Hillary Clinton Attorney Indictment -- Russia Russia Russia hoax

[rambot]

Process crimes, with no collusion charges by Mueller, which isn't even a crime.

You mean Mueller didn't press charges for something that isn't a crime? And you are using this as evidence of what exactly?

 

[Pommer]

It ain't over. That's two more charges than the Russia Hoax got related to collusion.

Here we recently have the revelation of a Deep State snake general colluding with a Chinese counterpart, and the left is still braying about Russia, that nation with a declining population, an economy the size of Italy's, and one broken aircraft carrier. If only they cared about Russia when it mattered during the Cold War. Instead, two were executed for treason working for them.

Treason doth never prosper. What's the reason? Why if it prosper, none dare call it treason."

 

[stevil]

Besides the evidence, and the convictions, why would we think there was collusion between Trump and Putin?

BTW,
1. Donald Trump himself was never investigated for conspiracy with Russians to interfere in the 2016 election. Due to DoJ guidelines not to indict a sitting president.
2. The investigations into members (other than Donald) of the Trump 2016 presidential campaign conspiring with the Russians, those two investigations were started by the FBI and the Republican acting Attorney General. Nothing at all to do with the Democrats or the mainstream media.

 

[KCfromNC]

Right, like lying to the FBI, which is the crime alleged in the OP.

But but but, that's different, you know, because reasons and such.

 

[Brihaha]

Two lame charges. Kevin Clinesmith got a year of probation and 400 hours of community service.

My mistake. I actually thought Clinesmith was charged by Horowitz. It seems so long ago.....

 

[Arcangl86]

Process crimes, with no collusion charges by Mueller, which isn't even a crime. So far two indictments against Deep State dirty cops, with dozens more who were demoted, fired, transferred or took early retirement.

Perkins Coie is part of the government?

ETA: So I just started to read the indictment. I find it interesting that every organization is pseudonymous, except for the Clinton Campaign. I wonder why (ok, not really) they felt to need to make that explicit but not anything else.

 

[rjs330]

Yes. The evidence that was provided WAS accepted as fact. Yes, the testimony WAS accepted as fact. Yes, Donald Trump's words WERE accepted as fact. Yes the contacts he used with Russia were accepted as facts. Yes the convictions in an IMPARTIAL COURT were accepted as fact.

And not one bit of that had ANY evidence of collusion with Russia to effect the election. The ONLY collusion was in Hillary's side.

Hillary destroyed emails that were evidence and no charges were filed. That is no misrepresentation. It's exactly what happened.

 

[rjs330]

You mean Mueller didn't press charges for something that isn't a crime? And you are using this as evidence of what exactly?

I know you understand the difference between finding process or lying crimes and actual crimes for which the investigation was started.

Name one person in the Trump team that was found to have colluded with Russians to effect the election.

 

[rjs330]

BTW,
1. Donald Trump himself was never investigated for conspiracy with Russians to interfere in the 2016 election. Due to DoJ guidelines not to indict a sitting president.
2. The investigations into members (other than Donald) of the Trump 2016 presidential campaign conspiring with the Russians, those two investigations were started by the FBI and the Republican acting Attorney General. Nothing at all to do with the Democrats or the mainstream media.

Trump was absolutely investigated. No he wouldn't have been prosecuted. However he could have been impeached if they found he did collude. However NOTHING was found. Sorry.

 

[Tom 1]

The 26-page indictment of former cybersecurity attorney and Hillary Clinton campaign lawyer Michael Sussmann by special counsel John Durham is as detailed as it is damning on the alleged effort to push a false Russia collusion claim before the 2016 presidential campaign. One line, however, seems to reverberate for those of us who have followed this scandal for years now: “You do realize that we will have to expose every trick we have in our bag.”

Full story at: Clinton lawyer's indictment reveals 'bag of tricks'

'...the indictment and prior disclosures suggest that Clinton campaign lawyers at the law firm of Perkins Coie helped organize an effort to spread Russia collusion stories and trigger an investigation'

This is news?

 

[TLK Valentine]

I don't know what the Russian Hoax is. But the Mueller Investigation resulted in indictments for 34 people and 3 Russian companies, as well as numerous guilty pleas.

And several prison sentences which Donald had to hastily pardon as payment for services rendered.

 

[rambot]

I know you understand the difference between finding process or lying crimes and actual crimes for which the investigation was started.

Name one person in the Trump team that was found to have colluded with Russians to effect the election.

Please find me the statute that refers to collusion.

 

[Belk]

I know you understand the difference between finding process or lying crimes and actual crimes for which the investigation was started.

Name one person in the Trump team that was found to have colluded with Russians to effect the election.

What crimes would those be then?

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipe...Presidential_Election_and_Related_Matters.pdf

 

[rambot]

And not one bit of that had ANY evidence of collusion with Russia to effect the election. The ONLY collusion was in Hillary's side.

Hillary destroyed emails that were evidence and no charges were filed. That is no misrepresentation. It's exactly what happened.

How do you know there was evidence there?

 

[East of Eden]

Right, like lying to the FBI, which is the crime alleged in the OP.

If you're referring to Flynn, some of the FBI people there said he didn't lie, and whatever, it is a process crime not related to any collusion. I'm much more concerned with the DOJ/FBI lying to the FISA court, and those organizations illegally leaking stories to the press, then using those leaked stories as justification for continuing the Russia Hoax. Brennan lied to Congress and wasn't prosecuted. Lying under oath is what the most recent Durham indictment was about.

There was no case. IG Horowitz said he didn't know why the whole matter wasn't dropped at the time it was launched, and Rosenstein who signed the OK for the Special Counsel said had he known then what he knew later he wouldn't have done so.

Rolling Stone on why the Steele dossier was always a joke:

'Corroboration Zero': An Inspector General's Report Reveals the Steele Dossier Was Always a Joke

"Meanwhile, the OI unit chief said Steele’s reports were “what kind of pushed it over the line.” There’s no FISA warrant without Steele.

Horowitz ratifies the oft-denounced “Nunes memo.”

Democrats are not going to want to hear this, since conventional wisdom says former House Intelligence chief Devin Nunes is a conspiratorial evildoer, but the Horowitz report ratifies the major claims of the infamous “Nunes memo.”

As noted, Horowitz establishes that the Steele report was crucial to the FISA process, even using the same language Nunes used (“essential”). He also confirms the Nunes assertion that the FBI double-dipped in citing both Steele and a September 23, 2016 Yahoo! news story using Steele as an unnamed source. Horowitz listed the idea that Steele did not directly provide information to the press as one of seven significant “inaccuracies or omissions” in the first FISA application.

Horowitz also verifies the claim that Steele was “closed for cause” for talking to the media, i.e. officially cut off as a confidential human source to the FBI. He shows that Steele continued to talk to Justice Official Bruce Ohr before and after Steele’s formal relationship with the FBI ended. His report confirms that the Steele information had not been corroborated when the FISA application was submitted, another key Nunes point.

There was gnashing of teeth when Nunes first released his memo in January, 2018. The press universally crapped on his letter, with a Washington Post piece calling it a “joke” and a “sham.” House Speaker Nancy Pelosi slammed Nunes for the release of a “bogus” document, while New York Senator Chuck Schumer said the memo was intended to “sow conspiracy theories and attack the integrity of federal law enforcement.” Many called for his removal as Committee chair.

The Horowitz report says all of that caterwauling was off-base. It also undercuts many of the assertions made in a ballyhooed response letter by Nunes counterpart Adam Schiff, who described the FBI’s “reasonable basis” for deeming Steele credible. The report is especially hostile to Schiff’s claim that the FBI “provided additional information obtained through multiple independent sources that corroborated Steele’s reporting.”

In fact, far from confirming the Steele material, the FBI over time seems mainly to have uncovered more and more reasons to run screaming from Steele, to wit:

The “Steele dossier” was “Internet rumor,” and corroboration for the pee tape story was “zero.”

 

[stevil]

Trump was absolutely investigated. No he wouldn't have been prosecuted. However he could have been impeached if they found he did collude. However NOTHING was found. Sorry.

Trump wasn't investigated by FBI or Mueller.

Trump's obstruction activities were looked into, but not in order to catch Trump, but only to see if anyone assisted him. They would have been prosecuted if they had helped him.

The media had assumed that Trump was being investigated, they were speculating as to whether Mueller was going to look into Trump's finances to see if there was any financial entanglement with the Russians. But Mueller never looked, he wasn't interested in what crimes Trump may have been involved in. Mueller was only ever looking for crimes of people other than Trump.

As Mueller spelled out in his report, Trump was never going to be indicted and if Trump were to be indicted then it would need to be by means other than the DoJ i.e. upto congress.

 

[essentialsaltes]

If you're referring to Flynn

Flynn, Pappadopoulos, Rick Gates (though that was lying to federal prosecutors)... or we could go on to witness tampering, fraud....

and whatever, it is a process crime not related to any collusion.

Whatever? See, you apparently don't even care about lying to the FBI. So the OP is a nothingburger to you.

I'm much more concerned with ....

Nothingburgers without even a side order of indictment.

 

[Valletta]

'...the indictment and prior disclosures suggest that Clinton campaign lawyers at the law firm of Perkins Coie helped organize an effort to spread Russia collusion stories and trigger an investigation'

This is news?

It's huge news, while there is almost a fake news story every week (this week so many of the American major media news networks falsely claimed whips were being used on blacks at the border) this fake Russian collusion hoax was the major hoax used by Democrats to falsely try and discredit President Trump and his family. Now it is tied right back to Hillary's campaign attorney. I don't know how well the Clinton email scandal was covered in your country, I have included a link back to those times from the Washington Times Hillary Clinton on wiping email server: ‘Like with a cloth or something?’, but Hillary seemed in big trouble and out of the blue came this Russian collusion tale.

 

[essentialsaltes]

but Hillary seemed in big trouble and...

Trump's FBI director decided that no charges were appropriate. The DOJ IG later said the decision to not prosecute "was consistent with the Department’s historical approach in prior cases under different leadership".

 

[Tom 1]

this week so many of the American major media news networks falsely claimed whips were being used on blacks at the border)

Do you mean this? White House condemns border guard use of whip-like cord against Haitian migrants Doesn’t quite match what you said, but doesn’t appear to be fake, either. Do you believe this is a ‘fake story’, or are you referring to something else? I’ve read the news over the last few weeks and that’s only the second time I’ve come across something related to the use of something like a whip (although that isn’t quite what the article says, that seems to be how you have interpreted it). Can you provide a link to some news outlet claiming whips were used on blacks?

while there is almost a fake news story every week

Then it should be easy for you to provide some examples, please do so.