Does Mueller Indictment Mean Clinton Campaign Can Be Indicted for Chris Steele?

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: jwlaffer

Have you ever hired a lawyer?Do you know their professional obligations require them to get approval ("instructions") for everything from the client?? Heck, have you ever hired any sort of agent to do work for you and then did not enforce any oversight over the work at all?

Ok, but what does that have to do with this situation? The lawyer did not even have a part in choosing to hire Steele. Even still, hiring Steele in and of itself is still not an illegal act.

At this point it seems like grasping at straws rooted in ignorance.

Right, as you've obtusely noted, hiring FusionGPS (and Steele by proxy) would not be illegal... If they had disclosed their actions as required by the campaign finance laws. Makes you wonder why they spent over a year hiding and lying about it...

Also, Elias did not/cannot act on his own without approval from his client. Stop playing obtuse.

If you hire a guy to hire a guy to hire a guy to hire a guy to go buy you Valium on a street corner instead of going to the doctor and getting a prescription, your defense can't be "well, Valium in and of itself isn't illegal. Who cares, officer?" Just because buying Valium in other ways might be legal does not make your purchase legal, ignovert.

Ignorance indeed.

a reply to: RadioRobert

They did disclose it.

originally posted by: Scrubdog
a reply to: RadioRobert

They did disclose it.

As "legal expenses". Unless you have another citation?

originally posted by: RadioRobert

originally posted by: Scrubdog
a reply to: RadioRobert

They did disclose it.

As "legal expenses". Unless you have another citation?

Nope, I don't follow the rabid anti-Hillary faux CT thing hourly.

Anyone wanting to be critical of paying funds for oppo-research and disclosing it as legal expenses is just fine with me, see what the courts say. We need more accountability in campaigns.

But, anyone who is willing to do that best be calling for Trump's arrest right now because there is no question Trump knew exactly what Russia was doing and why, Trump colluded right along with them. We've seen the emails from Don Jr., we've heard the speeches "Russia, if you're listening ..." and we have big reason to believe he is deeply indebted to Russian oligarchs/Putin.

The comparisons are absurd and indicative of just where the conservatives are nowadays. I see up and down these threads people bending over with their heads up their asses trying to explain how this is all normal, that Russia isn't bad, that Russians always interfere with elections, that sanctions don't work, blah blah blah.

Sickening.

I hope someone will file a complaint with the Fed. Election Commission and state that Hillary didn't disclose that expense properly enough. I want the law developed in this area. But, if that person isn't demanding Trump's arrest today, don't bother, because it's all just faux-outrage. People trained to think exclusively about Clintons and Obamas as "enemy."

a reply to: Scrubdog

There is already an FEC complaint. If Trump didn't disclose expensing properly, then he can take his medicine, too. It's never going to touch her personally. Some no-name staffer will be sacrificed on the altar of plausible deniability.
But isn't it curious how they tried to hide their connection to the dossier for over a year? Even hired Steele via a series of third parties. Why do that when it's easy to hire Fusion or Steele directly (and would have been legal). Then we find out the same camp paying for it has another investigator and they're both being fed info from (and to) other Clintonistas. It looks like a set up to me. An "insurance plan" even.
If Mueller finds evidence the Trump campaign was actively subverting our laws, then he can be pilloried, too. So far, based on Rosenstein's presser, it looks like Russians tried to promote anti-Hillary groups (and also anti-Trump events). And that they had no material effect on the election. That has been happening for years. It's not news to me. We do the same thing in other countries. Even ostensibly friendly ones like France and Israel. But hey, we're approaching two years of investigation by first the FBI and then Mueller, so we'll see where it takes us. Probably to this new great new divide and political hamstringing of the current administration (ironically sponsored in part by the Russians).

a reply to: RadioRobert

So far, based on Rosenstein's presser, it looks like Russians tried to promote anti-Hillary groups (and also anti-Trump events). And that they had no material effect on the election. That has been happening for years. It's not news to me. We do the same thing in other countries. Even ostensibly friendly ones like France and Israel. But hey, we're approaching two years of investigation by first the FBI and then Mueller, so we'll see where it takes us. Probably to this new great new divide and political hamstringing of the current administration (ironically sponsored in part by the Russians).

My bet? Once the realization that Trump won't be charged sets in, they are going to melt down entirely. Far worse than the election/inauguration even. This ends in them admitting they were pushing a lie for the last 2 years or it ends in outright disintegration of the country + possibly even a new civil war

These people have staked EVERYTHING on Trump not only being guilty, but on him being impeached. Simply put, after the indictments we now know this won't be the case. They staked their credibility, their sanity and most importantly their reputations on this.

Whatever happens from this point is a direct result of them peddling their own personal opinion/hate as though it were settled fact. In the future, lefties, that would be very wise of you to avoid. It would save you a lot of embarrassment and grief. Next time, instead of doubling down on a discredited lie maybe take an objective look at the facts and realize you aren't going to always get your way.

That isn't an excuse to throw a damn temper tantrum that puts the entire country at risk.

Ostensibly, I reckon we're on the precipice of a major domestic conflict. Realistically we've been in a "stale" or "cold" conflict for years now. But given the neo-liberal belief that violence is OK if its against conservatives (sorry: "Nazis" - hint, it's still unacceptable either way) there is no assurance it remains "cold"

originally posted by: JBurns
a reply to: RadioRobert

So far, based on Rosenstein's presser, it looks like Russians tried to promote anti-Hillary groups (and also anti-Trump events). And that they had no material effect on the election. That has been happening for years. It's not news to me. We do the same thing in other countries. Even ostensibly friendly ones like France and Israel. But hey, we're approaching two years of investigation by first the FBI and then Mueller, so we'll see where it takes us. Probably to this new great new divide and political hamstringing of the current administration (ironically sponsored in part by the Russians).

...and realize you aren't going to always get your way.

This is something a progressive leftist will never accept. They would rather destroy everything, including themselves, than accept the world doesn't exist to meet their needs. This has been evidenced for the last 18 months.

a reply to: UKTruth

UKT, unfortunately you are absolutely right

For some reason, they feel as though we owe them something despite the fact a majority of them have never contributed a thing to society (they've taken advantage of if though, bigly). Heck, most of them just graduated High School and already think they should be running the party just because they got their lazy butts out of bed ONE TIME and voted.

I left the Dem party because a bunch of millennials/special interests wanted to pretend they were the *real* "base" - In reality, all they've done is drive libertarians like myself away from *ever* voting Dem again on a national ticket. Although many of our local politicians are Democrats (and I vote for them), but this area is much different than the coastal wanna-be "elites" and our Democrats are actually moderate conservatives or moderate liberals (both of which are excellent things).

I'm not wasting my vote so a much of stupid kids can misuse our Republic's government to advance their own interests/agenda and help them impose their will on the rest of us. Not happening Not on my watch anyhow

originally posted by: chadderson
The indictments are nothing more than buzzword articles that make the easily controlled masses lean in the anti-Trump direction.

This is nothing more than continued subversion.

Trump wants the law on his side. The lefties want the masses on their side. Who holds the power? Will we all get to see the day the lefties fall upon their own sword or will their swarm overtake the sane?

Are you seriously suggesting that right wing trump supporters are NOT easily controlled?

a reply to: RadioRobert

Bwahahahahahah.

Right.

"Based on Rosenstein's presser, looks like ...."

Newsflash; Indictments do not exonerate or prove negatives. They set out a specific crime, the election law violations. And, second newsflash for your "If Trump was actively subverting our laws ..." that's the part that is comign down the pike, no matter how bigly Trump writes "Case closed" and "No collusion" what the press conference and indictments did NOT do is state that the investigation is over.

You misconstrued the indictment btw. Did you not read it?? It said they originally thought they would simply sow discord, and then changed to actively trying to defeat Hillary in 2016, did you not note that? It's stated expressly that the Russian goal changed when it appeared Trump could actually win. At that point, every single thing the Russians did was "adding value" as a campaign contribution by undisclosed foreigners - that's the predicate crime. It's an old prosecutors' trick to lay out the predicate crime with the low hanging fruit dupes. Then they join the higher-ups down the line.

The future indictments on Trump and others which are coming will be for knowingly accepting that help.

Rosenstein and Mueller knew that they needed to put something out there to stop this "Hoax" bullsht. It is not a hoax. They have no proven that, it is much deeper and brazen than people thought. They now have time to file the futures ones after processing all the Bannon info and interviewing Trump/Kushner.

The only thing Trump should take from this indictment is abject fear, not absolution. The fact is that the FBI had a source deep within this operation or they wouldn't have those details. The indictments to come will be equally penetrating and fact-specific.

Trump filed for a trademark on "Make America Great Again" in 2012. He started tweeting more about running for president after going to Moscow in 2013, retweeting Russian accounts. Planning a building in Moscow. A big hammer is coming and y'all best prepare yourselves. You seem somewhat more reality-based than some, but when that hammer drops, it will be interesting watching the RW here cover for Trump.

I don't see a lot of Republicans furious that Trump has done nothing about this, STILL.

a reply to: Scrubdog

It said they originally thought they would simply sow discord, and then changed to actively trying to defeat Hillary in 2016, did you not note that? It's stated expressly that the Russian goal changed when it appeared Trump could actually win

You sow discord by undercutting the likely candidate(s). Given that almost noone (including the Trump team) thought "it appeared Trump could actually win", don't you think it more likely lines up with the !conventions?
They also promoted anti-Trump rallies after the election, but you must have missed that part.
They are clearly pushing divisive stories to manipulate the public. That has never been not true. There appears to be no material erect on the election to date. I'd be willing to bet we could go back to the 30's and 40's to find evidence of Russian/Soviet influence in our national elections.
We're entering year three of the investigation soon, so maybe we'll know more about what Trump's culpability is eventually, but everyone so far has said point blank they've seen no actual evidence of collusion.
I'm not a hack. I don't bow to a Trump portrait when entering my office in the morning. l even on record saying I think Trump is something of a narcissistic douche with a giant mouth who is his own worst enemy, but I don't think that should be impeachable, and the more we learn about the investigation, the more it has the distinct aroma of horse#.

How about Moore?

Synopsis: Yesterday the Justice Department announced that it had indicted 13 Russians and 3 Russian entities for meddling in American politics. Specifically mentioned were two anti-Trump rallies that were organized by these Russian entities to protest the election of Donald Trump as President of the United States. One of the demonstrations was in Charlotte, NC and called Charlotte Against Trump. According to tonight's Gateway Pundit, the other one was held just 4 days after the election Nov. 12, 2016 in New York City in front of Trump Tower. Michael Moore appeared to be leading the group. At least, he was the most photographed face in the crowd.

Clinton Campaign/GPS/Steele/FBI should be investigated for their dealings with Russian information and other things related. How is one sure that this Russian influence didn't also involve those entities? It obviously did with Steele and his so called contacts and the "peeing on the bed" tabloid stuff. The fact that Mueller isn't going after that, and the fact his team is filled with Clinton and Obama donors, it seems highly unlikely they would ever want to do such an investigation. So another special counsel would be in order. Now since Jeff Sessions recused himself, then your left with Rosenstein and he obviously isn't going to investigate it so your left with no one to really run such an investigation.

a reply to: neo96

Yes, Steele is a foreign national and he should be indicted based on the same law that indicted foreign trolls.

originally posted by: talisman
Clinton Campaign/GPS/Steele/FBI should be investigated for their dealings with Russian information and other things related. How is one sure that this Russian influence didn't also involve those entities? It obviously did with Steele and his so called contacts and the "peeing on the bed" tabloid stuff. The fact that Mueller isn't going after that, and the fact his team is filled with Clinton and Obama donors, it seems highly unlikely they would ever want to do such an investigation. So another special counsel would be in order. Now since Jeff Sessions recused himself, then your left with Rosenstein and he obviously isn't going to investigate it so your left with no one to really run such an investigation.

Mueller, Rosenstein, Comey are all life long Republicans.

If one or more of the agents on the investigation had donated to democrats, that doesn't make the investigation skewed.

Steele didn't break a law. He got paid in money that was disclosed. Period. End of story. He did not violate the law.

It sounds to me like you're all set up perfectly. Sounds like you're ready to disregard the actual evidence uncovered in the investigation, and already are going after the "real bad guys" (in your mind), Clinton and Obama.

You hear that Putin wants Trump as president, see the Putin wants the sanctions lifted, and yet ignore that the guy in office refusing to enforce the sanctions, refuses to say anything bad about Russia even now.

We don't have a president, and you're building your case against the "good" bad guys, Clinton and Obama.

Stunning.

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: chadderson

You are doing a disservice to all who read this thread. People walk away DUMBER after witnessing your words. You are mincing words to try and sound right... just like your losing side does... when really you are waltzing around the truth AFRAID to admit it.

Am I incorrect?

You can discuss me and my "side" all you like, but can you refute what I said?

So far, the OP has proven my point.

I'm not saying you're pulling at straws, but you're pulling at straws.

Scrubdog,

Mueller, Rosenstein, Comey are all life long Republicans. If one or more of the agents on the investigation had donated to democrats, that doesn't make the investigation skewed.

Sure it does. One of the prosecutors was praising Sally Yates for defying an order of Donald Trump, and he has a questionable past. Peter Strzok, had to be let go after it was found out that he was more then just biased, but he had tremendous hatred for Donald Trump and he was part of Mueller's team. This team is ONLY filled with Clinton people, and Clinton was the other party involved, the one that was involved with colluding with Russian Info via Steele.

Steele didn't break a law. He got paid in money that was disclosed. Period. End of story. He did not violate the law.

HE lied to the FBI about talking to the media. Moreover, you can't just determine what he did do with the Russians, since the Russians are seen by the left as hiding behind every single rock, one must also look carefully at those who actually spoke to the Russians, and had that info passed on to the Media. That type of collusion needs investigating.

Hillary's Campaing actually colluded with the Russians. To see if it is so innocent, one must shine the LIGHT of a Special Counsel filled with Trump donors, to make things equal and FAIR.

A Special Counsel must look into Hillary's dealings with the DNC, her dealings with this INFO, and Christopher Steele should be indicted for his misleading the FBI and the Media Collusion he was involved with that also included Russian collusion. It boggles my mind, how one can justify a Trump investigation, yet ignore this? It actually is downright scary in fact that this is happening.

a reply to: neo96

Do I like Mueller now? Would like to get a beer with him and pick his brain while on truth serum, but in any other state I wouldn't trust him and his ilk as far as I could throw him.

Ham sandwhiches are plentiful. We'll see what other indictments come of this. Should just let the FBI and CIA do their job an prevent / arrest. Don't need a special prosecutor for FB patrol. Perhaps this was just a way for Mueller and his buddies to extract salaries for another year and squirrel away $$$ for the hard times to come.

a reply to: introvert

Is that sarcasm?