Breaking news! George Stephanopoulos today (6/12/2019) interviewed predisent Dotard and got him to admit to collusion. Replying to the question, "did you order the collusion?" an enraged Dotard screams, "you're God damn right I did!". Speaker Nancy (after meeting with her caucus), announced that impeachment hearings will begin soon.
Following is an excerpt from the interview.
So there you have it. A full admission to the crime of collusion. Surely the impeachment process will be swift, resulting in Dotard being removed before the end of the year. With Pence being sworn in (probably) around January of 2020. Then later defeated by Elizabeth Warren in November (followed by Warren being sworn in as the 46th US president in January of 2021 and Dotard's prosecution and imprisonment for his many crimes. In state court if Pence pardons Dotard).
Oh no, wait... it appears as though I embedded the wrong YouTube. Below is the correct one.
Obviously you can understand my mistake. In this 4 minute and 44 second video, predisent Dotard admits to collusion. At approximately the 1:45 mark, Stephanopoulos reminds ABC viewers of the tRump tower meeting of 6/9/2016. A meeting that was set up after Dotard Junior received an email informing him that the Russian government wanted to set up a collusion meeting. Dotard Junior responded by saying "I love it".
At the 2:30 mark predisent Dotard insists his son did nothing wrong in taking the collusion meeting. Then he goes on to say that, in the future (i.e. the 2020 election) he absolutely would meet with representatives of a foreign government to discuss collusion.
And, when George Stephanopoulos tells Dotard that his own FBI director Chris Wray says that, instead of taking a meeting, Dotard should immediately call the FBI, Dotard says "the FBI director is wrong". But the FBI director is not wrong.
"I'd go maybe to the FBI" Dotard says. Maybe. But probably not. Did Dotard go to the FBI when his idiot son meet with Russians in tRump tower? No. Instead Dotard made up a lie concerning the meeting being about Russian adoptions.
The reason for the lie was because Dotard knew what his son had done (almost certainly with his knowledge) was wrong. And now we have this admission that, hell yes the Orange Turd will - "if" the opportunity arises, definitely collude again. Or engage in "oppo research".
So, if Dotard Junior did nothing illegal (and Chris Wray is wrong), why did Dotard lie? Perhaps it is because Dotard knew the tRump tower collusion meeting violated federal election law (52 U.S. Code § 30121 - Contributions and donations by foreign nationals).
Or, Dotard may have lied because the FBI warned candidate Dotard in 2016 that Russians would try to infiltrate his campaign. And that Dotard should contact them if that happened. But nobody from the Dotard campaign informed the FBI of the Russian government's support for his campaign (as per the email) before or after the tRump tower collusion meeting.
BTW, how is what Dotard said to Stephanopoulos not a request for foreign governments (Russia, the UAE or North Korea, for example) to do "oppo research" on whoever the 2020 Democratic nominee turns out to be? Of course it is just that. Just like when he requested that Russia hack HRC's server to obtain her deleted emails. Even if Dotard lied about that being a "joke". They did it. And they are probably going to do it again. Hack to help Dotard retain the presidency (along with more of what they did last time).
Meanwhile (the extremely flatulent) Attorney General Bill Barr will be investigating the "oranges"... i.e. putting the screws to our intelligence agencies. "You better ignore the 2020 collusion tRump will be engaging in". Because, you know, Dotard got away with colluding to win the presidency. And now he IS president (incumbent running for re-election). Not a lowly private citizen, but the sitting potus with a compliant AG protecting him. So why won't he get away with colluding again?
Time to impeach. But will Speaker Pelosi agree? Watching MSNBC tonight the consensus seems to be no. Will she agree to impeachment eventually? The consensus seems to be yes. But time is running out. And you know that if impeachment doesn't begin until next year that the republicans will cry foul.
Not that they won't if it begins next year. But 2020 is an "election year" and the Democrats (if they wait until then to begin impeachment hearings) will for sure be doing it purely for partisan political reasons. And a lot of the voters will likely believe it (and not just tRump cultists).
lol! The Hillary campaign hired Brits and paid Russians to find Trump dirt. Where's your outrage over "collusion"?
ReplyDeleteNewsWeek: While Steele was indeed a foreign citizen when he compiled [the dossier], a 2018 report from the then-Republican led House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence appeared to clarify that hiring Steele or other non-citizens to do opposition research was within the bounds of existing law.
ReplyDelete"Under current federal election law, foreigners are prohibited from making contributions or donations in connection with any campaign in the United States. However, it is not illegal to contract with a foreign person or foreign entity for services, including conducting opposition research on a U.S. campaign, so long as the service was paid for at the market rate", reads the report. [6/13/19].
Note that the entity saying HRC broke no laws was the then-Republican led House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence. Additionally, Chris Steele did not hack and steal his information. It was members of the Russian IRA (internet research agency) that was charged with crimes, not Chris Steele.
And I'm not aware of HRC paying any Russians for her oppo research. Or passing off internal polling data so Russians could micro-target voters in swing states that tRump needed to win, as Manafort (acting on behalf of the tRump campaign) did.
The right loves their false equivalencies. But they really have choice. As there is no way the immorality or illegalities of tRump and associates could otherwise be defended.
In any case... in your mind should it be "anything goes" when it comes to foreigners and foreign governments trying to influence our elections? According to Lindsey Graham U.S. elections "should be run by, for, and decided by the American people" (but he also defends tRump). You disagree?
Who paid Misfud and the Australian ambassador?
ReplyDeleteWhy were all those Italian intelligence operators fired?
ReplyDeleteWhy wasn't Hunter Biden prosecuted by the Ukrainians? Did the Hillary Campaign also pay the Ukrainians to go after the Trump Campaign in social media?
ReplyDeleteFake news.
Delete...says the fake news king.
DeleteI haven't heard tRump mention Hunter Biden, but I suspect he'd believe ANYTHING negative about him or his father.
DeleteJoe Biden, if elected president, will not appoint Hunter Biden a presidential adviser. Hunter Biden is an adult with his own life. His father isn't responsible for any out of wedlock baby. If there is any truth to the story you link to. Not that I especially care either way.
DeleteIf he's an adult, why does Hunter follow Sleepy Joe around the world like a puppy every time Joe has a meeting overseas?
DeletetRump's kids (litter of puppies) were not with him when he visited the UK? Who knew? BTW, I can't say I give a crap about Hunter Biden (or that I looked at your link) because I don't and I didn't.
DeleteHad Steel's attempts to undermine Trump been successful, who's to say that he had not been grossly "undercompensated" and that the "balance due" was not a campaign contribution?
ReplyDeleteSteel made no attempts to undermine tRump. He alerted the FBI of collusion between the Dotard campaign and a hostile foreign power. He deserves our thanks. And he was paid. There is no renegotiation after terms are reached. You are thinking of criminal activity (where renegotiation can occur if one party threatens to go to to the authorities).
Delete:)
DeletetRump undermined himself. He realized he could not win except for the help Wikileaks/Russia was providing. This is why he said "I love WikiLeaks" and "Russia, if you're listening". i.e. "thanks for the help" and "please give me more help".
Deletebtw, NONE of the videos you linked to have anything to do with anything being discussed here. Nor are they any kind of a response to anything I wrote. I looked (a few days after you posted them). As usual, a total waste of time.
So, did the FBI get an "image" of the data or a "blueprint" of the hardware?
DeleteAdam Schiff couldn't say...
...and the FBI wouldn't because their orders were to exonerate Hillary, not investigate Russian hacking.
DeleteThere were no such "orders". If there had been Comey would have been ordered to not shut then reopen the email investigation (one of the factors that cost Hillary the election). Or are you saying Comey was ordered to sabotage HRC so tRump would win? If so, who ordered him to do that? Putin?
DeleteI don't know why Adam Schiff would know. Might that be part of the underlying evidence that they want but which Barr refuses to turn over? If you're saying Congress should get the unredacted Mueller report and the underlying evidence... then I agree.
Comey followed Loretta Lynches pre & post-Tarmac mtg marching orders.
DeleteThe late-hour ass-covering re-opening of the investigation show just how insecure Comey was... in the absence of ANY FBI forensic search and/or follow-up of Anthony Wiener's laptop. It sat for months on the evidence shelf.
Delete....just like how the FBI handled the DNC servers...
DeleteThe bush administration used RNC servers and deleted a ton more emails than HRC. Yet nothing happened and nobody cared. But HRC does a similar thing - in that she had her own server - though she only deleted personal emails and turned over everything else (in accordance with the rules) - and the FBI investigates and the press focuses on it non-stop, harming her campaign.
DeleteThe facts clearly show the FBI bias is in favor of Republicans and against Democrats. Comey didn't follow "marching orders" (i.e. the rules). Newsweek: "Justice Department veterans from both Democratic and Republican administrations said Comey's actions strayed from agency rules and norms".
News flash... the Deep State plays "favorites". It's a shame that the "press" couldn't burn their Deep State Cloak of Gyges leaker/contacts when Republicans were in charge. It would have destroyed their media power base exercised through the MSM "dance of the thousand cloaks".
DeleteThe "deep state" is your delusion. As is this "cloak" which is actually a ring.
DeleteA ring is making all the pertinent evidence invisible? Is it a ring of journalists? Or a ring of Deep Staters?
DeleteThe ring is fictional, so NO. The ring, btw, is as fictional as these "deep staters" you keep referring to.
DeleteThe market rate, given the Clinton Campaign expenditures, for a US Presidency has got to be tens if not hundreds of billions of dollars.
ReplyDeleteDotard didn't pay hundreds of billions of dollars to Putin. They only offered to repeal sanctions. Which they did (re the Russian oligarch Oleg Deripaska). I bet that was VERY valuable. He also gave back the compounds in NY and Maryland that the Obama administration seized, I believe.
DeleteI don't even know WHO you're suggesting HRC would have paid. You are wrong, regardless. Oppo research (started by a Republican and which was legal) would have received no bonuses (nor would anyone have expected such a bonus). No dollars, let alone "hundreds of billions".
:(
DeleteThe law is written the way it is (oppo research that is a gift from a foreign national is illegal while hiring a foreign national to acquire oppo research isn't) because the "gift" would come with strings attached. The law is written to dissuade foreign influence. That you fail to understand this does not make what the HRC campaign did illegal nor does it make what tRump says he'd do (again) legal.
DeleteSo if Trump had validated the Russian lawyer's parking from the Trump Tower meeting, all her spilled Hillary dirt would have been legal? Who knew?
DeleteNobody knew that because what you say is stupid. You think validated parking is some kind of payment? Interesting that you say there was dirt, however. Dotard Junior keeps saying they got nothing. A lie, I suspect, but it seems everyone believes him. But you say there WAS dirt, huh? Are you just using common sense, or do you have a source?
DeleteEven $1 is contractually legal "consideration".
DeleteThe law says the hired contractor needs to be paid the going market rate. Not to mention the fact that (as per the email that Dotard Junior released) the meeting concerned the Russian GOVERNMENT's support for the Dotard campaign. Christopher Steel acted in his capacity as a private citizen and was paid the market rate for his services pursuant to a negotiated contract (the market rate, which was more than $1).
DeleteHow do we know that Steele got the going rate? And what IS the going rate for feeding the British/Italian Intelligence Services help in setting up and feed ing false information to unsuspecting George Popadopolous so that he might repeat it under interrogation with US CIA Agents posing as aids to Australian diplomats?
DeleteDid they include the $10,000 that they gave to Popadopolous in Greece as an "advance" for future services?
DeleteDid the DNC reimburse the US Intelligence Services for their services in framing Trump aids? Ever hear of the Hatch Act?
DeleteWhy doesn't the US government want the $10,000 back?
DeleteDid Steele pay Joseph Misfud, or was that a direct Campaign contribution to the Clinton Campaign from the Italian Government?
Delete;p
ReplyDeleteThe Left can rag on the President all they want, but until they become willing to enforce the same standards of conduct upon themselves, they can go 'f themselves.
ReplyDeleteThey already follow the law. Dotard was investigated by the FBI for colluding, not Hillary. And you can stuff your "deep state" nonsense. The FBI is largely republican.
DeleteIf they followed the Law, Hillary would have been in prison for 3 years now.
DeleteDotard is facing prison time after he is booted from office.
DeleteI doubt there'll be room for him after all the co-conspirators in the attempted Trump coup are locked up.
DeleteThere was no "coup". People can't "conspire" in a crime that was never planned or executed. I doubt Barr will be able to rail-road anyone into prison with a selective release of information. He'll be able to convince you, obviously. But no Obama Administration officials will EVER go to prison. Much less go on trial. It won't happen. Dotard, on the other hand... he might get away with his crimes. But the chances of prison time for tRump is a lot higher than for Obama Administration officials (near 0). Especially given that a number of trumpers are already behind bars or on their way :)
Delete...so YOU say.
DeleteI do. It's a position I've arrived at after examining the facts. As opposed to conspiracy theory nonsense. But you still think Barack Obama was born in Kenya and was a foreign exchange student when he attended college.
DeleteExamining some facts like 10 shots and 4 beers?
DeleteDats a fac Jak!
You sure have a number of malcontents for your regulars Dervish.
ReplyDeleteIts a shame that there's no proof that the DNC was ever hacked by the RussiaNs.... https://www.scribd.com/document/413428947/Stone-De-123-DOJ-Response-to-MTC-Crowdstrike-Reports
ReplyDeleteMueller states as fact that the DNC servers were hacked in his report. All our intelligence agencies are in agreement that the DNC servers were hacked. The data that WikiLeaks released was passed to them by the Russian hackers responsible for the data theft. "there's no proof" is a trumper delusion.
DeleteThe intelligence agencies and US Government don't even have a copy of the Crowdstrike analysis of the hack. They've got zip for evidence.
DeleteIf the FBI had analysed the computer images themselves, there'd be a report of it and the DOJ wouldn't have to rely on the CrowdStrike Report, right?
DeleteSo where's the FBI analysis?
Oh, that's right, there never was one.
DeletePerkins Coie, the law firm that represented the Hillary Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee (DNC), reportedly helped draft CrowdStrike to aid with the DNC’s allegedly hacked servers.
CrowdStrike is the third-party company ultimately relied upon by the FBI to make its assessment about alleged Russian hacking into the DNC. The DNC reportedly did not allow the FBI to gain access to servers that were suspected of being hacked, instead coming to an arrangement with the federal agency in which CrowdStrike carried out forensics on the servers and shared details with the FBI.
The information about Perkins Coie’s reported role in bringing in CrowdStrike, first documented by the Washington Post last June, is newly relevant as attention in the Russia probe shifts to the law firm that represented the Clinton campaign and the DNC.
And who wrote the CrowdStrike report? The same people who hired Steele to pay Russians for dirt...
SO yes, you labelled your link correctly. It was all FAKE NEWS about server images being analysed by the FBI.
DeleteWhere did your cut-and-paste info come from Minus? You covering up your biased source? FYI, the FBI didn't release a report because they don't want to tip off the Russians as to their methods. They got a copy of everything they needed to do an analysis. Yet (according to you) they didn't do one?
DeleteQuote: CrowdStrike... gave an identical image of some of the servers to the FBI, which experts I've spoken to say would be more useful than giving the FBI a physical server itself. [end quote].
If they didn't do anything with the images wtf would they be useful for?
If Crowdstrike lied then there should be charges brought, yes? Surely this (if true) is a part of the "oranges". Given that the FBI has a copy of the servers, and given that Dotard has tasked his toady Barr with getting to the "oranges", shouldn't those images (if they weren't analyzed previously) be being analyzed right now? And shouldn't they be able to find that the DNC wasn't hacked or that the images were manipulated to look like there was a hack? If what you say is true, that is. There should be leading experts in the field analyzing those images right now, yes?
Of course, since what you propose is all conspiracy theory bullshit, we will never hear that this is the case. Because the FBI already analyzed the images and came to the conclusion that it was Russia. And that isn't going to change. Though it likely won't stop you form believing there was a cover-up (wouldn't it have to be a Barr cover-up??).
Minus: ...you labelled your link correctly...
DeleteMy link was to the truth. I wrote "fake news" in response to your comment. Examining physical servers is NOT how forensic data analysis is done. FULL STOP.
There should be leading experts in the field analyzing those images right now, yes?
DeleteChris Wray hasn't proven himself a Deep Stater cover-up artist? Who knew?
There is no evidence that the FBI examined ANY images. None.
Deletebtw - How long did Johnny Danger's laptop remain unexamined by other than the Southern District? Was it ever examined by HQ?
DeleteDotard appointed Chris Wray. You think you can simply call ANYONE a member of your imaginary "deep state" and that proves your conspiracy theory re "they're all out to get tRump". What paranoia!
Deletebtw, you mean "Carlos Danger". And his laptop was examined. That is why Comey (on orders from Putin?) reopened the email case to sabotage HRC so Dotard would win. Comey said the emails were all duplicates and he reclosed the case (after doing great damage to HRC, as per his orders).
Why the hell do you think the FBI owes you reports on their business? You have top secret clearance, Minus?
Nope, the FBI never examined anything with the dnc Server...
DeleteThe Conservative blog you link to claims "DOJ Admits FBI Never Saw Crowdstrike Report on DNC Russian Hacking Claim" (the title of the post). The post cites material (supposedly from the Roger Stone court case filings) that says CrowdStrike did not want to say what steps were taken to harden DNC servers against future attacks. Which makes sense. I see nothing in the material cited that says the FBI never saw the report or looked at the server images themselves. Although "The Last Refuge" author "Sundance" somehow extrapolates that. A conclusion based on the yellow highlighted text, apparently. Even though that text contains no such admission that I can see.
DeleteBut if the FBI never looked at the server images and if CrowdStrike lied to the FBI (who wanted to be lied to), surely the "oranges" investigation will uncover that, yes? If all the Obama administration people you say are going to end up in prison actually do - that is something they will have to prove, I would think. Which will certainly be problematic, IMO. Given that Russia did hack the DNC. A conclusion I say is going to stand. But we shall see, Minus.
from the DNC's response to the Stone filing:
DeleteGOVERNMENT’S RESPONSE TO DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO COMPEL UNREDACTED CROWDSTRIKE REPORTS
Defendant Roger J. Stone has filed a motion seeking to compel production of certain unredacted reports from the cybersecurity company CrowdStrike. Doc. 103. The government has no reason to believe the redacted information constitutes Brady material and does not possess the information the defendant seeks.
FACTUAL BACKGROUND
By May 2016, the Democratic National Committee (“DNC”) and the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (“DCCC”) became aware that their computer systems had ....
How could Roger Stone have "aided and abetted" a crime that the Government has no proof of ever happening?
DeleteHiding behind the "cloak of Gyges". The Democrats are a one-trick pony.
DeleteWTF??? The proof that the hack happened (which the FBI absolutely does have) has nothing to do with how the DNC hardened it's servers against FUTURE attacks. That's the DNC's business and nobody else has a right to that info. Least of all Stone or his lawyers.
DeleteDOJ stated in their filings that they have no idea what is behind the redactions. It may be hardening, the DOJ speculated, they don't know.
Delete"The government has no reason to believe the redacted information constitutes Brady material and does not possess the information the defendant seeks. "
If you don't tell someone something they won't know what it is. Duh. Stone is in a lot of trouble and grasping at straws to try and get out of it. Maybe he wants to pass that info off to Russia so they can hack the DNC again.
DeleteBTW, given that the RNC was also hacked, why haven't they turned over their servers (or images)? Obviously they are hiding something. But I imagine you don't give a crap about what that might be.
That's a direct quote from the DOJ filing stating that they, the Government, do not have any idea what was redacted in the CrowdStrike Report....zip...not a clue... exculpatory or not.
DeleteSad, huh?
No. And when is the RNC going to turn over their server images and info regarding their server security? You ignored that question. What are they hiding?
DeleteWhy bother? The FBI never independently looks at any actual evidence. They rely on reports from third-party analysts paid and controlled by the party.
DeleteSo you keep saying. I've never seen that confirmed. Why turn over images if they did nothing with them? That is Dotard's main complaint... that the FBI only got images and not the actual server. I've never heard him say (or seen him tweet) that they wouldn't (or didn't) look either way.
DeleteThe oranges investigation should make a point of that... if what you say is true and not complete BS. Yes?
Why turn over images if they did nothing with them?
Delete...Is that a fact that they turned images over, or fake news? Only Gyge's cloakers know for sure.
Doesn't Dotard say they turned over images? Has Dotard fallen for "fake news"? And there are people who know, but they aren't "Gyge's cloakers". Since there are no such people.
DeleteImages? The FBI didn't get no stinkin' images.
DeleteIs that what Barr's oranges report is going to say? That Russia hacked the DNC was a "hoax"? I suppose that the stolen DNC data helped the candidate of Russia's choice was simply a total coincidence? Sure.
Delete:)
DeleteGotta love Jimmy Dore!
Trumpers live in an upside down world. They ALL have overly large and over active imaginations!
ReplyDeletelol!
DeleteNot only has Trump added Tariff revenue to the Treasury... overall prices of Imports are down, too...
U.S. Import prices fell 0.3 percent in May, the first monthly decline since a 1.4-percent drop in December. Import prices advanced 1.8 percent from December to April before the downturn in May. The price index for overall imports decreased 1.5 percent over the past 12 months, matching the drop in January. These were the largest over-the-year declines since the index fell 2.2 percent in August 2016.
"Overall" being key, I suspect. Given that tRump's increased tariffs don't apply to all goods being imported.
DeleteRegarding the items the tRump tariffs do apply to... Importers may be willing to eat a portion of the tariffs and foreign suppliers might lower their prices a bit. But that isn't going to make up for the percentages that tRump is imposing. You think importers are selling product at a loss? Maybe they don't want to pass their increased costs on to the customer because they're all tRump fans who are prepared to lose their shirts so tRump doesn't look bad?
dervish is fixated on looking at Donald Trump's penis.
ReplyDelete