• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

FBI agent: Never was evidence of Russia collusion but Mueller team had 'get Trump' goal

Yes. Investigate him and convict him for lying. He lied to everyone and it is well speculated that he did it on Trumps instruction. All roads lead back to Putin.
"well speculated" ? Is that like "almost factual"? or "assumed true"? or is it simply "good enough for webwork"?
 
Stop leaving out the part about key witnesses lying and refusing to testify. Why was Stone convicted? He admitted it was to protect Trump. Manafort went back on his plea agreement and lied to prosecutors. So with out them, these folks that said they had no direct evidence of Trump colluding were right.

That doesn't mean he wasn't colluding.

Stone was not convicted over lies to protect with regard to Russian collusion, from what I remember it was with regard to contact with Trump campaign officials.

 
Trump colluding with Russia lmfao, what a bunch of nut jobs
 
And yet, allegations from one person...who everyone still pretends is unidentified...was enough to provide the Dems and Trump haters with enough justification to initiate and follow through with impeachment proceedings.

Yes...this is the Dem's idea of equal justice.

Mycroft (Trump's) idea of equal justice: illegally withhold congressionally approved aid to what he called "our greatest geopolitical foe" when the 2012 GOP demanded it of him, then attempt to extort announcement of sham investigations into a political rival's son to gain release of the aid.
 
Not collusion, but conspiracy. you ask for illicit information, they provide it unlawfully.
Its not unlawful until it is used to aid the campaign, turning it in to law enforcement isn't such.
 
It's so adorable that you think I need to continue arguing with you about this. He lied. Cold. Busted. No amount of dumbass Online Conservative spin changes a thing.

Better luck next disingenuous hot take!
Its always better to walk away when you are dead wrong, saves face.
 
Once again, your hypothetical does not apply to what we discuss.

Neither do your assumptions about their future actions----you know, YOUR hypothetical.
 
I did not bring it first. You confuse me with another poster. I just replied to your response which mentioned collusion

FYI, we have emails which show Trump Jr attempt to collude with Russians who offered help on behalf of the Rusian governemnt and I gave you also the results of the GOP controlled Senate which found that Manafort gave sensitive campaign data to Russians associated with the Russian govenrment. And all this happened while Trump was publicly asking the Russians to find Hillary's emails. So again, if the issue is that such actions are not crimes because there is no crime of collusion, it does not change the fact that they are still evidence of collusion.

The allegation was that the the Trump campaign had conspired with Russia.
What Mueller and the Senate found were example of Russia reaching out to the Trump campaign.


We now know that Steele's information to the Clinton campaign came from somebody who is being a suspected being a Russian agent.
What do you think the odds are that this was all just a big coincidence?

Russia targeted both campaigns in 2016.
 
Stop leaving out the part about key witnesses lying and refusing to testify. Why was Stone convicted? He admitted it was to protect Trump. Manafort went back on his plea agreement and lied to prosecutors. So with out them, these folks that said they had no direct evidence of Trump colluding were right.

That doesn't mean he wasn't colluding.

The story of Stone as told by Mueller was this:
After the WIKILEAKS release, the campaign reached out to him to see if he could find out if there would be any future releases and when.
He was charged and convicted about lying about this.

What this means is that even Mueller says there was no conspiracy: it makes no sense to argue the campaign had no knowledge of the release, about future releases, and explaining that it had no way of communicating with either Russia or WIKILEAKS. Kind of hard to conspire when one of the alleged conspirator has no means to communicate with the other conspirator, and doesn't know anything that which the conspiracy was about.

That explains why the Obama folks saw no evidence of conspiracy; why the FBI cleared Flynn and why that FBI agent said said what he said.
 
Good point.
The Mueller probe was supposed to find all the Russians who influenced the election and / or had contact with the Trump campaign.
Apparently completely missed the former (based on political party apparently), and didn't find any of the latter.

Then there's the still open question of prosecutorial and investigative malfeasance by the Mueller team (cabal of Clintonites out to get Trump anyway they could).

Don't even worry about any malfeasance in a criminal way. It will never be proven and simply distracts from the main point.
There was no conspiracy.
 
Neither do your assumptions about their future actions----you know, YOUR hypothetical.

It is not a hypothetical that GTrump asked in public Russia to intervene in the elections and it is not a hypothetcal that his campaign manager shared internal campaign information with Russians. Nor is it a hypothetical that TRump Jr lied in the beginning about the purpose of arranging a meeting with Russians at TRump Tower.
 
The allegation was that the the Trump campaign had conspired with Russia.
What Mueller and the Senate found were example of Russia reaching out to the Trump campaign.


We now know that Steele's information to the Clinton campaign came from somebody who is being a suspected being a Russian agent.
What do you think the odds are that this was all just a big coincidence?

Russia targeted both campaigns in 2016.

So, Manafort's choice to share internal campaign data with Russians (a senate finding by the way) is an effort by Russia to reach Trump...

Your statement makes sense only if you think that Manafort was a Russian agent.
 
Last edited:
It is not a hypothetical that GTrump asked in public Russia to intervene in the elections and it is not a hypothetcal that his campaign manager shared internal campaign information with Russians. Nor is it a hypothetical that TRump Jr lied in the beginning about the purpose of arranging a meeting with Russians at TRump Tower.

False, the Magintsky sanctions were responded to by the Russian government by ending the adoption program. Lifting the sanctions would restart the adoption program.

The speech where no one thinks he was serious, except liberals without a sense of humor.
 
False, the Magintsky sanctions were responded to by the Russian government by ending the adoption program. Lifting the sanctions would restart the adoption program.

The speech where no one thinks he was serious, except liberals without a sense of humor.

No false at all. The arrangement of the meeting did not take place with the knowledge that the topic would be the Magintsky sanctions. It was arranged with the hope that the Russian government would help Trump to beat Hilary by providing information against her as Trump clearly urged them to do publicly. The TRump Jr emails are clear.
 
No false at all. The arrangement of the meeting did not take place with the knowledge that the topic would be the Magintsky sanctions. It was arranged with the hope that the Russian government would help Trump to beat Hilary by providing information against her as Trump clearly urged them to do publicly. The TRump Jr emails are clear.

Which brings us right back to releasing illegal actions publicly and to law enforcement remaining legal. You keep trying to prove something that never happened, its pretty tricky.
 
An FBI agent who played a lead role investigating Michael Flynn told the Justice Department there was never evidence of wrongdoing by the retired general or Russian collusion by President Trump, but the probe was kept open by Special Counsel Robert Mueller because his team had a "get Trump" goal, according to an explosive interview released Friday.


The Obama Administration behaved like some shithole, 3rd World Banana Republic thugs... and ruined the FBI, CIA, DoJ, and IRS for their own narrow, political interests.

And the Goebbels Media was goose-stepping with the Corruptnik Obama Administration and its Treasonous henchmen... every step of the way.

Utter nonsense, merely another "dollop" of "Barr" stool. I cannot imagine being cursed by extreme right manipulation summoning misinformed outrage to the tips of my toe nails. Get "lives", break away from the grip and inform yourselves independently. It's election season, they're scared and pulling out all the stops. Trump knows he's so far under water, he obsessively attacks everything but the polling.

26 Comments
/
September 27, 2020
/
emptywheel

https://www.cjr.org/tow_center/empt...s-more-than-she-tells-but-she-tells-a-lot.php

By Sam Thielman, CJR
SEPTEMBER 24, 2018

This article is the first profile in a series focusing on notable forensic journalists for the Tow Center for Digital Journalism.
IN THE SOMETIMES MURKY WORLD of national security reporters, few people are wrong less often than Marcy Wheeler.

Wheeler’s insights, gleaned from tireless, detailed reading of declassified documents, are unique because they rely on public information, rather than access, and because Wheeler takes great pains to show her work. The longtime blogger’s site Emptywheel focuses on beats like information warfare and surveillance, traditionally the purview of large institutional newsrooms, where accuracy can sometimes mean the difference between a scoop and a prison sentence....
 
Which brings us right back to releasing illegal actions publicly and to law enforcement remaining legal. You keep trying to prove something that never happened, its pretty tricky.

You bring it back and as I said it is unrelated to the topic we discuss. I do not try to prove anything. We are not in court to prove collusion (which does not exist as a crime), nor is it necessary for a political decision to be certain beyond reaonable doubt that a real crime was comitted. A likely criminal should still suffer politically. Feel free to believe that Manafort did not commit a crime by sharing campaign data with the Russians. The fact remains that such action points to some form of collaboration between the campaign MANAGER and a foreign government and this by itself should have political implications and affect the decisions American citizens make in the elections.
 
You bring it back and as I said it is unrelated to the topic we discuss. I do not try to prove anything. We are not in court to prove collusion (which does not exist as a crime), nor is it necessary for a political decision to be certain beyond reaonable doubt that a real crime was comitted. A likely criminal should still suffer politically. Feel free to believe that Manafort did not commit a crime by sharing campaign data with the Russians. The fact remains that such action points to some form of collaboration between the campaign MANAGER and a foreign government and this by itself should have political implications and affect the decisions American citizens make in the elections.

Interesting attempt to evade the meat of the subject. Anyone on this board that knows me has known my stance on Manafort since the very beginning : throw the book at the bastard.
 
Utter nonsense, merely another "dollop" of "Barr" stool. I cannot imagine being cursed by extreme right manipulation summoning misinformed outrage to the tips of my toe nails. Get "lives", break away from the grip and inform yourselves independently. It's election season, they're scared and pulling out all the stops. Trump knows he's so far under water, he obsessively attacks everything but the polling.
Try making a post that isn't begging for clicks to your empty wheel blog.
 
Interesting attempt to evade the meat of the subject. Anyone on this board that knows me has known my stance on Manafort since the very beginning : throw the book at the bastard.

Manafort's sharing of campaign data with the Russians IS part of the subject of collusion.
 
Try making a post that isn't begging for clicks to your empty wheel blog.
Apologies for pooping on your "party". It seems you cannot disagree with the well supported points and analysis in the article by Dr. Wheeler, PhD
that I linked to related to the disinfo of Barr, SA William Barnett or Flynn's pathetic excuse for a criminal defense attorney, Ms. Powell, or you would have made a relevant reply.

It looks like there is nothing more here to discuss. Resolve not to get fooled again. I read and link to Dr. Wheeler's posts because, unlike your sources, she is almost never wrong, and on the rare occasion when it comes to her attention she has posted anything inaccurate, she quickly informs her readers of her corrections.... the opposite of what the sources you rely on do, and it shows.
 
Utter nonsense, merely another "dollop" of "Barr" stool. I cannot imagine being cursed by extreme right manipulation summoning misinformed outrage to the tips of my toe nails. Get "lives", break away from the grip and inform yourselves independently. It's election season, they're scared and pulling out all the stops. Trump knows he's so far under water, he obsessively attacks everything but the polling.

So Barnett was concerned of the fallout he might face in being part of an investigation for which there was no evidence of wrongdoing by the subject.

And the article proceeds to show-- no evidence of wrongdoing by the subject.
 
So, Manafort's choice to share internal campaign data with Russians (a senate finding by the way) is an effort by Russia to reach Trump...

Your statement makes sense only if you think that Manafort was a Russian agent.

Kilmick reached out to Manafort.
As the Senate report indicated, Manafort took the job for his personal financial advantage.
 
You bring it back and as I said it is unrelated to the topic we discuss. I do not try to prove anything. We are not in court to prove collusion (which does not exist as a crime), nor is it necessary for a political decision to be certain beyond reaonable doubt that a real crime was comitted. A likely criminal should still suffer politically. Feel free to believe that Manafort did not commit a crime by sharing campaign data with the Russians. The fact remains that such action points to some form of collaboration between the campaign MANAGER and a foreign government and this by itself should have political implications and affect the decisions American citizens make in the elections.

You are certainly free to hold Mr. Trump politically responsible for the actions of Mr. Manafort.
Even as Trump knew nothing what Manafort was doing; Trump is in charge-- he is responsible for what goes on in his organization.

The problem is that the investigatory and surveillance authority of the USA was used against Trump for political reasons.
And that is something that can't happen again.
 
Back
Top Bottom