SPYGATE; SMOKING GUN

[AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP]

May 26, 2018 13:14:53 GMT -5 thyme4change said:

If the FBI investigated members of Obama's campaign staff that had verified ties to Russia, I would not advocate for George W to go to prison.

You're moving the goal post. "Ties to Russia" is not a crime. Colluding with agents of the Russian government to manipulate the outcome of the election is the charge. And we know it's false. In fact, we know the very suggestion that the Russians might be in possession of information of interest to the Trump campaign was an idea PLANTED by Obama's agent provocateur.

theconservativetreehouse.com/2018/05/20/stefan-halper-agent-provocateur-in-his-own-words/comment-page-2/

Stefan Halper Agent Provocateur – In His Own Words…

Posted on May 20, 2018 by sundance


Stefan Halper has been identified and confirmed as the intelligence informant used by President Obama’s CIA and FBI to engage in contact with low level Trump campaign officials during their efforts to conduct a counterintelligence operation against the candidate. The joint CIA and FBI operation was codenamed “Crossfire Hurricane“.



Rather ironically, five days before the 2016 election intelligence agent provocateur Stefan Halper gave an interview to Sputnik News where he outlined his agenda; in hindsight the aggregate agenda of the Obama administration:

[AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP]

May 26, 2018 13:31:45 GMT -5 Virgil Showlion said:

May 26, 2018 10:53:27 GMT -5 AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP said:

Is Michael Caputo lying?

His story changes the FBI timeline...

It's an interesting development.

I can do without the editorializing by Mr. Dobbs, but Mr. Caputo would make the fourth member of the campaign team targeted by the FBI. Is he also supposed to be in bed with the Reds?

If you think he was targeted for his connections to Russia, you're missing the entire modus operandi of the Obama - DNC - Clinton scheme to use the intelligence agencies of the United States of America as their own personal political operation. 

He was targeted for the purpose of "dirtying him up". The problem for Spygate deniers are the ties that bind: Stefan Halper, Joseph Mifsud, and Alexander Downer...

What did they do with George Papadopoulos?  Mr. Papadopoulos was approached by agent provocateur,  Maltese professor named Joseph Mifsud and told during a meeting in London that he had learned that the Russian government had access to Clinton emails.
Two weeks later, on May 10, 2016, Papadopoulos met at a London wine room with Alexander Downer, the Australian High Commissioner to the U.K. An Australian diplomat named Erika Thompson introduced Papadopoulos to Downer- who conveniently has ties to the Clintons: thehill.com/376858-australian-diplomat-whose-tip-prompted-fbis-russia-probe-has-tie-to-clintons


Downer reportedly told the FBI that Papadopoulos mentioned stolen Clinton emails during that meeting- but where'd he get the idea in the first place? That information was what the FBI claims sparked the opening of a counterintelligence investigation of the Trump campaign. That investigation, nicknamed “Crossfire Hurricane,” started on July 31, 2016. Except Halper traces back to March 2016...timeline problems.

theconservativetreehouse.com/2018/05/19/corrupt-intelligence-apparatchik-leaks-informant-name-stefan-halper-and-defensive-perspective-to-new-york-times/comment-page-3/

Two things to remember: First, they denied all of this for eighteen months. Second, these are their leaks, their story, their version; delivered via their spin, from the people who were conducting the scheme against the Trump campaign:

(New York Times) […] The informant, an American academic who teaches in Britain, made contact late that summer with one campaign adviser, George Papadopoulos, according to people familiar with the matter. He also met repeatedly in the ensuing months with the other aide, Carter Page, who was also under F.B.I. scrutiny for his ties to Russia.

[…] No evidence has emerged that the informant acted improperly when the F.B.I. asked for help in gathering information on the former campaign advisers, or that agents veered from the F.B.I.’s investigative guidelines and began a politically motivated inquiry, which would be illegal.

Oh, well… by-the-book then?

[AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP]

theconservativetreehouse.com/2018/05/26/spygate-the-inspector-general-and-the-expanded-fisa-investigation/
SPYGATE, The Inspector General, And The Expanded FISA Investigation...

The phony "Trump - Russia collusion" cover-up disguised as "investigation" has had the lid blown completely off of it. It's functionally over. Mueller has to hang in as long as he can, I think for two reasons- first, he is nothing if not supremely arrogant; and second, because he is counting on the "blue wave" and his report, while meaningless in practical terms as a criminal consequence, will be used as an "impeachment report". 

The blue wave isn't coming, and having been exposed- literally every move he makes may constitute another crime.

[Virgil Showlion]

May 26, 2018 15:29:59 GMT -5 AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP said:

If you think he was targeted for his connections to Russia, you're missing the entire modus operandi of the Obama - DNC - Clinton scheme to use the intelligence agencies of the United States of America as their own personal political operation. 

He was targeted for the purpose of "dirtying him up". The problem for Spygate deniers are the ties that bind: Stefan Halper, Joseph Mifsud, and Alexander Downer...

We'll see what the former FBI actors say in their defense. I want to see both sides of the coin.

What I'll grant you is that it's now a question of determining whether Mr. Comey et al. were acting maliciously (i.e. a hit job on the campaign) or acting in good faith but astonishing neglect for optics and due diligence.

An old proverb says, "Never attribute to malice that which can adequately be explained by stupidity."  In this case, stupidity in the form of never having expected these Cold War era cloak and dagger operations to become public knowledge, hence a total lack of concern for perception.

Stop crying 'Wolf!' with trying to tie this to Pres. Obama.

[AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP]

May 26, 2018 19:32:00 GMT -5 Virgil Showlion said:

May 26, 2018 15:29:59 GMT -5 AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP said:

If you think he was targeted for his connections to Russia, you're missing the entire modus operandi of the Obama - DNC - Clinton scheme to use the intelligence agencies of the United States of America as their own personal political operation. 

He was targeted for the purpose of "dirtying him up". The problem for Spygate deniers are the ties that bind: Stefan Halper, Joseph Mifsud, and Alexander Downer...

We'll see what the former FBI actors say in their defense. I want to see both sides of the coin.

What I'll grant you is that it's now a question of determining whether Mr. Comey et al. were acting maliciously (i.e. a hit job on the campaign) or acting in good faith but astonishing neglect for optics and due diligence.

An old proverb says, "Never attribute to malice that which can adequately be explained by stupidity."  In this case, stupidity in the form of never having expected these Cold War era cloak and dagger operations to become public knowledge, hence a total lack of concern for perception.

Stop crying 'Wolf!' with trying to tie this to Pres. Obama.

Malice is easy to identify when you compare and contrast the treatment of Hillary Clinton.

We saw Comey change the language in the Clinton email investigation report from "grossly negligent" to "extremely careless" at the direction of Peter Strzok. Just as one example.

[dondub]

Was that during the sabotage incident or earlier?

[Opti]

May 26, 2018 19:44:19 GMT -5 AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP said:

May 26, 2018 19:32:00 GMT -5 Virgil Showlion said:

We'll see what the former FBI actors say in their defense. I want to see both sides of the coin.

What I'll grant you is that it's now a question of determining whether Mr. Comey et al. were acting maliciously (i.e. a hit job on the campaign) or acting in good faith but astonishing neglect for optics and due diligence.

An old proverb says, "Never attribute to malice that which can adequately be explained by stupidity."  In this case, stupidity in the form of never having expected these Cold War era cloak and dagger operations to become public knowledge, hence a total lack of concern for perception.

Stop crying 'Wolf!' with trying to tie this to Pres. Obama.

Malice is easy to identify when you compare and contrast the treatment of Hillary Clinton.

We saw Comey change the language in the Clinton email investigation report from "grossly negligent" to "extremely careless" at the direction of Peter Strzok. Just as one example.

You mean the difference between bringing up a new cache of emails that may not have anything new in them

versus

not mentioning a candidate's campaign has several individuals with strong Russian times?

That kind of difference? Treating Donald J. better than Hillary? Will you be all upset if when Trump is brought up on obstruction of justice charges someone decides the highest level charge is not appropriate?

[AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP]

May 26, 2018 19:58:43 GMT -5 Opti said:

May 26, 2018 19:44:19 GMT -5 AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP said:

Malice is easy to identify when you compare and contrast the treatment of Hillary Clinton.

We saw Comey change the language in the Clinton email investigation report from "grossly negligent" to "extremely careless" at the direction of Peter Strzok. Just as one example.

You mean the difference between bringing up a new cache of emails that may not have anything new in them

versus

not mentioning a candidate's campaign has several individuals with strong Russian times?

That kind of difference? Treating Donald J. better than Hillary? Will you be all upset if when Trump is brought up on obstruction of justice charges someone decides the highest level charge is not appropriate?

I hope you don't have a lot invested in Trump going down.

It.

Will.

NEVER.

Happen.

[AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP]

Clinton pollster: END the Mueller probe:

"The less they find, the more they investigate"

[Opti]

May 26, 2018 20:07:05 GMT -5 AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP said:

May 26, 2018 19:58:43 GMT -5 Opti said:

You mean the difference between bringing up a new cache of emails that may not have anything new in them

versus

not mentioning a candidate's campaign has several individuals with strong Russian times?

That kind of difference? Treating Donald J. better than Hillary? Will you be all upset if when Trump is brought up on obstruction of justice charges someone decides the highest level charge is not appropriate?

I hope you don't have a lot invested in Trump going down.

It.

Will.

NEVER.

Happen.

Never? Then why is Trump continually throwing tweet tantrums and firing any FBI or DOJ official he thinks might testify about or against him?

[AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP]

May 26, 2018 20:37:37 GMT -5 Opti said:

May 26, 2018 20:07:05 GMT -5 AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP said:

I hope you don't have a lot invested in Trump going down.

It.

Will.

NEVER.

Happen.

Never? Then why is Trump continually throwing tweet tantrums and firing any FBI or DOJ official he thinks might testify about or against him?

Do you want to take a crack at the question? Mueller hasn't answered it (and it's required by law for him to have been appointed) and in as many pages as there are in this thread NONE of you have answered it: WHAT CRIME is being investigated?

I think this is probably the most vital thing for all of you Trump opponents to understand: It is illegal to investigate a person in search of a crime. Here in America, you start with articulable evidence of a crime, and then you investigate and go where the investigation leads. You are not permitted to pick a person you don't like and then investigate until you find something on them.

[AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP]

May 25, 2018 21:53:57 GMT -5 Opti said:

Worth reading -

www.vox.com/2018/5/25/17380212/spygate-trump-russia-spy-stefan-halper-fbi-explained

Trump and Republicans say that Halper was a spy planted in the Trump campaign by the Obama administration “for political purposes” — in other words, to hurt Trump’s electoral chances. The president has dubbed this “SPYGATE,” calling it a “scandal the likes of which this country may never have seen before!”

The reality is much less exciting.

The scandal here isn’t that Trump was “spied on.” It’s that the FBI’s legitimate investigation into Russia is becoming a cudgel for the president to attack the Justice Department publicly and undermine its independence.

Less than a week later, Halper met Page at a conference on US foreign policy and the 2016 election held in Cambridge. The two men struck up an email correspondence.

It’s not clear whether that initial meeting was done at the FBI’s behest. It’s possible that these two men just had a lot in common and established a sort of friendship; Halper is reportedly known for being a major networker.

But on July 31, about three weeks after Halper and Page first met, the FBI began a counterintelligence investigation into Russian efforts to infiltrate the Trump campaign and alter the outcome of the 2016 election. As part of this investigation, they asked Halper to reach out to two Trump advisers — Page and George Papadopoulos — to see what he could learn about connections between the Trump campaign and Russia.

Why doesn't Stefan Halper just explain what he was doing himself? This just sounds like excuse making. 

[AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP]

And if the FBI began a counterintelligence investigation into Russian efforts to infiltrate the Trump campaign and alter the outcome of the 2016 election why wasn't Trump warned of their efforts. Oh, and I thought the concern was that Trump was colluding with Russian agents. If that was the case, and there's no evidence for it whatsoever, then why would the Russians be "trying to infiltrate" the campaign? You see, the constantly evolving-as-they-get-caught again and again stories of the deep state just don't work. 

The TRUTH is that they couldn't conduct a criminal investigation, so they used the lower standard of a counterintelligence investigation. They couldn't obtain a search warrant, so they went with the lower standard- a secret program, no judge required, warrantless spying: www.dailywire.com/news/30740/bombshell-fbi-used-secret-warrantless-program-spy-ryan-saavedra

The report also revealed that a government informant met several times with Trump campaign officials, which validates a March 8, 2018 report from The Washington Post. The New York Times reports:

The F.B.I. obtained phone records and other documents using national security letters — a secret type of subpoena — officials said. And at least one government informant met several times with Mr. Page and Mr. Papadopoulos, current and former officials said. That has become a politically contentious point, with Mr. Trump’s allies questioning whether the F.B.I. was spying on the Trump campaign or trying to entrap campaign officials.

So, what crime was Mueller appointed to investigate? *Answer Required*

And if Trump was colluding with Russia, why were the Russians "trying to infiltrate" his campaign? I mean, he WAS one, right?

And if he wasn't colluding with Russians, but we're going with the brand new story that the Russians were "trying to infiltrate" his campaign, then...

[AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP]

May 26, 2018 20:37:37 GMT -5 Opti said:

May 26, 2018 20:07:05 GMT -5 AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP said:

I hope you don't have a lot invested in Trump going down.

It.

Will.

NEVER.

Happen.

Never? Then why is Trump continually throwing tweet tantrums and firing any FBI or DOJ official he thinks might testify about or against him?

Maybe he wants to know what crime Mueller was appointed to investigate? 

[Tennesseer]

May 27, 2018 12:17:19 GMT -5 AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP said:

May 25, 2018 21:53:57 GMT -5 Opti said:

Worth reading -

www.vox.com/2018/5/25/17380212/spygate-trump-russia-spy-stefan-halper-fbi-explained

Trump and Republicans say that Halper was a spy planted in the Trump campaign by the Obama administration “for political purposes” — in other words, to hurt Trump’s electoral chances. The president has dubbed this “SPYGATE,” calling it a “scandal the likes of which this country may never have seen before!”

The reality is much less exciting.

The scandal here isn’t that Trump was “spied on.” It’s that the FBI’s legitimate investigation into Russia is becoming a cudgel for the president to attack the Justice Department publicly and undermine its independence.

Less than a week later, Halper met Page at a conference on US foreign policy and the 2016 election held in Cambridge. The two men struck up an email correspondence.

It’s not clear whether that initial meeting was done at the FBI’s behest. It’s possible that these two men just had a lot in common and established a sort of friendship; Halper is reportedly known for being a major networker.

But on July 31, about three weeks after Halper and Page first met, the FBI began a counterintelligence investigation into Russian efforts to infiltrate the Trump campaign and alter the outcome of the 2016 election. As part of this investigation, they asked Halper to reach out to two Trump advisers — Page and George Papadopoulos — to see what he could learn about connections between the Trump campaign and Russia.

Why doesn't Stefan Halper just explain what he was doing himself? This just sounds like excuse making. 

Speaking of excuse makers, how you doin'?

[Opti]

"So, what crime was Mueller appointed to investigate? *Answer Required*"

I keep seeing you post this as if you are offering up some great wisdom or wise question. If you know exactly what the crime is, you are generally done with the investigation. So the simple fact you think an answer is required shows probably one of two things, if not both. Ignorance of what an investigation is. Hope that other people don't know what an investigation is.

So think back to Trayvon Martin. The police are to investigate what happened. They aren't told they are investigating murder and stalking. An investigation happens to determine what crimes have been committed, or more accurately what crimes can be reasonably prosecuted and be assumed to have occurred.

[Virgil Showlion]

May 27, 2018 12:29:42 GMT -5 AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP said:

And if Trump was colluding with Russia, why were the Russians "trying to infiltrate" his campaign? I mean, he WAS one, right?

I was wondering about that myself.

They've got to pick a story before they wind up in front of your metaphorical firing squad. Whether it's truthful or not, I don't understand why they haven't simply admitted, "Yes, we suspected Pres. Trump of colluding with Russia and were keeping tabs on him as early as July."

Yes, it gives Pres. Trump a minor victory in that they've admitted he was the target of the investigation, but "We were just protecting him from the Reds" shoots the whole premise of the Mueller investigation--on shaky ground to begin with--to Swiss cheese because it simply doesn't fit with the timeline.

The only reason I won't concede the Mueller investigation is illegitimate is because I don't believe this 11th hour crap about "protecting" Pres. Trump's campaign. It was always about Pres. Trump, whether in good faith or not. They should admit this for their own good and everyone else's.

[djAdvocate]

May 27, 2018 12:34:36 GMT -5 Tennesseer said:

May 27, 2018 12:17:19 GMT -5 AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP said:

Why doesn't Stefan Halper just explain what he was doing himself? This just sounds like excuse making. 

Speaking of excuse makers, how you doin'?

LOL!  i will add this: knowing nothing more than the fact that Halper is a human being capable of intelligent speech, i will take him over the POtuS any day of the week in terms of reliability.

[Opti]

May 27, 2018 19:26:37 GMT -5 Virgil Showlion said:

May 27, 2018 12:29:42 GMT -5 AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP said:

And if Trump was colluding with Russia, why were the Russians "trying to infiltrate" his campaign? I mean, he WAS one, right?

I was wondering about that myself.

They've got to pick a story before they wind up in front of your metaphorical firing squad. Whether it's truthful or not, I don't understand why they haven't simply admitted, "Yes, we suspected Pres. Trump of colluding with Russia and were keeping tabs on him as early as July."

Yes, it gives Pres. Trump a minor victory in that they've admitted he was the target of the investigation, but "We were just protecting him from the Reds" shoots the whole premise of the Mueller investigation--on shaky ground to begin with--to Swiss cheese because it simply doesn't fit with the timeline.

The only reason I won't concede the Mueller investigation is illegitimate is because I don't believe this 11th hour crap about "protecting" Pres. Trump's campaign. It was always about Pres. Trump, whether in good faith or not. They should admit this for their own good and everyone else's.

It feels like you and Paul are so married to the conclusions you've been sold by the Trump propaganda machine that you've turned off all logic. You feel the President should be warned of the progress of the investigation and their reasoning? Before its concluded? That's batshit crazy. Do you generally advocate fouling up an investigation just to make someone feel better before its concluded? Trump's campaign, Hillary's server, I guess since they were both at the top you advocate just letting them know everything so they can cover up effectively and only save the minions they don't like so much?

 If you knew who was guilty of what before you started an investigation, you wouldn't need to have one. You could just hold a conclusion and skip right onto sentencing. Any time you are looking for foreign influence you are probably also looking for the Americans that may be helping them out. And should you care, like I do, that all connections should be found ... you investigate everyone. That's logical. Trump did not purge his campaign of all staffers with strong Russian connections after his and Hillary's briefing about Russian influence. Given that, its not surprising the FBI might suspect Trump is helping or supporting Russia in this effort.

 

[Opti]

"Yes, it gives Pres. Trump a minor victory in that they've admitted he was the target of the investigation"

I'd love to know where you think anyone, except a plant, has admitted that President Trump was the target, which means the only person of interest, in the investigation? Because that is patently false.

[Virgil Showlion]

May 27, 2018 23:10:15 GMT -5 Opti said:

"Yes, it gives Pres. Trump a minor victory in that they've admitted he was the target of the investigation"

I'd love to know where you think anyone, except a plant, has admitted that President Trump was the target, which means the only person of interest, in the investigation? Because that is patently false.

This is referring to my hypothetical situation about what they should do in order to salvage their credibility.

[Virgil Showlion]

May 27, 2018 22:33:54 GMT -5 Opti said:

May 27, 2018 19:26:37 GMT -5 Virgil Showlion said:

I was wondering about that myself.

They've got to pick a story before they wind up in front of your metaphorical firing squad. Whether it's truthful or not, I don't understand why they haven't simply admitted, "Yes, we suspected Pres. Trump of colluding with Russia and were keeping tabs on him as early as July."

Yes, it gives Pres. Trump a minor victory in that they've admitted he was the target of the investigation, but "We were just protecting him from the Reds" shoots the whole premise of the Mueller investigation--on shaky ground to begin with--to Swiss cheese because it simply doesn't fit with the timeline.

The only reason I won't concede the Mueller investigation is illegitimate is because I don't believe this 11th hour crap about "protecting" Pres. Trump's campaign. It was always about Pres. Trump, whether in good faith or not. They should admit this for their own good and everyone else's.

It feels like you and Paul are so married to the conclusions you've been sold by the Trump propaganda machine that you've turned off all logic. You feel the President should be warned of the progress of the investigation and their reasoning? Before its concluded? That's batshit crazy. Do you generally advocate fouling up an investigation just to make someone feel better before its concluded? Trump's campaign, Hillary's server, I guess since they were both at the top you advocate just letting them know everything so they can cover up effectively and only save the minions they don't like so much?

 If you knew who was guilty of what before you started an investigation, you wouldn't need to have one. You could just hold a conclusion and skip right onto sentencing. Any time you are looking for foreign influence you are probably also looking for the Americans that may be helping them out. And should you care, like I do, that all connections should be found ... you investigate everyone. That's logical. Trump did not purge his campaign of all staffers with strong Russian connections after his and Hillary's briefing about Russian influence. Given that, its not surprising the FBI might suspect Trump is helping or supporting Russia in this effort.

I don't know what to say, Optimist, other asserting that, whether logical or not, my conclusions have nothing to do with "the Trump propaganda machine". I'm taking a look at the same facts you are. I don't want to live in a world where the state is granted the kinds of carte blanche liberties you'd evidently be willing to grant it.

Suffice to say that if everything we know about "crossfire hurricane" is within the FBI's legal ability to do, I'd consider this a more disturbing conclusion than Paul's theory that they egregiously overreached their authority, especially given the lack of oversight.

If they'd done it in the light, either with Pres. Trump's knowledge or under the direct supervision of a bipartisan committee involving senior Republicans, based on a clear evidentiary basis without the remotest connection to the Clinton campaign, I'd agree with you that the probative value of the operation would justify its existence--with all appropriate safeguards in place. However I see no such supervision, evidentiary basis, separation from the Clinton campaign, safeguards, or diligence, and such is unacceptable regardless of the intent. Furthermore, I see actors being repeatedly caught in lies, distortions, and omissions that makes me seriously question whether their intentions were benign.

You call my standards "batshit crazy". I say you're foolish to cast them off. Viva difference of opinion.

Should I accuse you of being brainwashed by the New York Times, or the Democratic propaganda machine?

[Opti]

May 28, 2018 0:14:25 GMT -5 Virgil Showlion said:

May 27, 2018 23:10:15 GMT -5 Opti said:

"Yes, it gives Pres. Trump a minor victory in that they've admitted he was the target of the investigation"

I'd love to know where you think anyone, except a plant, has admitted that President Trump was the target, which means the only person of interest, in the investigation? Because that is patently false.

This is referring to my hypothetical situation about what they should do in order to salvage their credibility.

That wasn't clear to me, why you posted that. If they did what you wanted, I would no longer trust them.

[Virgil Showlion]

May 28, 2018 17:11:16 GMT -5 Opti said:

May 28, 2018 0:14:25 GMT -5 Virgil Showlion said:

This is referring to my hypothetical situation about what they should do in order to salvage their credibility.

That wasn't clear to me, why you posted that. If they did what you wanted, I would no longer trust them.

Nor would many others, I imagine, which is why they're spinning a yarn.

But I doubt they can spin it forever. Chances are that with Congress slowly chipping away at the fog of confidentiality surrounding the operation, eventually some piece of evidence will come forward identifying Pres. Trump as the principal target and will be so incontrovertible that even the MSM will have to admit it.

[Opti]

May 28, 2018 19:14:44 GMT -5 Virgil Showlion said:

May 28, 2018 17:11:16 GMT -5 Opti said:

That wasn't clear to me, why you posted that. If they did what you wanted, I would no longer trust them.

Nor would many others, I imagine, which is why they're spinning a yarn.

But I doubt they can spin it forever. Chances are that with Congress slowly chipping away at the fog of confidentiality surrounding the operation, eventually some piece of evidence will come forward identifying Pres. Trump as the principal target and will be so incontrovertible that even the MSM will have to admit it.

We see this so different. I think they are spinning things because the investigation isn't concluded and being forced into reveals early compromises the entire thing. I don't think Trump was a target per se, let alone a primary one. Things should have been so different if he really was the end goal.

What I see happening is Trump and the GOP are willing to expose FBI procedures to the world, just to not make Trump look bad and keep the Presidency in GOP hands. Seems like a big FU to the people who care about Russia interfering in our election process.

[happyhoix]

May 27, 2018 19:26:37 GMT -5 Virgil Showlion said:

May 27, 2018 12:29:42 GMT -5 AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP said:

And if Trump was colluding with Russia, why were the Russians "trying to infiltrate" his campaign? I mean, he WAS one, right?

I was wondering about that myself.

They've got to pick a story before they wind up in front of your metaphorical firing squad. Whether it's truthful or not, I don't understand why they haven't simply admitted, "Yes, we suspected Pres. Trump of colluding with Russia and were keeping tabs on him as early as July."

Yes, it gives Pres. Trump a minor victory in that they've admitted he was the target of the investigation, but "We were just protecting him from the Reds" shoots the whole premise of the Mueller investigation--on shaky ground to begin with--to Swiss cheese because it simply doesn't fit with the timeline.

The only reason I won't concede the Mueller investigation is illegitimate is because I don't believe this 11th hour crap about "protecting" Pres. Trump's campaign. It was always about Pres. Trump, whether in good faith or not. They should admit this for their own good and everyone else's.

Russia was attempting to make up front connections with Trump. We know that because of the meeting arranged with Trump Jr at Trump Tower were he was offered 'dirt' on Clinton by the Russian lawyer with close ties to the Kremlin. There were also two other meetings, another at Trump tower and one in the Seychelles (and this one was set up specifically to try to create a 'back channel' link to the Kremlin). Then there was Jared going to the Russian Embassy to attempt to get them to create a 'secure' line to the Kremlin for Trump.  This was the 'collusion' aspect that Mueller is investigating.

Concurrently, the FBI suspected that Putin was attempting to spy on Trump's campaign by having well placed allies, like Manafort, that would either willingly keep Putin updated on the campaign, or could be blackmailed into spying due to his past Ukrainian business, which apparently involved money laundering.  This is why the FBI sent an informant to talk to several Trump campaign workers that the FBI thought might be working for Russia.

Russia possibly colluding with the campaign is a different thing than Russian recruiting spies to report back to Putin - but you guys know that.

Really, really getting tired of Trump's constant lies about the DOJ. He's trying to discredit them, so when they finally do report their findings, the Trumpettes will fall for the 'they're hopelessly corrupt' line. Trump is denigrating a lot of hard working, dedicated career professionals who wanted to protect American and keep her safe, all because he knows he has a shit ton of skeletons in his closet and is freaking out about people discovering them.

[Opti]

May 27, 2018 12:15:36 GMT -5 AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP said:

May 26, 2018 20:37:37 GMT -5 Opti said:

Never? Then why is Trump continually throwing tweet tantrums and firing any FBI or DOJ official he thinks might testify about or against him?

Do you want to take a crack at the question? Mueller hasn't answered it (and it's required by law for him to have been appointed) and in as many pages as there are in this thread NONE of you have answered it: WHAT CRIME is being investigated?

I think this is probably the most vital thing for all of you Trump opponents to understand: It is illegal to investigate a person in search of a crime. Here in America, you start with articulable evidence of a crime, and then you investigate and go where the investigation leads. You are not permitted to pick a person you don't like and then investigate until you find something on them.

Talking about vital- Perhaps you, Trump or his enablers can prove Trump is being investigated. As for the last sentence, it feels like that's exactly what the GOP does when it involves Hillary. Benghazi, remember?

That last sentence is kind of funny. Isn't that how Trump has justified the bulk of his FBI firings?

[Tennesseer]

May 29, 2018 7:23:49 GMT -5 happyhoix said:

May 27, 2018 19:26:37 GMT -5 Virgil Showlion said:

I was wondering about that myself.

They've got to pick a story before they wind up in front of your metaphorical firing squad. Whether it's truthful or not, I don't understand why they haven't simply admitted, "Yes, we suspected Pres. Trump of colluding with Russia and were keeping tabs on him as early as July."

Yes, it gives Pres. Trump a minor victory in that they've admitted he was the target of the investigation, but "We were just protecting him from the Reds" shoots the whole premise of the Mueller investigation--on shaky ground to begin with--to Swiss cheese because it simply doesn't fit with the timeline.

The only reason I won't concede the Mueller investigation is illegitimate is because I don't believe this 11th hour crap about "protecting" Pres. Trump's campaign. It was always about Pres. Trump, whether in good faith or not. They should admit this for their own good and everyone else's.

Russia was attempting to make up front connections with Trump. We know that because of the meeting arranged with Trump Jr at Trump Tower were he was offered 'dirt' on Clinton by the Russian lawyer with close ties to the Kremlin. There were also two other meetings, another at Trump tower and one in the Seychelles (and this one was set up specifically to try to create a 'back channel' link to the Kremlin). Then there was Jared going to the Russian Embassy to attempt to get them to create a 'secure' line to the Kremlin for Trump.  This was the 'collusion' aspect that Mueller is investigating.

Concurrently, the FBI suspected that Putin was attempting to spy on Trump's campaign by having well placed allies, like Manafort, that would either willingly keep Putin updated on the campaign, or could be blackmailed into spying due to his past Ukrainian business, which apparently involved money laundering.  This is why the FBI sent an informant to talk to several Trump campaign workers that the FBI thought might be working for Russia.

Russia possibly colluding with the campaign is a different thing than Russian recruiting spies to report back to Putin - but you guys know that.

Really, really getting tired of Trump's constant lies about the DOJ. He's trying to discredit them, so when they finally do report their findings, the Trumpettes will fall for the 'they're hopelessly corrupt' line. Trump is denigrating a lot of hard working, dedicated career professionals who wanted to protect American and keep her safe, all because he knows he has a shit ton of skeletons in his closet and is freaking out about people discovering them.

Speaking of trump:

Trump says, without proof, that Mueller team will meddle in midterm election

Washington (CNN)President Donald Trump alleged Tuesday — without providing any evidence — that special counsel Robert Mueller's investigation will meddle in the midterm elections to benefit Democrats.

Trump's claim is his latest attack on the credibility of the Russia investigation as being politically motivated, though it's a significant new step in his attacks on what is intended to be an independent probe working to get to the bottom of Russia's efforts to interfere in the 2016 election.

"The 13 Angry Democrats (plus people who worked 8 years for Obama) working on the rigged Russia Witch Hunt, will be MEDDLING with the mid-term elections, especially now that Republicans (stay tough!) are taking the lead in Polls," Trump tweeted. "There was no Collusion, except by the Democrats!"

Trump says, without proof, that Mueller team will meddle in midterm elections

[happyhoix]

 Paul would like to convince people that Mueller is straying from his original charge, which was to investigate whether or not anyone on Trump's team offered to collude with Russia.

It has been proven in multiple instances, someone from Trump's team DID try to meet with Russian agents to get dirt (or propaganda services) from Russian sources, but claim 'nothing came of it' and therefore it doesn't matter. In fact, intent to commit a crime is actually still a crime.

Additionally, Mueller's charge was to investigate whether anyone tried to collude with Russia, but that doesn't mean, if Mueller discovers questionable activity in another area, he is obligated to ignore it. For instance, their investigation into Roger Stone for potential collusion appears to be broadening, which could mean criminal charges being filed against him. Stone is whining that they can't do that, but they can.

www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/the-5-latest-twists-in-the-russia-story/ar-AAxXEnv

Propaganda experts know that truth doesn't really matter, what matters is what people believe, and if you keep insisting you are right long enough, and firmly enough, some percentage of people will start to believe you, and truth becomes unimportant. However, there is another subset of people who insist that truth is truth and lies are lies, no matter how many times they are repeated, or how firmly they are stated. In dealing with the Trump presidency, it will become self evident which of those two groups every individual American lines up with. 

[AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP]

It's almost impossible at this stage for intelligent people making a good faith effort to learn what has happened to ignore the near certainty that Obama and Clinton were engaged in a scheme to use the awesome power of the surveillance state to subvert the election.

I have admitted that we currently have only circumstantial evidence that Obama was involved directly, but to believe he wasn't (and isn't), is getting to be more and more of a stretch.

Did the FISC issue a warrant to spy on the opposition party Presidential campaign without the President's knowledge?

Unlikely.

And given what we know about his proclivity for using government for his own political purposes, it becomes impossible to dismiss the idea that this is another Obama scheme.

I haven't forgotten that it was the Obama regime which allowed Lois Lerner (“Not a smidgen of corruption”) weaponize the IRS to obstruct his political opponents during the 2012 election.

I haven't forgotten Does anyone Eric Holder’s illegal surveillance of the Associated Press journalists and Fox News’s James Rosen.

The fact that Obama got away with it because nobody there honestly investigate him, doesn't mean he had a scandal free 8 years.

Unless you're a moron you can tell the difference between talking points and Truth.

And if you have a couple of brain cells up there between your ears that are still sparking, then you can pick up on a pattern. So while I have admitted that I am indeed a little out over my skis, it isn't wishful thinking. It's pattern recognition.