Robert Mueller Responds to Trump’s Commutation of Roger Stone Sentence: Stone Was No Victim

[disciple Clint]

A lie is a lie and never counts as the Truth.

you know if you have evidence that anything I have posted is not true you are free to post it, in fact if you are going to say that I am spreading lies the burden of proof would be on you. I do not need to use lies to prove my points so if you find any actual lies I would be interested to know. The articles I use are sometimes from right of center news services but the left of center news services are also not totally reliable. So be specific about lies and show some evidence.

 

[childeye 2]

you know if you have evidence that anything I have posted is not true you are free to post it, in fact if you are going to say that I am spreading lies the burden of proof would be on you. I do not need to use lies to prove my points so if you find any actual lies I would be interested to know. The articles I use are sometimes from right of center news services but the left of center news services are also not totally reliable. So be specific about lies and show some evidence.

This is well said Clint, because here we can agree to agree rather than agree to disagree. And I'm going to take you up on that.

But before I respond further I want you to understand something. I would be a liar to say that you lied if in fact you didn't lie. I am reluctant to accuse you of lying because I must first be sure that you are aware that what you are saying is untrue before I would consider it a willful attempt to deceive others. A person should be be in full recognition that the lie they spread is a lie before I see them as a liar. To me a person can be deceived two ways. One way is by hearing a lie and believing it as true, and another is a deeper deception which is knowing that it's a lie but spreading it anyway because that person is deceived into thinking that somehow it will benefit them in the end. To me even liars that knowingly lie are still yet deceived in a different way.

In the moral/immoral aspect of psycholinguistics, those who reason on something false as if it's true always end up in the contradiction of hypocrisy. I've already pointed out to you the contradiction of saying that the Democrats would have listed obstruction as one of the articles of impeachment if there was any evidence of the crime. That's not provably true, therefore you will be in a contradiction when you then claim any articles for obstruction when presented are still not evidence of a crime because it was a made up or false allegation to begin with, meant for political gain.

But that's just a contradiction in reasoning pointing to something wrong at work which you are reasoning upon. It's the slander that is the immoral aspect of the lie. Fundamentally, believing that there was no legitimate purpose for any investigations into Trump's ties with Russia and/or Russia's endeavor to help the Trump campaign, is believing a lie. I see the slander as just an ad hominem attack formed in a negative prejudice to avoid looking at the issue objectively. The ad hominem attack could be construed as avoiding considering whether any allegations are true by avoiding discussing the substance or evidence of the claim. Subsequently, any discourse coming from anyone meant to insinuate a slanderous sentiment about Democrats or those who disagree with Trump on this, is spreading a lie about others; Even as it is not established that the Russian interference in favor of Trump was ever a hoax which must be necessary before accusing anyone of mischief who believed or reported otherwise.

Here are some differing forms of essentially the same lie and ad hominem slander about the illegitimacy of the investigation, and the motives of those who wanted it, and conducted it.
Feb. 16, 2017 Trump tweet:
The Democrats had to come up with a story as to why they lost the election, and so badly (306), so they made up a story - RUSSIA. Fake news!

May 9, 2017(NBC News) Trump explaining why he fired Comey:
“When I decided to just do it, I said to myself, I said, you know, this Russia thing with Trump and Russia is a made-up story. It’s an excuse by the Democrats for having lost an election that they should have won. … So everybody was thinking, they should have won the election. This was an excuse for having lost an election.”

These are your statements which I feel slanders Democrats and liberals and the MSM:

"This is a simple issue, if there was a crime it would have been listed in the impeachment charges, the Dems were grasping for any straw they could find to support their purely political move."

"Here is the only important fact "While this report does not conclude that the president committed a crime" all the rest of what you posted is unsupported innuendo, it is a cheap shot attempt to appease the Dems and the msm. Most people know the difference between fact and innuendo."

"well that all sounds good until you consider that any actual evidence that he had ( and he had none) could have been used in an impeachment proceeding, which as we know the liberals were all to eager to conduct. So out the window that excuse goes. Face it there was no evidence to support any illegal activity on the part of Trump."

 

[disciple Clint]

This is well said Clint, because here we can agree to agree rather than agree to disagree. And I'm going to take you up on that.

But before I respond further I want you to understand something. I would be a liar to say that you lied if in fact you didn't lie. I am reluctant to accuse you of lying because I must first be sure that you are aware that what you are saying is untrue before I would consider it a willful attempt to deceive others. A person should be be in full recognition that the lie they spread is a lie before I see them as a liar. To me a person can be deceived two ways. One way is by hearing a lie and believing it as true, and another is a deeper deception which is knowing that it's a lie but spreading it anyway because that person is deceived into thinking that somehow it will benefit them in the end. To me even liars that knowingly lie are still yet deceived in a different way.

In the moral/immoral aspect of psycholinguistics, those who reason on something false as if it's true always end up in the contradiction of hypocrisy. I've already pointed out to you the contradiction of saying that the Democrats would have listed obstruction as one of the articles of impeachment if there was any evidence of the crime. That's not provably true, therefore you will be in a contradiction when you then claim any articles for obstruction when presented are still not evidence of a crime because it was a made up or false allegation to begin with, meant for political gain.

But that's just a contradiction in reasoning pointing to something wrong at work which you are reasoning upon. It's the slander that is the immoral aspect of the lie. Fundamentally, believing that there was no legitimate purpose for any investigations into Trump's ties with Russia and/or Russia's endeavor to help the Trump campaign, is believing a lie. I see the slander as just an ad hominem attack formed in a negative prejudice to avoid looking at the issue objectively. The ad hominem attack could be construed as avoiding considering whether any allegations are true by avoiding discussing the substance or evidence of the claim. Subsequently, any discourse coming from anyone meant to insinuate a slanderous sentiment about Democrats or those who disagree with Trump on this, is spreading a lie about others; Even as it is not established that the Russian interference in favor of Trump was ever a hoax which must be necessary before accusing anyone of mischief who believed or reported otherwise.

Here are some differing forms of essentially the same lie and ad hominem slander about the illegitimacy of the investigation, and the motives of those who wanted it, and conducted it.
Feb. 16, 2017 Trump tweet:
The Democrats had to come up with a story as to why they lost the election, and so badly (306), so they made up a story - RUSSIA. Fake news!

May 9, 2017(NBC News) Trump explaining why he fired Comey:
“When I decided to just do it, I said to myself, I said, you know, this Russia thing with Trump and Russia is a made-up story. It’s an excuse by the Democrats for having lost an election that they should have won. … So everybody was thinking, they should have won the election. This was an excuse for having lost an election.”

These are your statements which I feel slanders Democrats and liberals and the MSM:

"This is a simple issue, if there was a crime it would have been listed in the impeachment charges, the Dems were grasping for any straw they could find to support their purely political move."

"Here is the only important fact "While this report does not conclude that the president committed a crime" all the rest of what you posted is unsupported innuendo, it is a cheap shot attempt to appease the Dems and the msm. Most people know the difference between fact and innuendo."

"well that all sounds good until you consider that any actual evidence that he had ( and he had none) could have been used in an impeachment proceeding, which as we know the liberals were all to eager to conduct. So out the window that excuse goes. Face it there was no evidence to support any illegal activity on the part of Trump."

And there still is no evidence, and you are still welcome to provide any that you can find, but rather that be verbose in the extreme and bloviate I will simply tell you to research the facts being developed by the two senate investigations and the Durham investigation. I do not find any error or misstatement in my posts.

 

[jgarden]

And all that and still there is no case against Trump or Barr. The facts remain the facts.

I predict that if this President loses the 2020 Election, at some point he will either attempt to provide a presidential pardon or commutation for himself or negotiate a deal with a similar outcome as his price for peacefully transferring power to his successor without a constitutional crisis!

The other scenario would be for Trump to step down from Office a few days before the end of his term, making Pence the interim President - on the condition that he would provide private citizen Donald J Trump with a presidential pardon or commutation!

 

[disciple Clint]

I predict that if this President loses the 2020 Election, at some point he will either attempt to provide a presidential pardon or commutation for himself or negotiate a deal with a similar outcome as his price for peacefully transferring power to his successor without a constitutional crisis!

The other scenario would be for Trump to step down from Office a few days before the end of his term, making Pence the interim President - on the condition that he would provide private citizen Donald J Trump with a presidential pardon or commutation!

since there is no crime what would he be pardoned for? Oh that's right it is Trump, he must have done something illegal even if there is no evidence.

 

[childeye 2]

And there still is no evidence, and you are still welcome to provide any that you can find, but rather that be verbose in the extreme and bloviate I will simply tell you to research the facts being developed by the two senate investigations and the Durham investigation. I do not find any error or misstatement in my posts.

You said if I had evidence of inaccurate words posted by you, that I was welcome to show you the evidence. I felt I had explained the error I had noticed, and even posted your own words to point out what are the unfair depictions about others in your posts. To be blunt, I showed you proof of you spreading hurtful and damaging gossip about others based on prejudice, (the Dems were grasping for any straw they could find to support their purely political move."... "all the rest of what you posted is unsupported innuendo, it is a cheap shot attempt to appease the Dems and the msm."). These were your words which are simply based on prejudice which I also proved by showing you the contradictions that your bias creates.

Proof is here here from post #44:
Respectfully, your framing of the issue is a contradiction in reasoning. When we base legal conclusions on prejudice, it ends in the contradiction of hypocrisy. On one hand you say if there were a crime it would have been listed in the articles of impeachment, as if listing a crime in the articles proves there was a crime (which it doesn't). Accordingly, and on the other hand, if the Democrats list a crime of obstruction in their articles of impeachment, which they did, you then say there was no crime because the Democrats were just trying to impeach Trump on baseless accusations for political gain.


I also explained that it was possible that you had believed the lie said about others, and repeated it not knowing it was a lie. I'm informing you so that you can stop believing and spreading the lie about others. Again, here is the lie you are believing and by extension spreading:

believing that there was no legitimate purpose for any investigations into Trump's ties with Russia and/or Russia's endeavor to help the Trump campaign, is believing a lie.

This is the evidence that this gossip that is spread about others is untrue (I have shown it many times to you):

All the official reports have stated unequivocally that the Russians did in fact interfere on Trump's behalf in a "broad and sweeping way".

Even Trump himself acknowledged the reality of the Russians meeting at Trump Tower to help his campaign against Hillary Clinton.

Roger Stone was found guilty of lying to the FBI by not divulging the contact giving the Trump campaign inside knowledge about WikiLeaks dumps of Russian hacked information.

This is all evidence that shows Russia interfered on behalf of Trump. This necessarily means there was a legitimate purpose being served in investigating the Trump Russia issue which Trump was calling a hoax. Subsequently it was a lie being said about the Democrats and MSM claiming that they made up a fake story about Russia helping Trump and his campaign.

Here is the evidence of Trump saying that lie:

May 9, 2017(NBC News) Trump explaining why he fired Comey:
“When I decided to just do it, I said to myself, I said, you know, this Russia thing with Trump and Russia is a made-up story. It’s an excuse by the Democrats for having lost an election that they should have won. … So everybody was thinking, they should have won the election. This was an excuse for having lost an election.”

Feb. 16, 2017 Trump tweet:
The Democrats had to come up with a story as to why they lost the election, and so badly (306), so they made up a story - RUSSIA. Fake news!

I'm informing you so you can stop believing and spreading the lie that it's a hoax invented by Democrats and the MSM because they are out to get Trump. With all due respect, any assertion that there was no crime won't ever make that lie come true.

 

[disciple Clint]

You said if I had evidence of inaccurate words posted by you, that I was welcome to show you the evidence. I felt I had explained the error I had noticed, and even posted your own words to point out what are the unfair depictions about others in your posts. To be blunt, I showed you proof of you spreading hurtful and damaging gossip about others based on prejudice, (the Dems were grasping for any straw they could find to support their purely political move."... "all the rest of what you posted is unsupported innuendo, it is a cheap shot attempt to appease the Dems and the msm."). These were your words which are simply based on prejudice which I also proved by showing you the contradictions that your bias creates.

Proof is here here from post #44:
Respectfully, your framing of the issue is a contradiction in reasoning. When we base legal conclusions on prejudice, it ends in the contradiction of hypocrisy. On one hand you say if there were a crime it would have been listed in the articles of impeachment, as if listing a crime in the articles proves there was a crime (which it doesn't). Accordingly, and on the other hand, if the Democrats list a crime of obstruction in their articles of impeachment, which they did, you then say there was no crime because the Democrats were just trying to impeach Trump on baseless accusations for political gain.


I also explained that it was possible that you had believed the lie said about others, and repeated it not knowing it was a lie. I'm informing you so that you can stop believing and spreading the lie about others. Again, here is the lie you are believing and by extension spreading:

believing that there was no legitimate purpose for any investigations into Trump's ties with Russia and/or Russia's endeavor to help the Trump campaign, is believing a lie.

This is the evidence that this gossip that is spread about others is untrue (I have shown it many times to you):

All the official reports have stated unequivocally that the Russians did in fact interfere on Trump's behalf in a "broad and sweeping way".

Even Trump himself acknowledged the reality of the Russians meeting at Trump Tower to help his campaign against Hillary Clinton.

Roger Stone was found guilty of lying to the FBI by not divulging the contact giving the Trump campaign inside knowledge about WikiLeaks dumps of Russian hacked information.

This is all evidence that shows Russia interfered on behalf of Trump. This necessarily means there was a legitimate purpose being served in investigating the Trump Russia issue which Trump was calling a hoax. Subsequently it was a lie being said about the Democrats and MSM claiming that they made up a fake story about Russia helping Trump and his campaign.

Here is the evidence of Trump saying that lie:

May 9, 2017(NBC News) Trump explaining why he fired Comey:
“When I decided to just do it, I said to myself, I said, you know, this Russia thing with Trump and Russia is a made-up story. It’s an excuse by the Democrats for having lost an election that they should have won. … So everybody was thinking, they should have won the election. This was an excuse for having lost an election.”

Feb. 16, 2017 Trump tweet:
The Democrats had to come up with a story as to why they lost the election, and so badly (306), so they made up a story - RUSSIA. Fake news!

I'm informing you so you can stop believing and spreading the lie that it's a hoax invented by Democrats and the MSM because they are out to get Trump. With all due respect, any assertion that there was no crime won't ever make that lie come true.

Here are a few things to consider, much more will be revealed in the senate investigations and the Durham report.
The political winds have shifted in Washington. The law enforcers who abused their badges to launch a political inquisition targeting Donald Trump are themselves now exposed to the furies they unleashed. It’s poetic justice — without the poetry. The process may be painful, but the nation is less likely to suffer a coup redo if the instigators have their cover-up blown.
How ‘Crossfire Hurricane’ blew it: Russia collusion hoax was built on thin air
In the article below: A picture is starting to emerge about the abuse of power against the incoming Trump administration orchestrated by a cabal of outgoing Obama administration officials, House Democrats, the intelligence community and their allies in the media.

According to Attorney General William Barr, “What happened to the president in the 2016 election and throughout the first two years of his administration was abhorrent. It was a grave injustice and it was unprecedented in American history.”

Turns out the entire Russian investigation was a sham, and Obama administration officials knew it from the get-go. Senior intelligence officials testified before closed-door congressional hearings that there was NO collusion between the Trump campaign and the Russians.
KT McFarland: Russia hoax – Obama team's shocking abuse of power. Here's what we know so far
Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Lindsey Graham revealed in an interview with Fox News' "Sunday Morning Futures" that in 2018 Congress investigated Christoper Steele's Russian dossier, and that the FBI lied to lawmakers about it.
Graham: FBI lied to FISA court, lied to Congress about dossier
This is unsurprising. The Russia hoax is crumbling and people can’t run away fast enough. We’ve seen signs from the very beginning that many of the people who promoted the Trump-Russia collusion smear have always known it was a hoax. These signs have been in plain sight. Here is an incomplete list.
As The Russia Hoax Begins To Unravel, The Gaslighting Begins

 

[disciple Clint]

You said if I had evidence of inaccurate words posted by you, that I was welcome to show you the evidence. I felt I had explained the error I had noticed, and even posted your own words to point out what are the unfair depictions about others in your posts. To be blunt, I showed you proof of you spreading hurtful and damaging gossip about others based on prejudice, (the Dems were grasping for any straw they could find to support their purely political move."... "all the rest of what you posted is unsupported innuendo, it is a cheap shot attempt to appease the Dems and the msm."). These were your words which are simply based on prejudice which I also proved by showing you the contradictions that your bias creates.

Proof is here here from post #44:
Respectfully, your framing of the issue is a contradiction in reasoning. When we base legal conclusions on prejudice, it ends in the contradiction of hypocrisy. On one hand you say if there were a crime it would have been listed in the articles of impeachment, as if listing a crime in the articles proves there was a crime (which it doesn't). Accordingly, and on the other hand, if the Democrats list a crime of obstruction in their articles of impeachment, which they did, you then say there was no crime because the Democrats were just trying to impeach Trump on baseless accusations for political gain.


I also explained that it was possible that you had believed the lie said about others, and repeated it not knowing it was a lie. I'm informing you so that you can stop believing and spreading the lie about others. Again, here is the lie you are believing and by extension spreading:

believing that there was no legitimate purpose for any investigations into Trump's ties with Russia and/or Russia's endeavor to help the Trump campaign, is believing a lie.

This is the evidence that this gossip that is spread about others is untrue (I have shown it many times to you):

All the official reports have stated unequivocally that the Russians did in fact interfere on Trump's behalf in a "broad and sweeping way".

Even Trump himself acknowledged the reality of the Russians meeting at Trump Tower to help his campaign against Hillary Clinton.

Roger Stone was found guilty of lying to the FBI by not divulging the contact giving the Trump campaign inside knowledge about WikiLeaks dumps of Russian hacked information.

This is all evidence that shows Russia interfered on behalf of Trump. This necessarily means there was a legitimate purpose being served in investigating the Trump Russia issue which Trump was calling a hoax. Subsequently it was a lie being said about the Democrats and MSM claiming that they made up a fake story about Russia helping Trump and his campaign.

Here is the evidence of Trump saying that lie:

May 9, 2017(NBC News) Trump explaining why he fired Comey:
“When I decided to just do it, I said to myself, I said, you know, this Russia thing with Trump and Russia is a made-up story. It’s an excuse by the Democrats for having lost an election that they should have won. … So everybody was thinking, they should have won the election. This was an excuse for having lost an election.”

Feb. 16, 2017 Trump tweet:
The Democrats had to come up with a story as to why they lost the election, and so badly (306), so they made up a story - RUSSIA. Fake news!

I'm informing you so you can stop believing and spreading the lie that it's a hoax invented by Democrats and the MSM because they are out to get Trump. With all due respect, any assertion that there was no crime won't ever make that lie come true.

Something more for your edification, there is much more to come as the senate investigations proceed along with the Durham investigation.
“This was the Clinton campaign’s dossiers. It was the dirt. It was a phony story that they sold not only to the American people, but they sold it and corrupted our FBI, where it appears these dirty cops were more than willing to take this information to present it to the FISA court,” Nunes said. Rep. Nunes on secret source for anti-Trump Steele dossier: 'expanded our investigation' into Brookings Institute

 

[childeye 2]

The political winds have shifted in Washington.

All this means is that since William Barr has now taken over the DOJ, all cases against Trump or Trump associates have been fixed or are in the process of being fixed. He is of a character that was willing to send Michael Cohen back to prison unless Cohen agreed to stay silent and not say anything about his experiences with Trump in any book or interview. He is not adverse to protecting Trump's political image even if it's against the law.

The law enforcers who abused their badges to launch a political inquisition targeting Donald Trump are themselves now exposed to the furies they unleashed. It’s poetic justice — without the poetry. The process may be painful, but the nation is less likely to suffer a coup redo if the instigators have their cover-up blown.

All this means is that Trump is seeking retribution against those who rightfully investigated Russia's intentions to interfere on Trump's behalf, by perceiving it as a coup. It neglects to mention that Russia's interference was the initial instigator of all the events that followed, including Trump's understandable desire that it would all go away.

See Clint, when people believe a lie they become possessed by the dark spirit that the lie fosters. It therefore should be understood that if Trump did not believe the lie, he would be enabled to say in his innocence that the FBI had a difficult job to do in that situation and that he doesn't take it personally. But because he believes the lie, instead he is possessed of a vindictive spirit which appears as justified by the lie.

How ‘Crossfire Hurricane’ blew it: Russia collusion hoax was built on thin air
In the article below: A picture is starting to emerge about the abuse of power against the incoming Trump administration orchestrated by a cabal of outgoing Obama administration officials, House Democrats, the intelligence community and their allies in the media.

All this means is that the FBI and the outgoing administration found themselves in a circumstance where they knew Russia was trying to help Trump win but they didn't know whether Trump was complicit in some degree or even whether he might be an agent working in Russia's interests. So just before Trump took over the Presidency, they buried the information/evidence that had been gathered in crossfire hurricane, by spreading it around a bureaucratic maze. This was a precaution against the worst case scenario that Trump was working with Putin and upon taking power he would make the evidence disappear. And it was also a way to leave a trail of bread crumbs that any legitimate investigative reporter could follow when it was leaked out, so at least the public would know what had been found. This was all explained years ago by Ms. Ellen Farkas. This is why we needed a thorough and complete investigation.

Please note that the link above is stipulating the "collusion" aspect to qualify 'hoax', and thereby making exempt from consideration the fact that the FBI had a legitimate obligation to investigate the Russian interference to help Trump win despite their not knowing why Russia wanted Trump to win and/or whether there was any collusion at the time. In other words, it's propaganda. You can tell because those composing the propaganda inevitably will claim that the investigators from the beginning knew there was no evidence of collusion at the time the investigation began, which should be common sense since they didn't announce it nor try to stop Trump's campaign. The difference is that the propagandist intends to imply that it was for a nefarious purpose that any investigation even happened to begin with, albeit without directly saying so.

According to Attorney General William Barr, “What happened to the president in the 2016 election and throughout the first two years of his administration was abhorrent. It was a grave injustice and it was unprecedented in American history.”

William Barr has a fair point here. Of course it was unprecedented. It was unprecedented that Russia interfered on the level that they were able to. It was unprecedented that the incoming NSA would be found lying to the FBI about what was discussed with the Russian ambassador, the very same day Obama put forth sanctions for Russia's meddling in the election. It was unprecedented that Trump would ask Comey to let Flynn go while implying his job was on the line if he wasn't loyal to Trump. It was unprecedented that the incoming President who was willing to make a deal with Russia to remove sanctions for invading Crimea, would fire the head of the FBI and state publicly that it was because the Russian story was a story made up by the Democrats for losing, and only after Trump had tried to get Rosenstein to lie and say it was his idea to fire Comey.

Turns out the entire Russian investigation was a sham, and Obama administration officials knew it from the get-go. Senior intelligence officials testified before closed-door congressional hearings that there was NO collusion between the Trump campaign and the Russians.

All this means is that Senior intelligence officials had stated that there was no evidence of a conspiracy between Trump and Russia when Trump was campaigning for president. They only knew of Russia trying to help Trump win by hacking the DNC and releasing damaging aspects of the emails that were stolen.

And no, this does not prove that the entire Russian investigation was a sham since we found out that Russia was in fact trying to help Trump win, the various means they used to do so, and that the Trump campaign had met with the Russians to discuss removing sanctions and getting help against Hillary.

KT McFarland: Russia hoax – Obama team's shocking abuse of power. Here's what we know so far
Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Lindsey Graham revealed in an interview with Fox News' "Sunday Morning Futures" that in 2018 Congress investigated Christoper Steele's Russian dossier, and that the FBI lied to lawmakers about it.
Graham: FBI lied to FISA court, lied to Congress about dossier
This is unsurprising. The Russia hoax is crumbling and people can’t run away fast enough. We’ve seen signs from the very beginning that many of the people who promoted the Trump-Russia collusion smear have always known it was a hoax. These signs have been in plain sight. Here is an incomplete list.
As The Russia Hoax Begins To Unravel, The Gaslighting Begins

The looming hole with this propaganda is that the investigation was never predicated on the dossier or the surveillance of Carter Paige, according to the Mueller report and the IG Horowitz report. So all of this is a logical fallacy known in sophistry as a red herring. As such it never addresses the following relevant facts.

Believing that there was no legitimate purpose for any investigations into Trump's ties with Russia and/or Russia's endeavor to help the Trump campaign, is believing a lie.

This is the evidence that this gossip that is spread about others is untrue (I have shown it many times to you):

All the official reports have stated unequivocally that the Russians did in fact interfere on Trump's behalf in a "broad and sweeping way".

Even Trump himself acknowledged the reality of the Russians meeting at Trump Tower to help his campaign against Hillary Clinton.

Roger Stone was found guilty of lying to the FBI by not divulging the contact giving the Trump campaign inside knowledge about WikiLeaks dumps of Russian hacked information.

This is all evidence that shows Russia interfered on behalf of Trump. This necessarily means there was a legitimate purpose being served in investigating the Trump Russia issue which Trump was calling a hoax. Subsequently it was a lie being said about the Democrats and MSM claiming that they made up a fake story about Russia helping Trump and his campaign.

Here is the evidence of Trump saying that lie:

May 9, 2017(NBC News) Trump explaining why he fired Comey:
“When I decided to just do it, I said to myself, I said, you know, this Russia thing with Trump and Russia is a made-up story. It’s an excuse by the Democrats for having lost an election that they should have won. … So everybody was thinking, they should have won the election. This was an excuse for having lost an election.”

Feb. 16, 2017 Trump tweet:
The Democrats had to come up with a story as to why they lost the election, and so badly (306), so they made up a story - RUSSIA. Fake news!

 

[Sistrin]

At this point who cares about what Mueller says about anything. The guy was a puppet, nothing more.

 

[childeye 2]

Something more for your edification, there is much more to come as the senate investigations proceed along with the Durham investigation.
“This was the Clinton campaign’s dossiers. It was the dirt. It was a phony story that they sold not only to the American people, but they sold it and corrupted our FBI, where it appears these dirty cops were more than willing to take this information to present it to the FISA court,” Nunes said. Rep. Nunes on secret source for anti-Trump Steele dossier: 'expanded our investigation' into Brookings Institute

The investigation crossfire hurricane was never predicated on the Steele dossier nor Carter Paige. The Dossier and Paige actually are irrelevant due to the findings of the Mueller report that shows Russia did in fact interfere to try to help Trump win even without establishing that there was any conspiracy between Trump and Russia. This is why the so called hoax has changed in qualification from it's initial beginnings as Russia trying to help Trump win, to Trump was colluding with Russia.

I will say this about Carter Paige. According to what I've seen in interviews with Mr. Paige and what has been reported in the IG Horowitz report, it is possible that Carter Paige was a double agent working for the FBI, and he was sent to infiltrate the Trump campaign to gather any information as to whether or not there was any conspiracy with Russia.

 

[childeye 2]

At this point who cares about what Mueller says about anything. The guy was a puppet, nothing more.

I care. Why? Because I want to reason upon reliable information not propaganda. However I do evaluate propaganda for the sake of examining what the propaganda is trying to hide and thereby convince people of.

 

[disciple Clint]

All this means is that since William Barr has now taken over the DOJ, all cases against Trump or Trump associates have been fixed or are in the process of being fixed. He is of a character that was willing to send Michael Cohen back to prison unless Cohen agreed to stay silent and not say anything about his experiences with Trump in any book or interview. He is not adverse to protecting Trump's political image even if it's against the law.

All this means is that Trump is seeking retribution against those who rightfully investigated Russia's intentions to interfere on Trump's behalf, by perceiving it as a coup. It neglects to mention that Russia's interference was the initial instigator of all the events that followed, including Trump's understandable desire that it would all go away.

See Clint, when people believe a lie they become possessed by the dark spirit that the lie fosters. It therefore should be understood that if Trump did not believe the lie, he would be enabled to say in his innocence that the FBI had a difficult job to do in that situation and that he doesn't take it personally. But because he believes the lie, instead he is possessed of a vindictive spirit which appears as justified by the lie.

All this means is that the FBI and the outgoing administration found themselves in a circumstance where they knew Russia was trying to help Trump win but they didn't know whether Trump was complicit in some degree or even whether he might be an agent working in Russia's interests. So just before Trump took over the Presidency, they buried the information/evidence that had been gathered in crossfire hurricane, by spreading it around a bureaucratic maze. This was a precaution against the worst case scenario that Trump was working with Putin and upon taking power he would make the evidence disappear. And it was also a way to leave a trail of bread crumbs that any legitimate investigative reporter could follow when it was leaked out, so at least the public would know what had been found. This was all explained years ago by Ms. Ellen Farkas. This is why we needed a thorough and complete investigation.

Please note that the link above is stipulating the "collusion" aspect to qualify 'hoax', and thereby making exempt from consideration the fact that the FBI had a legitimate obligation to investigate the Russian interference to help Trump win despite their not knowing why Russia wanted Trump to win and/or whether there was any collusion at the time. In other words, it's propaganda. You can tell because those composing the propaganda inevitably will claim that the investigators from the beginning knew there was no evidence of collusion at the time the investigation began, which should be common sense since they didn't announce it nor try to stop Trump's campaign. The difference is that the propagandist intends to imply that it was for a nefarious purpose that any investigation even happened to begin with, albeit without directly saying so.


William Barr has a fair point here. Of course it was unprecedented. It was unprecedented that Russia interfered on the level that they were able to. It was unprecedented that the incoming NSA would be found lying to the FBI about what was discussed with the Russian ambassador, the very same day Obama put forth sanctions for Russia's meddling in the election. It was unprecedented that Trump would ask Comey to let Flynn go while implying his job was on the line if he wasn't loyal to Trump. It was unprecedented that the incoming President who was willing to make a deal with Russia to remove sanctions for invading Crimea, would fire the head of the FBI and state publicly that it was because the Russian story was a story made up by the Democrats for losing, and only after Trump had tried to get Rosenstein to lie and say it was his idea to fire Comey.

All this means is that Senior intelligence officials had stated that there was no evidence of a conspiracy between Trump and Russia when Trump was campaigning for president. They only knew of Russia trying to help Trump win by hacking the DNC and releasing damaging aspects of the emails that were stolen.

And no, this does not prove that the entire Russian investigation was a sham since we found out that Russia was in fact trying to help Trump win, the various means they used to do so, and that the Trump campaign had met with the Russians to discuss removing sanctions and getting help against Hillary.


The looming hole with this propaganda is that the investigation was never predicated on the dossier or the surveillance of Carter Paige, according to the Mueller report and the IG Horowitz report. So all of this is a logical fallacy known in sophistry as a red herring. As such it never addresses the following relevant facts.

Believing that there was no legitimate purpose for any investigations into Trump's ties with Russia and/or Russia's endeavor to help the Trump campaign, is believing a lie.

This is the evidence that this gossip that is spread about others is untrue (I have shown it many times to you):

All the official reports have stated unequivocally that the Russians did in fact interfere on Trump's behalf in a "broad and sweeping way".

Even Trump himself acknowledged the reality of the Russians meeting at Trump Tower to help his campaign against Hillary Clinton.

Roger Stone was found guilty of lying to the FBI by not divulging the contact giving the Trump campaign inside knowledge about WikiLeaks dumps of Russian hacked information.

This is all evidence that shows Russia interfered on behalf of Trump. This necessarily means there was a legitimate purpose being served in investigating the Trump Russia issue which Trump was calling a hoax. Subsequently it was a lie being said about the Democrats and MSM claiming that they made up a fake story about Russia helping Trump and his campaign.

Here is the evidence of Trump saying that lie:

May 9, 2017(NBC News) Trump explaining why he fired Comey:
“When I decided to just do it, I said to myself, I said, you know, this Russia thing with Trump and Russia is a made-up story. It’s an excuse by the Democrats for having lost an election that they should have won. … So everybody was thinking, they should have won the election. This was an excuse for having lost an election.”

Feb. 16, 2017 Trump tweet:
The Democrats had to come up with a story as to why they lost the election, and so badly (306), so they made up a story - RUSSIA. Fake news!

maybe you should just wait until the facts in the ongoing investigations come out and then you write a book.

 

[disciple Clint]

The investigation crossfire hurricane was never predicated on the Steele dossier nor Carter Paige. The Dossier and Paige actually are irrelevant due to the findings of the Mueller report that shows Russia did in fact interfere to try to help Trump win even without establishing that there was any conspiracy between Trump and Russia. This is why the so called hoax has changed in qualification from it's initial beginnings as Russia trying to help Trump win, to Trump was colluding with Russia.

I will say this about Carter Paige. According to what I've seen in interviews with Mr. Paige and what has been reported in the IG Horowitz report, it is possible that Carter Paige was a double agent working for the FBI, and he was sent to infiltrate the Trump campaign to gather any information as to whether or not there was any conspiracy with Russia.

I cant wait for the conclusions of the two senate investigations and the Durham investigation, I wonder what excuses there will be for those who end up being indicted for their criminal acts.

 

[childeye 2]

maybe you should just wait until the facts in the ongoing investigations come out and then you write a book.

I know this much, whatever facts come out in any investigations won't change the fact that Russia was helping the Trump campaign, and won't make the lie that it was a fake story made up by Democrats and the MSM come true.

If I wrote a book, it would be about psycho-linguistics, showing how the first lie ever thought and spoken was that God is a liar and can't be trusted. And how every lie about others believed or spread, is in some form the same spirit of darkness expressing the same sentiment as that foundational lie.

 

[childeye 2]

I cant wait for the conclusions of the two senate investigations and the Durham investigation, I wonder what excuses there will be for those who end up being indicted for their criminal acts.

Step out of yourself and imagine you're God. How do you think He would feel looking down and seeing someone like yourself wishing an investigation would find some wrongdoing? I mean do you laugh when other people fall? This is the difference between the sentiments of saying someone is full of grace, and someone is disgraceful. You can't love others as yourself and at the same time want to believe bad things about others without incriminating yourself.

 

[Sistrin]

Step out of yourself and imagine you're God. How do you think He would feel looking down and seeing someone like yourself wishing an investigation would find some wrongdoing?

Define Irony.

 

[childeye 2]

Define Irony.

The point being made is that honest introspection should inform the ignorance that leads to hypocrisy. There's nothing wrong with being corrected, or wanting to be corrected from hypocrisy, even though that correction often comes through those who were once incorrect themselves. It shouldn't be taken personally. Here's the summary line that should be pondered by all including yourself as pertains to a negative prejudice: You can't love others as yourself and at the same time want to believe bad things about others without incriminating yourself.

 

[disciple Clint]

Step out of yourself and imagine you're God. How do you think He would feel looking down and seeing someone like yourself wishing an investigation would find some wrongdoing? I mean do you laugh when other people fall? This is the difference between the sentiments of saying someone is full of grace, and someone is disgraceful. You can't love others as yourself and at the same time want to believe bad things about others without incriminating yourself.

first you misconstrue what I have said then you lecture and preach to me about your assumptions. I am looking forward to justice being done, people have made their decision to break the law, I was not part of that, now they need to face justice, that is what keeps our system fair so that the rights of all are protected. I would suggest that no one should be imagining themselves as God or trying to judge for him.

 

[childeye 2]

first you misconstrue what I have said then you lecture and preach to me about your assumptions. I am looking forward to justice being done, people have made their decision to break the law, I was not part of that, now they need to face justice, that is what keeps our system fair so that the rights of all are protected.

In all forthrightness, you said, "I wonder what excuses there will be for those who end up being indicted for their criminal acts", before you even know if there are any criminal acts. This necessarily means you've already concluded there were criminal acts that will be indicted. And above you say that you're "looking forward to justice being done", before even knowing for certain if there was ever an injustice performed. This means you've arrived at these conclusions based on a negative prejudice. Finally, you said these things in the context of, "I cant wait for the conclusions of the two senate investigations and the Durham investigation", which is why I said you look as if you're wishing an investigation would find some wrongdoing.

I would suggest that no one should be imagining themselves as God or trying to judge for him.

Respectfully, when we abide in His Spirit, every time we make a decision of what's right or wrong as pertains to how we treat our fellow man, we are judging what God would have us do.