Jump to content

The Mueller Report. BREAKING NEWS: AG’s Summary Report Released. NO COLLUSION!

Nanker

By Nanker
in Politics, Polls, and Pundits

 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 3.2k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

Deranged Rhino
Deranged Rhino

"The person who learned the most about the Mueller report today was Bob Mueller." Trey Gowdy just now   

Deranged Rhino
Deranged Rhino
Hedge
Hedge

I've been waiting for someone to pot one of these together. I was not disappointed.    

Posted Images

Foxx All Pro

Foxx

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

i've got about the first hour and a half of that hearing under my belt. it is pretty good, i would recommend it to anyone who wants to get a better understanding of what is what with regard (of course, i am not a capital hill lawyer but i digress). it is very striking, at least to me anyways, how the Dems on the committee are still grandstanding even with this hearing that is specifically designed to enlighten them on what the law says. when they query one of the professors and don't get the answer they are looking for, or one that goes against what they want to hear, they try to cut that professor off and either direct the question to one of the other professors, ask a different question or go into a feelz speech that does nothing except further their own distorted belief.

 

it really is something to behold. what it says to me, is that those foolish displays we see in these other hearings that we all might assume are simply partisanship on display, is much more than that. here we have a hearing by them, for them so they don't get their asses handed to them in the courts and yet they are so imbrued with TDS that it prevents them from not being their own worst enemies.

  • Like (+1) 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
row_33 Hall of Famer

row_33

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, njbuff said:

 

The stupidity of the Democrats never ceases to amaze me.

 

Maybe they are being stupid on purpose.

 

With only two parties the loser party knows it will be back on top by inertia within a decade no matter how dumb it is 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Koko78 All Pro

Koko78

Posted
Posted
13 minutes ago, DC Tom said:

 

That just makes too much ***** sense.  They took it not literally literally, but Biden literally.  

 

Or AOC literally, which is only literally literal if she isn't mocked for it. If she is, it retroactively becomes "dry humor" and/or "sarcasm".

Link to comment
Share on other sites
3rdnlng Hall of Famer

3rdnlng

Posted
Posted
40 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

The second tweet is dead on. The redactions will only make this worse for the collusion truthers out there.

Have you seen anywhere any kind of even proof of a slim possibility that the Russians "hacked" Podesta and/or the DNC? Mueller team says it, but how do we know? All bs aside, the how and why of Wikileaks obtaining the emails, etc. goes to the crux of the conspiracy to frame Trump's campaign.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
reddogblitz Hall of Famer

reddogblitz

Posted
Posted
18 minutes ago, 3rdnlng said:

Have you seen anywhere any kind of even proof of a slim possibility that the Russians "hacked" Podesta and/or the DNC? Mueller team says it, but how do we know? All bs aside, the how and why of Wikileaks obtaining the emails, etc. goes to the crux of the conspiracy to frame Trump's campaign.

 

It wasn't hard.  They just sent him a phishing email and he fell for it.

 

Does the DNC hold any responsibility for lax data security for theirs?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
3rdnlng Hall of Famer

3rdnlng

Posted
Posted
10 minutes ago, reddogblitz said:

 

It wasn't hard.  They just sent him a phishing email and he fell for it.

 

Does the DNC hold any responsibility for lax data security for theirs?

Wasn't that supposed hacking done at a speed that can't be accomplished over the internet, but only through a direct connection like a jump drive?

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Deranged Rhino Hall of Famer

Deranged Rhino

Posted
Posted
27 minutes ago, 3rdnlng said:

Have you seen anywhere any kind of even proof of a slim possibility that the Russians "hacked" Podesta and/or the DNC? Mueller team says it, but how do we know? All bs aside, the how and why of Wikileaks obtaining the emails, etc. goes to the crux of the conspiracy to frame Trump's campaign.

 

There is none. Not even the FBI has the evidence, nor the CIA, NSA or the office of the DNI who did the January '17 ICA. No intelligence agency or law enforcement agency was ever allowed to examine the DNC/DCCC servers themselves, instead they relied on CrowdStrike's assessment and forensics. 

 

CrowdStrike is/was the in-house tech counsel for the organization in question which, one would presume, would rule them out as being an objective third party vendor in an investigation such as this -- yet Comey didn't question it. Because CrowdStrike also had FBI contracts (and, as we may soon learn) including inside the DOJ National Security Division and the FBI's Counterintelligence Divisions. The same two divisions where Admiral Rogers and the NSA found unsupervised government contractors were illegally accessing classified data on American citizens. 

 

In fact, the NSA would only put their confidence level at 50% on this "hack" -- compared to the CIA and FBI who ruled it to be certain (without evidence, again), and compared to how this information was initially presented to the American people by the USIC and the MSM: "all 17 intelligence agencies agree there was a hack". Which, of course, was a lie/misinformation designed to shield the coup under the guise of "protecting national security". 

 

(Not that I don't think you know all that stuff, it's always good to lay it out for any new eyes or old eyes who need a refresher) 

:beer:

 

8 minutes ago, reddogblitz said:

 

It wasn't hard.  They just sent him a phishing email and he fell for it.

 

Does the DNC hold any responsibility for lax data security for theirs?

 

The DCCC/DNC were not phished. Podesta was, but only Podesta. 

1 minute ago, 3rdnlng said:

Wasn't that supposed hacking done at a speed that can't be accomplished over the internet, but only through a direct connection like a jump drive?

 

There were three "attacks" -- they're often conflated: 

 

* Podesta was phished first, this happened earlier than the rest. 

* The DNC was "hacked"

* The DCCC was "hacked" 

 

But the hacks, yes, had much evidence against them including the rate of downloads. https://www.thenation.com/article/a-new-report-raises-big-questions-about-last-years-dnc-hack/

  • Thank you (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
reddogblitz Hall of Famer

reddogblitz

Posted
Posted
5 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:
19 minutes ago, reddogblitz said:

 

It wasn't hard.  They just sent him a phishing email and he fell for it.

 

Does the DNC hold any responsibility for lax data security for theirs? 

 

The DCCC/DNC were not phished. Podesta was, but only Podesta. 

 

True.  That's why I said him in the first line and DNC in the second.  Sorry for the confusion :).

10 minutes ago, 3rdnlng said:

Wasn't that supposed hacking done at a speed that can't be accomplished over the internet, but only through a direct connection like a jump drive?

 

The DNC "hack" allegedly.  I wonder what ever happened to the person with the jump drive?

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Foxx All Pro

Foxx

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

Mueller is not going to appear until after the OIG is released at this rate -- then once it's out, I bet he decides not to appear at all. 

 

Timing/schedule/planning of this has been pretty incredible thus far.

if he is a smart man, he would avoid the rabid Dems at all costs. recent history tells us that unless he gives them what they are looking for (and his report suggests he won't) they are going to go all Cujo on him.

  • Like (+1) 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Doc Hall of Famer

Doc

Posted
Posted
On 5/16/2019 at 12:01 PM, Deranged Rhino said:

 

On 5/16/2019 at 2:55 PM, DC Tom said:

That just makes too much ***** sense.  They took it not literally literally, but Biden literally.  

 

More like millenial "literally." 

 

21 hours ago, reddogblitz said:

The DNC "hack" allegedly.  I wonder what ever happened to the person with the jump drive?

 

Botched-mugged.

  • Like (+1) 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
njbuff All Pro

njbuff

Posted
Posted
36 minutes ago, 3rdnlng said:

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2017/05/debbie-wasserman-schultzs-brother-steven-wasserman-accused-burying-seth-rich-case/

 

Plus one of the Awan brothers (I believe Imran) was the last person to be seen with Seth Rich.

 

The Seth Rich story might be the biggest MSM cover up going, because if the truth comes out................. 

 

get your popcorn, this might get good.

  • Like (+1) 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tiberius Hall of Famer

Tiberius

Posted
Posted

A Republican has spoken out about Trump's obvious Obstruction of Justice 

 

I offer these conclusions only after having read Mueller’s redacted report carefully and completely, having read or watched pertinent statements and testimony, and having discussed this matter with my staff, who thoroughly reviewed materials and provided me with further analysis.

— Justin Amash (@justinamash) May 18, 2019

Quote


 

“Contrary to Barr’s portrayal, Mueller’s report reveals that President Trump engaged in specific actions and a pattern of behavior that meet the threshold for impeachment,” Amash said. “In fact, Mueller’s report identifies multiple examples of conduct satisfying all the elements of obstruction of justice, and undoubtedly any person who is not the president of the United States would be indicted based on such evidence.” That judgment is supported by more than 900 former federal prosecutors who have signed onto a letter reaffirming this exact point.

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/05/19/why-justin-amash-stands-alone/?utm_term=.d6545f29cca5

Link to comment
Share on other sites
B-Man Hall of Famer

B-Man

Posted
Posted

Victor Davis Hanson on how Brennan and Clapper are turning on each other.

Note well: none of the leveraged targets of Robert Mueller turned state’s evidence to accuse Donald Trump of “collusion,” the object of the special counsel’s investigation, although to have done so would have mightily helped their cause and given them John Dean iconic status among leftists. In contrast, we have scarcely begun to investigate wrongdoing at the intelligence and justice departments and already the suspects are fingering each other.

 

James Clapper, John Brennan, and James Comey are now all accusing one another of being culpable for inserting the unverified dossier, the font of the effort to destroy Trump, into a presidential intelligence assessment—as if suddenly and mysteriously the prior seeding of the Steele dossier is now seen as a bad thing. And how did the dossier transmogrify from being passed around the Obama Administration as a supposedly top-secret and devastating condemnation of candidate and then president-elect Trump to a rank embarrassment of ridiculous stories and fibs?

 

Given the narratives of the last three years, and the protestations that the dossier was accurate or at least was not proven to be unproven, why are these former officials arguing at all? Did not implanting the dossier into the presidential briefing give it the necessary imprimatur that allowed the serial leaks to the press at least to be passed on to the public and thereby apprise the people of the existential danger that they faced?

 

Why would not they still be vying to take credit for warning President Obama that Donald J. Trump was a likely sexual pervert, with a pathological hatred of Obama, as manifested in Trump’s alleged Moscow debauchery—a reprobate who used his subordinates to steal the election from Hillary Clinton and who still must somehow be stopped at all costs?

 

That entire bought fantasy was the subtext of why Mueller was appointed in the first place. It was the basis for the persistent support to this day among the media and progressives for the now discredited notion of “collusion.”

 

If our noble public servants really believed all that to be true, would not Comey and Brennan instead now be arguing that each, not the other, was bold and smart enough to have included the seminal dossier into a presidential briefing? Comey in public still insists that the dossier is not discredited, though in all his sanctimonious televised sermons, he never has provided any details that support the supposed veracity of Steele’s charges. Why then is Comey not demanding that the FBI take credit for bringing this key piece of intelligence to Obama’s attention rather than fobbing off such an important feat to the rival CIA?

 

Why, for that matter, are Andrew McCabe and James Comey at odds?

 

 

 

Because they know what’s coming.

 
 
 
.
  • Like (+1) 3
  • Thank you (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
B-Man Hall of Famer

B-Man

Posted
Posted

BYRON YORK: Mueller Changed Everything.

From now on, the Trump-Russia affair, the investigation that dominated the first years of Donald Trump’s presidency, will be divided into two parts: before and after the release of the Mueller report. Before the special counsel’s findings were made public last month, the president’s adversaries were on the offensive. Now, they are playing defense.

 

The change is due to one simple fact: Mueller could not establish that there was a conspiracy or coordination between Russia and the Trump campaign to fix the 2016 election. The special counsel’s office interviewed 500 witnesses, issued 2,800 subpoenas, executed nearly 500 search-and-seizure warrants, and obtained nearly 300 records of electronic communications, and still could not establish the one thing that mattered most in the investigation.

 

Without a judgment that a conspiracy — or collusion, in the popular phrase — took place, everything else in the Trump-Russia affair began to shrink in significance. . . .

 

Of course, TV talking heads are still arguing over obstruction. But with the report’s release, the investigation moved from the legal realm to the political realm. And in the political realm, the president has a simple and effective case to make to the 99.6% of Americans who are not lawyers: They say I obstructed an investigation into something that didn’t happen? And they want to impeach me for that?

 

The ground has shifted in the month since the report became public. Before the release, many Democrats adopted a “wait for Mueller” stance, basing their anti-Trump strategy on the hope that Mueller would find the much-anticipated conspiracy.

 

Then Mueller did not deliver. And not only that, Mueller’s report stretched to 448 pages, with long stretches of minutia and arcane legal argument that the public would never read. Democrats searched for a way to convince Americans that the president was still guilty of something serious.

 

They devised a plan to turn the Mueller report into a TV show, accessible to millions of viewers who have not read even a page of the report itself. They would call key witnesses to give dramatic testimony in televised hearings that would build support for possible impeachment.

 

At the same time, they would insist that Attorney General William Barr, who has allowed top lawmakers to see the full Mueller report with the exception of a small amount of grand jury material, was hiding something, and that the hidden material might reveal presidential wrongdoing.

 

So far, the strategy has not worked. The White House, which provided Mueller testimony and documents that might easily have been withheld as privileged, has not been so forthcoming with Congress. We gave the criminal investigator, Mueller, what he needed, the White House said, but we are not obligated to do the same for Congress.

 

 
 
.
  • Like (+1) 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Deranged Rhino Hall of Famer

Deranged Rhino

Posted
Posted
Just now, Koko78 said:

 

This was truly a bizarre stunt. Hilarious that someone in the Democrat leadership forced them to read Volume I, but bizarre.

 

One of the people I've gotten to know pretty well the past three years of digging into this is an analyst for an alphabet agency. They've joked for over a year now that if they were to write up an honest analysis on the behavior of the principles on the coup plotters side of things, they'd have to conclude that some are being paid/coerced into performing political seppuku, and a small group in leadership are being given bonuses based on the level of idiocy they display. :lol: 

 

Some of the counter moves really make no earthly sense.   

 

Strange times.

  • Like (+1) 2
  • Haha (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...