Trump's Presidency: Is this the next domino to fall?

5,016 posts in this topic

This is everyone's reminder that everything in the "rebuttal" made by Giuliani and Sekulow are things Trump refused to say under oath...because they're lies.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, El Jeffo said:

Accusing someone else of "never" learning, alt-bicus? Wow.

 

5cb841c91ef5a_4841.jpg.3fc95595b5e0e7563

 

Is there something wrong with being black?   No need for racism here Jeffo.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@AleXXL    

 

Please append "Anonymous sources, which have proven themselves to be notoriously unreliable and politically biased stirred up discord among die-hard Russiagate Truthers, some of whom claimed" to the beginning of the sentence below. 

 

Barr's apparent partisan attempt at indemnifying and protecting Trump, which is not the job I and the rest of the American taxpaying public are paying him to do. 

 

Leaks have not been reliable for the past 3 years.    

 

You never learn. 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Request denied. What's new in your home politics?

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, balticus said:

Leaks have not been reliable for the past 3 years.    

 

All on purpose. It's known in Intel circles as a Barium Meal, to flush out leakers. The Soviets were masters at it.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh dear...

 

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-04-17/nxivm-sex-cult-prosecutors-have-evidence-illegal-clinton-campaign-contributions

 

Quote

And whose "presidential primary campaign" did the group allegedly attempt to buy influence with?

 

None other than Hillary Rodham Clinton, according to former NXIVM publicist-turned-whistleblower Frank Parlato, who told Big League Politics "I was there, and I knew that the contributions were made by more than a dozen NXIVM members to Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign."

 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Quote

 

Attorney General William Barr on Thursday held a news conference ahead of his release of a redacted version of special counsel Robert Mueller’s report on the investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election — and whether President Trump had attempted to interfere in that probe.

Barr began his press conference repeating his public statements about the Mueller report, emphasizing that no evidence was found proving that Trump campaign associates — or any American — conspired with the Russian influence campaign.

For the first time, however, the attorney general noted that the report details "10 episodes” of possible obstruction on the part of the president and discusses potential legal theories for connecting those activities to the elements of an obstruction offense.

Barr said that he and Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein found that the evidence was "not sufficient" for an obstruction offense and that he never spoke to Mueller about his decision not to file criminal charges against the president.

Prior to Thursday’s news conference, the White House counsel was given a copy of the report, but Trump had decided not to invoke executive privilege to redact the document further before its public release, Barr said.

Sounding at times like a defense lawyer for the president, Barr noted that Trump "was frustrated and angered by a sincere belief" that the probe undermined him. Barr also faulted the media for Trump’s impatience, noting the "relentless speculation in the news media about the president's personal culpability."

When asked whether it was proper for the attorney general to be “spinning the report before the public gets a chance to read it,” Barr responded, “No.”

 

 

more here

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And before that -

 

Quote

 

About 90 minutes before Attorney General Bill Barr holds a press conference about a redacted report he won’t release until a couple hours later, President Donald Trump opened the festivities, tweeting that Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s report is “The Greatest Political Hoax of all time!”

In his tweet, Trump called Mueller-and-team “Crooked, Dirty Cops.”

“PRESIDENTIAL HARASSMENT!” Trump hollered all-caps-ily in a follow-up tweet.

A few re-tweets later, Trump urged his Twitter followers to watch the day play out on Fox News Channel.

Trump’s tweets seem to argue against Barr’s 4-page interpretation of Mueller’s 400-page report, released weeks ago, in which Barr claimed Mueller found no collusion and nothing criminal re obstruction. Barr acknowledged Mueller’s report did not exonerate Trump on obstruction.

Trump’s hair-on-fire tweets seem to step on that 4-page nothing-to-see-here spin, and Barr’s defense-lawyerly Thursday game plan to front the evidence and take the sting out of the report that will follow, with his pre-buttal presser set for 9:30 AM ET.

Barr’s DOJ has been consulting with White House for days about Mueller’s report, NYT reported late Wednesday. In response to which, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer opened Thursday morning calling on Mueller to testify before the House and Senate, arguing Barr’s behavior has entirely tainted the process.

 

 

 

 

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Quote

 

Special counsel Robert Mueller wrote in his report on Russian interference in the 2016 presidential campaign that while he lacked sufficient evidence to clear or charge President Trump of possible obstruction of justice, Congress could take up the issue.

“We concluded that Congress has authority to prohibit a president’s corrupt use of his authority in order to protect the integrity of the administration of justice,” Mueller wrote in his report, a redacted version of which was released by the Justice Department Thursday.

Mueller made clear in his report that he did not believe that his investigation cleared the president of much.

“If we had confidence after a thorough investigation of the facts that the President clearly did not commit obstruction of justice, we would so state,” Mueller wrote.

Still, Mueller wrote that Trump was, for the most part, unsuccessful in influencing the outcome of the investigation.

"The President's efforts to influence the investigation were mostly unsuccessful, but that is largely because the persons who surrounded the President declined to carry out orders or accede to his requests."

READ THE FULL REPORT

The release of the report was the first chance for the public to hear directly from the special counsel himself. Days after Mueller submitted his findings to William Barr, the attorney general wrote a four-page summary of them, and portrayed the conclusions in a favorable light for Trump.

While the president concluded Barr’s summary proved his complete and total exoneration, Mueller’s report itself was far less certain.

The special counsel wrote that “collusion is not a specific offense or theory of liability found in the United States Code, nor is it a term of art in federal criminal law.”

After describing the rationale on whether to charge the president with a crime, Mueller laid out a damning series of events detailing the contacts between the Trump campaign, the president’s family members ad former lawyer Michael Cohen and the Russian government.

"In approximately Sept 2015, Cohen obtained approval to negotiate with [Russian real estate company] from candidate Trump... Cohen also discussed the Trump Tower Moscow project with Ivanka... and Donald J. Trump Jr."

 

After Trump's election,"the most senior levels of the Russian govt" encouraged efforts to "make inroads" w/ the new administration. Key player: Kirill Dmitriev, chief of Russian sovereign wealth fund, who met with Eric Prince in Seychelles.

 
 
 
 

Mueller was also resolute on the role the Russian government played in helping elect Trump.

"The Russian government interfered in the 2016 presidential election in sweeping and systematic fashion," the report states.

On the question of obstruction, Trump, Mueller wrote, "engaged in efforts to curtail the Special Counsel's investigation and prevent the disclosure of evidence to it, including through public and private contacts with potential witnesses."

The president realized the appointment of the special counsel spelled trouble for his presidency. According to notes contained in the report, “when Sessions told the President that a Special Counsel had been appointed, the President slumped back in his chair and said, 'Oh my God. This is terrible. This is the end of my Presidency. I'm f**ked.'"

 

 

5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Quote

 

The day after President Trump fired FBI Director James Comey, then-deputy press secretary Sarah Sanders stood at the podium in the White House briefing room and told reporters that the president had had “countless conversations” with members of the FBI who said morale at the bureau was low and they had lost confidence in Comey.

“He’s questioned Director Comey’s reason for needing to stay at the FBI,” Sanders said during the May 10, 2017, briefing. “He had countless conversations with members from within the FBI.”

But in her testimony to federal investigators probing whether Trump obstructed justice, Sanders admitted that she made it up.

According to special counsel Robert Mueller's report on the Trump campaign's contacts with Russia and the president’s interference in the investigation released Thursday, there was “no evidence” suggesting Trump had heard from FBI agents who had lost confidence in Comey before his firing, and “Sanders acknowledged to investigators that her comments were not founded on anything.”

 

 

5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

The president realized the appointment of the special counsel spelled trouble for his presidency. According to notes contained in the report, “when Sessions told the President that a Special Counsel had been appointed, the President slumped back in his chair and said, 'Oh my God. This is terrible. This is the end of my Presidency. I'm f**ked.'"

 

B-b-but the Russian spy is still there!

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh dear...

 

Quote

18 U.S. Code § 2384.Seditious conspiracy

prev | next

If two or more persons in any State or Territory, or in any place subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, conspire to overthrow, put down, or to destroy by force the Government of the United States, or to levy war against them, or to oppose by force the authority thereof, or by force to prevent, hinder, or delay the execution of any law of the United States, or by force to seize, take, or possess any property of the United States contrary to the authority thereof, they shall each be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both.

(June 25, 1948, ch. 645, 62 Stat. 808; July 24, 1956, ch. 678, § 1, 70 Stat. 623; Pub. L. 103–322, title XXXIII, § 330016(1)(N), Sept. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 2148.)

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/2384

 

Quote

18 U.S. Code § 2385.Advocating overthrow of Government

prev | next

Whoever knowingly or willfully advocates, abets, advises, or teaches the duty, necessity, desirability, or propriety of overthrowing or destroying the government of the United States or the government of any State, Territory, District or Possession thereof, or the government of any political subdivision therein, by force or violence, or by the assassination of any officer of any such government; or

Whoever, with intent to cause the overthrow or destruction of any such government, prints, publishes, edits, issues, circulates, sells, distributes, or publicly displays any written or printed matter advocating, advising, or teaching the duty, necessity, desirability, or propriety of overthrowing or destroying any government in the United States by force or violence, or attempts to do so; or

Whoever organizes or helps or attempts to organize any society, group, or assembly of persons who teach, advocate, or encourage the overthrow or destruction of any such government by force or violence; or becomes or is a member of, or affiliates with, any such society, group, or assembly of persons, knowing the purposes thereof—

Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both, and shall be ineligible for employment by the United States or any department oragency thereof, for the five years next following his conviction.

If two or more persons conspire to commit any offense named in this section, each shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both, and shall be ineligible for employment by the United States or any department or agency thereof, for the five years next following his conviction.

As used in this section, the terms “organizes” and “organize”, with respect to any society, group, or assembly of persons, include the recruiting of new members, the forming of new units, and the regrouping or expansion of existing clubs, classes, and other units of such society, group, or assembly of persons.

(June 25, 1948, ch. 645, 62 Stat. 808; July 24, 1956, ch. 678, § 2, 70 Stat. 623; Pub. L. 87–486, June 19, 1962, 76 Stat. 103; Pub. L. 103–322, title XXXIII, § 330016(1)(N), Sept. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 2148.)

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/2385

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now something from the not batshit crazy side of the internet. I do recommend you go and read the entire article.

 

Quote

While the report does not find criminal conspiracy between Trump associates and Russia, it describes a set of contacts that may not involve chargeable criminality but might reasonably be described as “collusion.” In some of these cases, there was a clear “meeting of the minds”—or an effort to establish one—between members of the Trump campaign and agents of the Russian government, but the object of that agreement was not a federal crime. If these episodes fall short of a criminal conspiracy, they nonetheless reveal an alarming reality.

 

The report details numerous contacts during the presidential campaign, some of which are well known—for example, the cases of George Papadopoulos and Carter Page, two low-level recruits to the Trump campaign’s foreign policy team who became the focus of efforts by Russian agents to cultivate a relationship. A higher profile case is that of Trump’s former campaign manager, Paul Manafort. The report describes Manafort’s extensive ties to Russia in detail, ties he cultivated through his prior work for Russian oligarch Oleg Deripaska and the former Russian-backed government in Ukraine. Throughout his time with the Trump campaign—Manafort resigned in August 2016 but continued to advise the Trump campaign through at least November—Manafort maintained consistent contact with his “longtime” associate Konstantin Kilimnik, a Ukrainian who, according to the report, “the FBI assesses to have ties to Russian intelligence.” Kilimnik attempted to have Manafort pass along a peace plan for Ukraine that Manafort acknowledged to be friendly to Russian interests, though the Mueller team was unable to identify evidence that Manafort did so. Manafort in turn instructed his deputy Rick Gates to provide Kilimnik with polling data and other information regarding the Trump campaign’s electoral strategy, which he understood would be passed on to Deripaska and others.

 

A particularly troubling example is the protracted negotiation over the Trump Tower Moscow project, in which President Trump was personally involved. In September 2015, the Trump Organization, acting through attorney Michael Cohen, restarted negotiations over a possible Trump Tower project in Moscow that had fallen through several years prior. Trump himself signed a letter of intent for the project in October 2015, on the same day as the third Republican primary debate. One of Cohen’s interlocutors on the deal, businessman Felix Sater, repeatedly raised the prospect of using the deal to enhance Trump’s electoral prospects. In January 2016, Cohen reached out to Russian officials in an attempt to contact Putin and secure support for the project, which ultimately resulted in an invitation for Cohen to visit Moscow to discuss. Cohen also raised the prospect of Trump himself visiting Russia to discuss the deal, once in late 2015 and again in spring 2016—a possibility that Cohen indicated Trump was open to if it would facilitate the deal. Neither trip ultimately came together. Cohen ultimately pleaded guilty to lying to Congress about how long into 2016 the Trump Tower Moscow project was negotiated and Trump’s personal knowledge of it.

 

There are other examples too. The Mueller report lays out in detail a sustained effort to obtain a set of emails which figures associated with the campaign believed hackers might have obtained from Hillary Clinton’s private server before she deleted them. The trouble is that it appears the emails didn’t exist. It has previously been reported that now-deceased Trump supporter Peter Smith went to extreme lengths to try and track down Clinton’s 30,000 deleted emails. According to today’s report, after candidate Trump stated in July 2016 that he hoped Russia would “find the 30,000 emails,” future National Security Advisor Michael Flynn reached out to multiple people to try and obtain those emails. One of the individuals he reached out to was Peter Smith. Smith later circulated a document that claimed his “Clinton Email Reconnaissance Initiative” was “‘in coordination’ with the Trump Campaign” specifically naming Flynn, Sam Clovis, Steve Bannon and Kellyanne Conway. While the investigation found that Smith communicated with both Flynn and Clovis, it found no evidence that any of the four individuals listed “initiated or directed Smith’s efforts.” So essentially, a bunch of people in Trump’s orbit tried very hard to obtain stolen emails but came up empty. Mueller decided that chasing this particular ghost did not constitute criminal conduct.

 

There are also a series of events for which the special counsel’s office appeared to have seriously considered the possibility of bringing charges but ultimately determined that not all of the elements were met or that the evidence was otherwise insufficient.

 

Most seriously, the special counsel’s office examined possible criminal charges related to the June 9, 2016, Trump Tower meeting in significant depth. The report’s account of the meeting between senior representatives of the Trump campaign and Russian attorney Natalya Veselnitskaya and other Russian government-linked individuals largely tracks with widely reported accounts. The meeting was proposed to Donald Trump Jr. in an email from Robert Goldstone, who said that the “Crown prosecutor of Russia ... offered to provide the Trump Campaign with some official documents and information that would incriminate Hillary and her dealings with Russia” as “part of Russia and its government's support for Mr. Trump.” Trump Jr. responded that “if it’s what you say I love it” and arranged the meeting through a series of emails and telephone calls. Trump Jr., Paul Manafort, and Jared Kushner attended. The meeting lasted approximately 20 minutes and left the campaign officials frustrated because the Russians were not able to offer any concrete information and instead talked about adoptions and the Russian Magnitsky Act. The report indicates that Mueller could not establish that Donald Trump knew in advance about the meeting, and Trump’s submitted written answers say he has no recollection of learning of the meeting at the time.

 

Mueller ultimately concluded there was not sufficient evidence to pursue campaign finance charges against campaign officials regarding the Trump Tower meeting. He cites the government’s “substantial burden of proof on issues of intent,” raising questions about whether the participants knew the activity was illegal at the time as is required by the statute, and then explores whether Veselnitskaya’s offer of “dirt” on Hillary Clinton qualifies as a “contribution or donation of money or other thing of value” under campaign finance laws. While the report recognizes that opposition research could be considered a “thing of value,” no judicial decision has considered this issue. Rather than tackle that issue himself, Mueller declined to pursue criminal campaign finance charges.

 

At least one other section of the report clearly alludes to potential criminal conduct, but it is so redacted (presumably because of the ongoing Roger Stone indictment) that it is hard to say why the activities did not rise to the level of criminality. The report spends more than 20 pages detailing how the Russian intelligence services hacked the Clinton campaign, the Democratic National Committee (DNC) and the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, and then coordinated with WikiLeaks to release the hacked information in ways that would hurt Clinton and help Trump. The GRU had initially set up its own websites, including DCLeaks and Guccifer 2.0, but later transferred many of the documents they stole from the DNC and campaign Chairman John Podesta to WikiLeaks “n order to expand its interference” in the 2016 election. Julian Assange and WikiLeaks implied publicly that Seth Rich, a former DNC staff member who was killed in July 2016, was the source of the material in order to throw suspicion away from the GRU as the source of the material. But the involvement of the Trump campaign in the dissemination of the stolen material is largely redacted. It’s clear that Manafort, Gates, Jerome Corsi, Ted Malloch, and at least one other person—presumably Roger Stone, whose name does not appear in the redacted version of the report—were involved in some way. 

 

3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How we know Barr is just a partisan hack...of course, besides the fact that we already know he lied about the Iran-Contra affair.

 

Quote

Barr's letter  read: “[T]he investigation did not establish that members of the Trump Campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities.”

The bracket suggested, particularly to those who wondered whether Barr was spinning the soon-to-be-released report favorably for his boss, that it was not a full sentence and was preceded by something.
...
 

now, with the Mueller report released, we finally know what came before that half-sentence — and it turns out it was not flattering to President Trump.

 

Here’s the full version of that sentence:

 

“Although the investigation established that the Russian government perceived it would benefit from a Trump presidency and worked to secure that outcome, and that the Campaign expected it would benefit electorally from information stolen and released through Russian efforts, the investigation did not establish that members of the Trump Campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities.”

 

3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fourteen different criminal activities, but we only know two of them...

 

Quote

The most striking of these may be a list, almost completely redacted, of 14 instances of “potential criminal activity” the special counsel says it uncovered and handed over to other offices within the DOJ and in particular to the FBI, because it determined that the crimes involved were “outside the scope” of the special counsel’s mandate.
 

Out of the 14 potential crimes for which Mueller uncovered evidence, only two have so far been made public. That means there are still 12 investigations that arose from the special counsel’s probe about which the public knows nothing.
 

Here’s how the special counsel describes them:
 

During the course of the investigation, the Office periodically identified evidence of potential criminal activity that was outside the scope of the Special Counsel’s jurisdiction established by the Acting Attorney General. After consultation with the Office of the Deputy Attorney General, the Office referred that evidence to appropriate law enforcement authorities, principally other components of the Department of Justice and the FBI. Those referrals, listed alphabetically by subject, are summarized below.

 

It’s a tantalizing mystery, made all the more so by the fact that the two probes which have so far been made public have targeted two of the most high-profile individuals to be caught up in the special counsel’s web: Trump’s longtime personal fixer and attorney, Michael Cohen, and the former White House counsel to President Barack Obama, Greg Craig.

The discovery of Cohen’s potential crimes is the second item on the 14-item list. “During the course of the investigation, the Special Counsel’s Office uncovered evidence of potential wire fraud and [Federal Election Campaign Act] violations pertaining to Michael Cohen. That evidence was referred to the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York and the FBI’s New York Field Office,” wrote the special counsel.

 

Craig’s case is No. 5 on the list. “During the course of the [Foreign Agents Registration Act] investigation of Paul Manafort and Rick Gates, the Special Counsel’s Office uncovered evidence of potential FARA violations pertaining to Gregory Craig, Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP (Skadden), and their work on behalf of the government of Ukraine,” the report said.

 

3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@AlexTrJones -  As Barr mentioned yesterday, he has no objections to Mueller testifying before Congress.     

 

Congress has a recess until April 29.

 

Hope you and El Jeffo are not on suicide watch and can get out during the holiday weekend.  

 

 

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now