DOJ Appoints Special Counsel In Russia Probe

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: Xcathdra

The Russians started the Russian thing by hacking the DNC.

Give me a frigging break.

A bold claim considering the DNC refused the FBI access to the server. Seth Ri9ch sent 44k DNC emails to wikileaks and he turned up dead. That is most likely the reason the DNC is refusing access to the FBI. The FBI would discover russia didnt hack the server and not only would expose the lie, but the DNC / Clinton camp for the murder of seth rich.

Democrats started the russia bs.

originally posted by: Indigo5

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: Sillyolme

Because Clinton / DNC / Democrats started the whole Russia thing...

Stunning some people can still think that way..

RUSSIA started the "Russia Thing"...TRUMP started the Trump+Russia thing...

That is basic, fundamental reality, like gravity..

and once again you are wrong.

a reply to: TheRedneck

It was written by a biographer and author who has interviewed both Comey and Mueller multiple times over years about those vents.

I will take his account over your bizzare and ever changing narrative fiction with Trump as some genius posing as the idiot he is.

No one needs to read Trumps mind to know why he fired Comey...all they have to do is suffer through his brain dump on twitter..

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: Indigo5

As for Politico... I read it until I saw this:

President Trump impulsively fired Comey in the hope that it would shut down the Russia investigation

Source: www.politico.com...

Ya...It's not like he scheduled a meeting the next day with the Russians and didn't allow American Press in and then told them the pressure was off regarding the Russia probe now that he had fired that "Nut Job" Jim Comey...

oh..wait...

Trump Told Russians That Firing ‘Nut Job’ Comey Eased Pressure From Investigation
www.nytimes.com...

a reply to: Indigo5

Hmm. A source read out a "memo" of the conversation...

Even if this is accurate (unless there is a recording there is zero way of knowing), how is that different than Obama being filmed and on a hot Mic saying "he'll be more flexible after the election"?

originally posted by: SonOfThor
a reply to: Indigo5

Hmm. A source read out a "memo" of the conversation...

Even if this is accurate (unless there is a recording there is zero way of knowing), how is that different than Obama being filmed and on a hot Mic saying "he'll be more flexible after the election"?

Take some time and think up a better defense..

Trump is effed here...In varied and multi-faceted ways...

a reply to: Indigo5

Oh, well, that clears everything up if Trump said that in a closed-door meeting with the Russi... wait! Were there NYT reporters in that meeting?

No there weren't.

No one at the NYT has any idea what was said in the meeting with the Russians. More propaganda...

I'm starting to think I could make some serious dough by starting up a Web site and just making stuff up about stuff. WaPo and the NYT does it, so why not me? My suppositions are just as valid as their fantasies.

TheRedneck

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: Indigo5

Oh, well, that clears everything up if Trump said that in a closed-door meeting with the Russi... wait! Were there NYT reporters in that meeting?

No there weren't.

No one at the NYT has any idea what was said in the meeting with the Russians. More propaganda...

I'm starting to think I could make some serious dough by starting up a Web site and just making stuff up about stuff. WaPo and the NYT does it, so why not me? My suppositions are just as valid as their fantasies.

TheRedneck

Thats what I don't get, who are the leakers?

In the Russian case, there shouldn't be that many people that would have known what was said in the meeting can there be?

If this is a deep state coup in progress, there's no way it should be supported.

a reply to: D8Tee

As for the meeting transcripts are prepared and disseminated to NSC staff and others to give them an idea of what was discussed so they can be in the loop in order to do their jobs. Transcripts are also made anytime the President speaks on the phone with foreign leaders.


The theory I have seen floating around is one of the leakers is the deputy national security advisor, Dina Powell. She apparently is a Clinton supporter.

a reply to: D8Tee

Whoever the leakers are, there's a very good legal basis for charging them with treason. National Security secrets are secret for a reason; just because someone thinks giving a heads-up to the media on a minor point won't hurt anything, they really have no idea whether it will or not. Only those at the very top know all the pieces of that puzzle, and anyone else second-guessing could literally get American soldiers killed.

If and when these leakers are caught, they deserve nothing less than a firing squad IMO.

TheRedneck

a reply to: TheRedneck

Who would have been in charge of finding leaks??

Would that have fallen to the FBI and Comey?

originally posted by: D8Tee
a reply to: TheRedneck

Who would have been in charge of finding leaks??

Would that have fallen to the FBI and Comey?

The FBI is responsible for that. Also the Director of the FBI is responsible for the day to day operations of the department. Career field agents would be responsible for the investigation. If your using Comey and the FBI in broad terms then yes, you are correct.

a reply to: D8Tee

Once someone discovered enough evidence to accuse someone, yes. Or the FBI could launch a broader investigation, but having a suspect is of course much easier.

Think of it this way: you come home to find your house has been robbed. You call the police. The police will launch an investigation to try and find out who robbed you, but with no leads to go on, their chances of actually catching the culprit is slim. If you, however, see your stuff being pawned by a friend of your cousin, you can take that to the police and they'll investigate them, your cousin, and anyone else that lead points to. The chances of finding the culprit are greatly increased.

It may be the FBIs job, but it is Trump's responsibility.

TheRedneck

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: Indigo5

Oh, well, that clears everything up if Trump said that in a closed-door meeting with the Russi... wait! Were there NYT reporters in that meeting?

No there weren't.

No one at the NYT has any idea what was said in the meeting with the Russians. More propaganda...

I'm starting to think I could make some serious dough by starting up a Web site and just making stuff up about stuff. WaPo and the NYT does it, so why not me? My suppositions are just as valid as their fantasies.

TheRedneck

yeah .
The Russians leaked that one. Lol

a reply to: marg6043

Haha. Look how that turned out lol.
Conservatives turning on Mueller now that he's investigating trump for obstruction of justice.
Ha ha

a reply to: UKTruth

And another word sandwich..
Want mustard on that?

I would like to know how much this is costing us. After we are done with the witches, maybe we can learn how much it cost to have the hunt.

a reply to: marg6043

Words to live by.
A month later they're investigating trump and you're crying foul play.
Isn't it funny how this turned out.

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: marg6043

...now that he's investigating trump for obstruction of justice.
Ha ha

Says who?