaving out that info was designed to make it look worse for trumps team, and shows mueller is willing to withhold exculpatory evidence to make trump and his team look worse

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: chr0naut

It's a common tactic. Threaten with charges and get them to plead to something smaller. Whether the person actually did it or not doesn't matter usually.

Now whether Manafort did it, it does not make the fact the government was trying to set Trump's people up any less chilling.

That might be an FBI tactic, due to holes in US policing law that allow interrogators to lie, but these charges were brought by the DOJ who are legally constrained to ensure the truthfulness of any charges laid and are constrained against misrepresentation of the facts in doing so.

originally posted by: RadioRobert
a reply to: chr0naut

You mean like the Sater "Our boy could be President, I'll get the Russians/Putin on board with Trump Tower"-emails?

For the first time, BuzzFeed News has verified the surprising sweep of Sater’s undercover work and many of his specific exploits. He worked as an asset for the CIA and the Defense Intelligence Agency (or DIA) and tracked Osama bin Laden. Then he worked for more than a decade for the FBI, providing intel on everything from the mob to North Korea’s drive for nuclear weapons. He still operates as a source for the bureau, according to two current FBI agents.

Today, as he is being questioned about Trump's business deals and ties to Russia, he has built relationships with at least six members of special counsel Robert Mueller’s team, some going back more than 10 years.

Curious example for you to choose...

No, I was specifically referencing what Trump initially denied, and then admitted when the evidence was brought to light. Not what someone else said.

a reply to: chr0naut

Impressive attempt to change the subject

But hey, anything to deflect from mueller dishonesty

originally posted by: Grambler
a reply to: chr0naut

No One was charged with conspiring with Russians in the election

Kliminik amd manafort we’re charged with tax issues and process crimes

You trying to spin this as Manafort or Kliminik conspiring to affect the us with Russia is absurd

Meanwhile the article I source shows Kliminik was still a state dept course for Obama’s admin in 2016

You can spin all you want, but mueller leaving out that info was designed to make it look worse for trumps team, and shows mueller is willing to withhold exculpatory evidence to make trump and his team look worse

OK, but I see it as an irrelevance to the case, based mostly on Mannafort's confession/s overriding other factors. But it also shows that a confession alone is not enough to convict. There must be evidence, too.

Produce some evidence supportive of the articles' assumptions and it would be worth considering as truth, till then, speculation.

originally posted by: Grambler
a reply to: chr0naut

Impressive attempt to change the subject

But hey, anything to deflect from mueller dishonesty

Apologies for going off topic but I was directly answering another poster, to clarify my comments.

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: Grambler
a reply to: chr0naut

No One was charged with conspiring with Russians in the election

Kliminik amd manafort we’re charged with tax issues and process crimes

You trying to spin this as Manafort or Kliminik conspiring to affect the us with Russia is absurd

Meanwhile the article I source shows Kliminik was still a state dept course for Obama’s admin in 2016

You can spin all you want, but mueller leaving out that info was designed to make it look worse for trumps team, and shows mueller is willing to withhold exculpatory evidence to make trump and his team look worse

OK, but I see it as an irrelevance to the case, based mostly on Mannafort's confession/s overriding other factors. But it also shows that a confession alone is not enough to convict. There must be evidence, too.

Produce some evidence supportive of the articles' assumptions and it would be worth considering as truth, till then, speculation.

Ok we have had m the article evidence of Obama’s state dept official saying he used Kliminik as a helpful source in August 2016, thanked Kliminik and sent his info up the chain to one of Obama’s top official Victoria Nuland

Is your claim Obama’s official lied to the fbi about this?

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: Grambler
a reply to: chr0naut

No One was charged with conspiring with Russians in the election

Kliminik amd manafort we’re charged with tax issues and process crimes

You trying to spin this as Manafort or Kliminik conspiring to affect the us with Russia is absurd

Meanwhile the article I source shows Kliminik was still a state dept course for Obama’s admin in 2016

You can spin all you want, but mueller leaving out that info was designed to make it look worse for trumps team, and shows mueller is willing to withhold exculpatory evidence to make trump and his team look worse

OK, but I see it as an irrelevance to the case, based mostly on Mannafort's confession/s overriding other factors. But it also shows that a confession alone is not enough to convict. There must be evidence, too.

Produce some evidence supportive of the articles' assumptions and it would be worth considering as truth, till then, speculation.

Ok we have had m the article evidence of Obama’s state dept official saying he used Kliminik as a helpful source in August 2016, thanked Kliminik and sent his info up the chain to one of Obama’s top official Victoria Nuland

Is your claim Obama’s official lied to the fbi about this?

The article referred rather vaguely to "state department documents' and did not either link to them or give any other details by which we could verify. It does not have any evidential strength.

Please also note the byline on the article;
"BY JOHN SOLOMON, OPINION CONTRIBUTOR — 06/06/19 08:45 PM EDT 5,830 THE VIEWS EXPRESSED BY CONTRIBUTORS ARE THEIR OWN AND NOT THE VIEW OF THE HILL"

So, as is clearly stated, it is an opinion.

a reply to: Grambler

What's gets me is all these lefties from other countries crying about collusion and Russian trolls on social media are literally doing exactly what they cry so much about from their foreign country..

They don't even realize that they are as bad as the evil Russian trolls.

a reply to: chr0naut

It’s not an opinion

It sites evidence from fbi statements from Obama officials

originally posted by: Grambler
a reply to: chr0naut

It’s not an opinion

It sites evidence from fbi statements from Obama officials

Do you honestly believe that a journalist is privy to internal FBI and and State Department e-mails? Wouldn't that make him guilty of crimes against the espionage act?

Clearly if he is quoting stuff which he cannot have had access to, he must be making it up.

Perhaps, Google his name and article history to see if he is a trust-able news source?

a reply to: chr0naut

IG reports have proven so 🔥

Check JOHN SOLOMON'S "Track Record" too and "SEE" 💥🚬💥

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: Grambler
a reply to: chr0naut

It’s not an opinion

It sites evidence from fbi statements from Obama officials

Do you honestly believe that a journalist is privy to internal FBI and and State Department e-mails? Wouldn't that make him guilty of crimes against the espionage act?

Clearly if he is quoting stuff which he cannot have had access to, he must be making it up.

Perhaps, Google his name and article history to see if he is a trust-able news source?

Solomon has an incredible record for being correct in the Russia investigation

He is actually quoting officials from documents he has seen

So your claim is that he is making up those quotes?

Surely the people he is quoting will put his as lying in short order

Meanwhile I take it IF this report is true then you will admit mueller was deceptive

a reply to: chr0naut

John Solomon at The Hill

😀

originally posted by: xuenchen
a reply to: chr0naut

John Solomon at The Hill

😀

John Solomon Gives Us Less Than Meets the Eye — Again - Columbia Journalism Review

Staffers at The Hill press management about the work of John Solomon". - Washington Post

Network Propaganda: Manipulation, Disinformation, and Radicalization in American Politics. - Oxford, New York: Oxford University Press. pp. 173–176. ISBN 9780190923631

Something fishy? - Columbia Journalism Review