Log In

Your email is not your username

Register

If you were a member of the old Bodybuilding.com forums and would like to reuse your previous username, you can request it below. We use your email only for registration and do not store it. For more information, please see our Privacy Policy.

Confirm your email

A registration code was sent to your email. Enter it here.

Welcome

You have successfully setup your account.

Sign in

Quick Navigation Bottom Misc
Forum » maga brahs trusting the AG's 4 page report is a gigantic hypocrisy
  1. Results 241 to 270 of 320
  2. Page 9 of 11
  3. First
  5. 7
  6. 8
  7. 9
  8. 10
  9. 11
  11. Last

Thread: maga brahs trusting the AG's 4 page report is a gigantic hypocrisy

post 1576951201 03-29-2019, 08:47 PM
-
#241
  1. Noliberals4
  2. Registered User
  1. Noliberals4
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: Aug 2015
  4. Location: United States
  5. Age: 37
  6. Posts: 34,396
  7. Rep Power: 0
Originally Posted By NYPat⏩
And btw, let's not forget that Barr was able to summarize the Mueller report and reach a conclusion in less than 48 hours, but needs weeks to cover it up with redactions.
The fact you keep going and going is a real testament of the human spirit.
Republicans are weak men who pretend to be strong

Democrats are strong men who pretend to be weak
post 1576951661 03-29-2019, 08:53 PM
-
#242
  1. rampagefc77
  2. Registered User
  1. rampagefc77
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: Apr 2006
  4. Age: 39
  5. Posts: 20,625
  6. Rep Power: 153167
Originally Posted By NYPat⏩
And btw, let's not forget that Barr was able to summarize the Mueller report and reach a conclusion in less than 48 hours, but needs weeks to cover it up with redactions.
He had the guy that ran the charade from the start by his side to sign it as well, Rosenstein. Surely Rosenstein wouldn’t let any juicy tidbits slip through the cracks when he was willing to wear a wire against trump, recruit his cabinet to overthrow him, launch an investigation into him, sign fisa warrant extensions to spy on team trump, and fail to show twice to answer any questions under oath about all of that... now would he?
post 1576952151 03-29-2019, 08:59 PM
-
#243
  1. beowulf10
  2. Registered User
  1. beowulf10
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: Jan 2014
  4. Posts: 7,405
  5. Rep Power: 14836
Originally Posted By Noliberals4⏩
It was known since 2013 he was doing a project in Moscow lol.
The problem is not that he was doing a project in Moscow, the problem is that he was doing a project in Moscow while running for President and at the same time saying he wasn't doing a project in Moscow, a project which would have made him hundreds of millions of dollars, a project which required the direction involvement of the Russian government. He lied about it. When he got caught he lied about it again. He then lied about it again. That's a big deal.

Also, there were two separate Moscow tower projects:

https://www.mcclatchydc.com/latest-n...211288014.html

The one that began around 2013 ended before he ran for President, and before the latest one began.

And people wonder why half the country is suspicious of this guy.

And this is the same guy that is unindicted co-conspiracy in SDNY for campaign finance violations. This is the same guy who was involved in cheating on his taxes to the tunes of hundreds of millions of dollars. And he wasn't just cheating the government. He was cheating everyone that paid their taxes fair and square.

So, yeah, I don't think this is the last we've heard of this scandal.

And, yes, I'm suspicious, but that's because Trump is a suspicious guy who has done suspicious and shady things his entire life.
Doc had but three redeeming traits. One was his courage; he was afraid of nothing on Earth. The second was the one commendable principal in his code of life, sterling loyalty to friends. The third was his affection for Wyatt Earp.
post 1576953031 03-29-2019, 09:12 PM
-
#244
  1. NYPat
  2. Registered User
  1. NYPat
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: Dec 2010
  4. Posts: 43,432
  5. Rep Power: 198579
Originally Posted By rampagefc77⏩
He had the guy that ran the charade from the start by his side to sign it as well, Rosenstein. Surely Rosenstein wouldn’t let any juicy tidbits slip through the cracks when he was willing to wear a wire against trump, recruit his cabinet to overthrow him, launch an investigation into him, sign fisa warrant extensions to spy on team trump, and fail to show twice to answer any questions under oath about all of that... now would he?
Weird how Trump had to get Barr in there (after putting his unqualified boy Whitaker in there first bypassing the normal confirmation hearings) to make sure Rosenstein didn't get to make the decision(s)...

And after Barr was carefully put in place, what do you think Rosenstein is supposed to do? Not sign it?

Release the entire report.




And then there's this.. smh



A guy Trump nominated on February 1, 2017.
post 1576953951 03-29-2019, 09:27 PM
-
#245
  1. Jrd86
  2. Registered User
  1. Jrd86
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: Sep 2015
  4. Age: 40
  5. Posts: 6,698
  6. Rep Power: 41280
Originally Posted By NYPat⏩
Weird how Trump had to get Barr in there (after putting his unqualified boy Whitaker in there first bypassing the normal confirmation hearings) to make sure Rosenstein didn't get to make the decision(s)...

And after Barr was carefully put in place, what do you think Rosenstein is supposed to do? Not sign it?
LMAO you are one insufferable dumb jackass. Did you type all that out while wearing your tinfoil hat as well? Rosenstein has zero credibility after the **** he tried to pull by talking about wearing a wire. Page said there was no evidence of collusion 9 months into the investigation back in 2017. You guys HAD NOTHING then and you have nothing now. All those indictments and not a single ****ing one for collusion.

You guys are wasting your time and life on something that is already settled. Go get a girl, eat the cake, take that trip. Go live your ****ing life and stop being a conspiracy-tard.
EMT/Firefighter Crew

Bench 405
Deadlift 700
Sqaut 550
post 1576956751 03-29-2019, 10:14 PM
-
#246
  1. yabbayabba
  1. yabbayabba
  3. Join Date: Jun 2005
  4. Location: Burning down the belt warehouse
  5. Posts: 19,040
  6. Subscribers: 2
  7. Rep Power: 157908
Originally Posted By NYPat⏩
Weird how Trump had to get Barr in there (after putting his unqualified boy Whitaker in there first bypassing the normal confirmation hearings) to make sure Rosenstein didn't get to make the decision(s)...

And after Barr was carefully put in place, what do you think Rosenstein is supposed to do? Not sign it?

Release the entire report.




And then there's this.. smh



A guy Trump nominated on February 1, 2017.
Two years of pinning all your hopes and dreams on "Mueller Time" only to see the two worst words that could ever be uttered..."no collusion". A lesser he/she/xe would have off'ed themselves. Many congrats on your mental fortitude.
post 1576957711 03-29-2019, 10:48 PM
-
#247
  1. wickedman
  2. Registered User
  1. wickedman
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: Jun 2011
  4. Location: California, United States
  5. Posts: 30,900
  6. Rep Power: 79002
Originally Posted By rampagefc77⏩
One sided.

For the trump Jr. meeting, it will say that he met with a Russian agent and there is no evidence that he took information or anything came of it.

It will leave out the Russian lawyer got special permission from lynch to even enter the country, met with fusion gps the day before and after the meeting, the lawyer has said she got her talking points from fusion gps, glenn simpson-- in his now infamous testimony where he committed perjury multiple times-- said he didn't speak Russian and therefore couldn't communicate with her... right... So the company that Clinton hired to dig up dirt on trump met was working with a lawyer that just so happened to send an unsolicited email to the trump team saying they wanted to have Russia help him win? And the other Russian there has said in testimony he personally knew the Clintons? And the interpreter was from Clinton's state department? oh the coincidences keep piling up.

Glenn simpson also worked for oleg deripaska, who wanted magnitsky relief. What likely happened is simpson tried to double dip. Clinton wanted him to set up a trump team member, and simpson thought he could help his other client, deripaska, with magnitsky relief at the same time. Set up a quid pro quo if you will. Magnitsky relief for deripaska, and Clinton dirt in exchange. I'm willing to bet that the trump team sniffed that out right away and said go pound sand.

But if you leave out all of the details, and just say a Russian lawyer tried to penetrate the trump team and offer him dirt, and trump jr. accepted the meeting, it sure sounds sinister, doesn't it?

It would be easy to weave a narrative, wouldn't it?
What an ether this was, I like how he ignored it lmao. On spread sadly.
#FreeCryptoBandit
post 1576963701 03-30-2019, 03:26 AM
-
#248
  1. fitnessislife
  2. Registered User
  1. fitnessislife
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: Aug 2006
  4. Location: Michigan, United States
  5. Age: 37
  6. Posts: 27,183
  7. Rep Power: 223047
Originally Posted By NYPat⏩
Trump's the smartest man in the world, but we can't see his grades.
We couldn’t see Barack Obama’s grades either due to his college records being sealed. Why wouldn’t he release them?
Originally Posted By NYPat
Trump's the richest man in the world, but we can't see his taxes.
Not only did Trump not say he was the richest man in the world (Christ, what is it with your obsession over things Trump never said or did?), tax returns aren’t a prerequisite of being POTUS.

A birth certificate, however, is. Wonder why that was sealed for so long, too.
Originally Posted By NYPat
Trump's the most innocent man in the world, but we can't see the report.
You’re not accepting the results of the report? What are you, some kind of danger to democracy?

No collusion. Deal with it.
"At the core of liberalism is the spoiled child - miserable, as all spoiled children are, unsatisfied,
demanding, ill-disciplined, despotic and useless. Liberalism is a philosophy of sniveling brats."

- PJ O'Rourke
post 1576963731 03-30-2019, 03:29 AM
-
#249
  1. fitnessislife
  2. Registered User
  1. fitnessislife
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: Aug 2006
  4. Location: Michigan, United States
  5. Age: 37
  6. Posts: 27,183
  7. Rep Power: 223047
Originally Posted By EctoCanuck⏩
"At the core of liberalism is the spoiled child - miserable, as all spoiled children are, unsatisfied,
demanding, ill-disciplined, despotic and useless. Liberalism is a philosophy of sniveling brats."

- PJ O'Rourke
post 1576963971 03-30-2019, 03:47 AM
-
#250
  1. SillieBazzillie
  2. Md, Misc, Old-Brah
  1. SillieBazzillie
  2. Md, Misc, Old-Brah
  3. Join Date: Jul 2011
  4. Location: Maryland, United States
  5. Age: 58
  6. Posts: 46,410
  7. Rep Power: 219352
Looking forward to seeing the report.

No criminal collusion. Now let's get back to discussing the hundreds of other ways Trump has proven unfit and a horrible president. I'll start with pathetic GDP growth despite the bigly tax cuts for the rich. I'll continue with almost no real wage growth. I'll continue continue with his adding at least $3T to the deficit in his term.
Early AM workout crew.
Holy crap dude, Satan's huge crew.
post 1576964781 03-30-2019, 04:41 AM
-
#251
  1. Tears
  2. Transitioning
  1. Tears
  2. Transitioning
  3. Join Date: Nov 2009
  4. Posts: 28,988
  5. Rep Power: 128422
^ is this old fart really talking about wage growth for a 2 year old president while having the audacity to bring up the deficit after the last administration?

This is why no one takes regressives, and old senile fools, seriously.
post 1576965191 03-30-2019, 05:05 AM
-
#252
  1. SillieBazzillie
  2. Md, Misc, Old-Brah
  1. SillieBazzillie
  2. Md, Misc, Old-Brah
  3. Join Date: Jul 2011
  4. Location: Maryland, United States
  5. Age: 58
  6. Posts: 46,410
  7. Rep Power: 219352
Originally Posted By Tears⏩
^ is this old fart really talking about wage growth for a 2 year old president while having the audacity to bring up the deficit after the last administration?

This is why no one takes regressives, and old senile fools, seriously.
Would you say that the economy was slightly different when taking office for both men? Trump has declared the economy the last two years the "best ever." Wouldn't the best ever economy produce meaningful real wage growth and enough revenue to reduce the debt? That's what's happened in the past.
Early AM workout crew.
Holy crap dude, Satan's huge crew.
post 1576965471 03-30-2019, 05:22 AM
-
#253
  1. rampagefc77
  2. Registered User
  1. rampagefc77
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: Apr 2006
  4. Age: 39
  5. Posts: 20,625
  6. Rep Power: 153167
Originally Posted By NYPat⏩
Weird how Trump had to get Barr in there (after putting his unqualified boy Whitaker in there first bypassing the normal confirmation hearings) to make sure Rosenstein didn't get to make the decision(s)...

And after Barr was carefully put in place, what do you think Rosenstein is supposed to do? Not sign it?

Release the entire report.




And then there's this.. smh



A guy Trump nominated on February 1, 2017.
https://theconservativetreehouse.com...t/#more-161894

Here’s a good idea of what might be in the report, and the actions of the special counsel and trump are perfectly explained under this lens.

Rosenstein was corrupt and wanted trump out. He was willing to wear a wire and invoke the 25th amendment against him, he signed a fuss warrant against them, he penned the letter stating why comey needed to be fired. He was so heavily convicted he should have recused himself from day one... but instead he launched the investigation to get back into the good graces of the swamp once they found out about his comey letter. Rosenstein then failed to show multiple times to testify for these actions, under the hope the dems would win midterms and he would never be called again. Paul Ryan was part of the swamp and he would never hold Rosenstein in contempt.

Can you make one logical argument that Rosenstein should have continued to be the guy to oversee the investigation? I don’t think there is one. Hence why trump appointed Whitaker, and then Barr was appointed after senate approval.
post 1576965611 03-30-2019, 05:28 AM
-
#254
  1. rampagefc77
  2. Registered User
  1. rampagefc77
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: Apr 2006
  4. Age: 39
  5. Posts: 20,625
  6. Rep Power: 153167
Originally Posted By wickedman⏩
What an ether this was, I like how he ignored it lmao. On spread sadly.
Roaches scurry when the lights come on.
post 1576965801 03-30-2019, 05:36 AM
-
#255
  1. rampagefc77
  2. Registered User
  1. rampagefc77
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: Apr 2006
  4. Age: 39
  5. Posts: 20,625
  6. Rep Power: 153167
Originally Posted By SillieBazzillie⏩
Would you say that the economy was slightly different when taking office for both men? Trump has declared the economy the last two years the "best ever." Wouldn't the best ever economy produce meaningful real wage growth and enough revenue to reduce the debt? That's what's happened in the past.
Obama inherited a recession and had the worst ever recovery. Trump inherited an economy primed for a major crash due to artificially low rates, everyone predicted a plateau or decline in coming years, trump
Promised growth and he delivered despite Obama and others mocking him. Trump proved t be hudini.
post 1576965891 03-30-2019, 05:40 AM
-
#256
  1. SillieBazzillie
  2. Md, Misc, Old-Brah
  1. SillieBazzillie
  2. Md, Misc, Old-Brah
  3. Join Date: Jul 2011
  4. Location: Maryland, United States
  5. Age: 58
  6. Posts: 46,410
  7. Rep Power: 219352
Originally Posted By rampagefc77⏩
Obama inherited a recession and had the worst ever recovery. Trump inherited an economy primed for a major crash due to artificially low rates, everyone predicted a plateau or decline in coming years, trump
Promised growth and he delivered despite Obama and others mocking him. Trump proved t be hudini.
lol wut. Obama inherited the worst recession since the great depression. Trump inherited a stable economy at near full employment, promised to grow the economy 4% annually and eliminate the debt in 8 years. How's it working out so far?
Early AM workout crew.
Holy crap dude, Satan's huge crew.
post 1576968051 03-30-2019, 06:49 AM
-
#257
  1. iifymbro
  2. Registered User
  1. iifymbro
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: Jan 2015
  4. Location: United States
  5. Age: 37
  6. Posts: 21,395
  7. Rep Power: 112562
inb4 lawyercel tries to continue his cope about how all the fisa chit was legit and it's conspiracy theory to think otherwise


**MFC**
**Barbara Palvin is my 10/10 crew**
post 1576985721 03-30-2019, 01:02 PM
-
#258
  1. beowulf10
  2. Registered User
  1. beowulf10
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: Jan 2014
  4. Posts: 7,405
  5. Rep Power: 14836
Originally Posted By iifymbro⏩
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/n...-fierce-debate
The court overseeing Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act didn't hold any hearings on the applications targeting onetime Trump campaign aide Carter Page. But does that matter?

According to President Trump's allies, it is a big deal. A bevy of legal experts, some of whom are anti-Trump, disagree.
there has been fierce backlash to those raising the alarm about a potential scandal because there were no hearings on the Page warrants. Some, including Michael Bromwich, a former inspector general for the Department of Justice and U.S. attorney, stressed that it is "the norm" for there not to be any hearings.

"People who know nothing about law enforcement should not opine on it so glibly. Judges make decisions on warrants — FISA, domestic surveillance, search warrants — on the papers, without a hearing, all the time. That is the norm, not the exception," Bromwich, who is now the attorney to former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, said in a tweet.
Joyce Alene, a law professor who served as a U.S. attorney during the Obama years, called the complaints about a lack of a hearing a "Trumpian talking point designed to take Americans further away from the truth."
Joyce Alene tweeted:

This is not how the FISA process works. Complaints about the lack of a hearing are just another Trumpian talking point designed to take Americans further away from the truth & keep them securely in his camp.
David Kris, a former assistant attorney general for national security, shared a 2013 correspondence between FISC and then-Judiciary Chairman Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., which he said shows that formal hearings are not typical.

"Draft applications are submitted a week in advance, and after review by 'the Court’s legal staff' the judge makes a preliminary determination 'to approve…to impose conditions...[to decide] that additional information is needed...or...that a hearing would be appropriate,'" he said while sharing some excerpts on Twitter.

"'[M]any applications are altered...or...withheld from final submission...often after an indication that a judge would not approve'; the 'approval rate' for criminal wiretap applications 'is higher' than for FISA; & a sample showed 'substantive changes' made in 24.4% of cases," he continued. "'The frequency of hearings varies' with 'the nature and complexity' of a case & the judge, but the Court gets information 'from the government…through telephone conversations [&] meetings' as well as 'hearings,' & 'typically' the interaction is via 'informal communications.'"
Doc had but three redeeming traits. One was his courage; he was afraid of nothing on Earth. The second was the one commendable principal in his code of life, sterling loyalty to friends. The third was his affection for Wyatt Earp.
post 1576986231 03-30-2019, 01:10 PM
-
#259
  1. beowulf10
  2. Registered User
  1. beowulf10
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: Jan 2014
  4. Posts: 7,405
  5. Rep Power: 14836
Originally Posted By wickedman⏩
What an ether this was, I like how he ignored it lmao. On spread sadly.
I don't think the sources he's using are always very logical or honest with their arguments, and it's just too much work to respond to everything.

Let's just take one example. There is a comment above about how the translator at the Trump tower meeting was "from Clinton's State Dept."

That's not an honest statement. He was a contractor, not an employee. The State Dept. needs to translate a lot of material, they need a lot of help to interpret foreign languages.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/anatoli...mp-jr-meeting/

The State Dept. is a huge organization, and it employs 13,885 Foreign Service employees, 10,171 Civil Service employees, 49,734 local employees across the world.

So, with those facts on hand, saying something like the translator was from "Clinton's" State Dept. sounds sinister an evil, but it's not very accurate.

So, every argument conservative treehouse constructs is based on those very thin connections. And that's fine, but it's not fine to overemphasize the importance of facts and connections which aren't important, or to play tricks with language to make something appear to be something it's not.
Doc had but three redeeming traits. One was his courage; he was afraid of nothing on Earth. The second was the one commendable principal in his code of life, sterling loyalty to friends. The third was his affection for Wyatt Earp.
post 1576987171 03-30-2019, 01:28 PM
-
#260
  1. rampagefc77
  2. Registered User
  1. rampagefc77
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: Apr 2006
  4. Age: 39
  5. Posts: 20,625
  6. Rep Power: 153167
Originally Posted By beowulf10⏩
I don't think the sources he's using are always very logical or honest with their arguments, and it's just too much work to respond to everything.

Let's just take one example. There is a comment above about how the translator at the Trump tower meeting was "from Clinton's State Dept."

That's not an honest statement. He was a contractor, not an employee. The State Dept. needs to translate a lot of material, they need a lot of help to interpret foreign languages.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/anatoli...mp-jr-meeting/

The State Dept. is a huge organization, and it employs 13,885 Foreign Service employees, 10,171 Civil Service employees, 49,734 local employees across the world.

So, with those facts on hand, saying something like the translator was from "Clinton's" State Dept. sounds sinister an evil, but it's not very accurate.

So, every argument conservative treehouse constructs is based on those very thin connections. And that's fine, but it's not fine to overemphasize the importance of facts and connections which aren't important, or to play tricks with language to make something appear to be something it's not.
So every single Russian at this now infamous meeting can be directly tied back to Clinton, in one way or another. And the main Russian lawyer met with fusion gps the day before and after the meeting. And it appears Simpson lied under oath about his interactions with the lawyer. And she needed special permission granted from lynch to even enter the US.

That certainly raises a few red flags, does it not? Not to mention her Nigerian prince scheme email that was completely unsolicited and said something like Russia’s ongoing efforts to get trump elected... right.

If you can look at all of that and believe this was a Russian effort to get to team trump and not a set up... so be it. But when you look at all of papadapolos meetings and the attempted sting operation where they arrested him but he didn’t have the money their western intel agent planted on him, it becomes a pattern. What makes that sting operation even more precarious is that it occurred shortly after mueller learned about the strzok Page texts. Do mueller is tipped off that the IG knows the thing is a hoax and severe bias within his team exists, and he immediately tries to sting papa, does an AM raid on manafort, did his raid on Cohen, etc. he knew his days were numbered, so he tried to do anything possible to keep his act going instead of doing the admirable thing— which would be to shut it down and tell the public we had all been played.

And if we do take it at face value and assume the meeting was legit... shouldn’t it be a grave concern that Russia possesses “dirt” on Clinton that shows she is corrupt and could be used as blackmail against her if she had won the election? I feel like everyone glosses over that little detail... it begs for an investigation into what Clinton did that was so dirty, not team trump for being willing to listen to it.
post 1576988751 03-30-2019, 01:50 PM
-
#261
  1. Jrd86
  2. Registered User
  1. Jrd86
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: Sep 2015
  4. Age: 40
  5. Posts: 6,698
  6. Rep Power: 41280
Originally Posted By rampagefc77⏩
So every single Russian at this now infamous meeting can be directly tied back to Clinton, in one way or another. And the main Russian lawyer met with fusion god the day before and after the meeting. And she needed special permission granted from lynch to even enter the US.

That certainly raises a few red flags, does it not? Not to mention her Nigerian prince scheme email that was completely unsolicited and said something like Russia’s ongoing efforts to get trump elected... right.

If you can look at all of that and believe this was a Russian effort to get to team trump and not a set up... so be it. But when you look at all of papadapolos meetings and the attempted sting operation where they arrested him but he didn’t have the money their western intel agent planted on him, it becomes a pattern. What makes that sting operation even more precarious is that it occurred shortly after mueller learned about the strzok Page texts. Do mueller is tipped off that the IG knows the thing is a hoax and severe bias within his team exists, and he immediately tries to sting papa, does an AM raid on manafort, did his raid on Cohen, etc. he knew his days were numbered, so he tried to do anything possible to keep his act going instead of doing the admirable thing— which would be to shut it down and tell the public we had all been played.
Mueller tried to save the deep state, and in doing so, incriminated himself. He knew collusion was dead and a nothing burger. That's why he went on from collusion and investigated obstruction...because there was nothing to collusion. We learned that from strzok. Thats why all the indictments are simple process crimes.

He had to string this investigation on as long as he could. Why? A few reasons. 1) he had to protect compromised people from being investigated by the IG. 2) to give the Democrats even more political capital heading into the mid-terms. And 3) keeping the media narrative alive.

The media narrative was central to point 2. Without media colluding with the deep state, which was colluding with the Democrats, where would the country be right now without Russia-gate? They needed to get Trumps approval rating down so they could potentially set the stage for impeachment proceedings. With 30+ Republicans retiring or not seeking reelection in the house, there was no way they would retain it. Now the Mueller report has left the left scrambling to fill a new narrative. SDNY anyone?!
EMT/Firefighter Crew

Bench 405
Deadlift 700
Sqaut 550
post 1576990251 03-30-2019, 02:21 PM
-
#262
  1. beowulf10
  2. Registered User
  1. beowulf10
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: Jan 2014
  4. Posts: 7,405
  5. Rep Power: 14836
Originally Posted By rampagefc77⏩
So every single Russian at this now infamous meeting can be directly tied back to Clinton, in one way or another.
Well, the translator has no connection to Clinton other than the fact he was a contractor for the State Dept. That's not really a connection in any meaningful sense.

Did the translator work for Clinton directly or something?

Why do you think that because the translator did some contract work for the State Dept. that this necessarily means Clinton and the translator had any sort of meaningful connection?
And she needed special permission granted from lynch to even enter the US.
So, here's another one...why do you think Lynch was personally involved in allowing Veselnitskaya to either the U.S.?

On what basis are you making this statement?
But the use of parole for entry is not particularly unusual, and approval authority lies with the Department of Homeland Security, not the Justice Department. And there is no indication that Ms. Lynch was personally responsible for the decision.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/14/u...lnitskaya.html

More at the article above if you're interesting in reading.

So why do you keep saying Lynch personally approved her entry or somehow was involved in the decision?

Why do you say things like that that aren't accurate?

Don't you care about being accurate?
The Homeland Security Department confirmed Friday that Russian lawyer Natalia Veselnitskaya was granted special entry to the United States on multiple occasions in 2015 and 2016 at the request of the Justice Department.

It also said Veselnitskaya eventually won a nonimmigrant work visa around the time she met President Trump’s eldest son in New York last summer.

Homeland told The Hill that Veselnitskaya was allowed to enter the United States on multiple occasions between September 2015 and February 2016 under a “Significant Public Benefit Parole” document requested by the Justice Department so she could participate in a court case for a client.

The request was done “in concurrence” with the U.S. attorney's office in New York City, which was enforcing a civil asset forfeiture case against Prevezon Holdings, a company owned by Russian businessman Denis Katsyv, whom Veselnitskaya represented as a private attorney in their home country.

Katsyv is one of three Moscow businessmen connected to a lobbying campaign against the Magnitsky Act, a U.S. law punishing Russia for human rights violations. The lobbying campaign was spearheaded in Washington by Russian-American lobbyist Rinat Akhmetshin, who was revealed on Friday to have been in an election-year meeting with Veselnitskaya and Donald Trump Jr.

Homeland’s statement confirmed court testimony and records cited by The Hill on Wednesday that Veselnitskaya was initially turned down for a visa to enter the United States and required the special immigration parole permission as late as January 2016. The court records did not indicate how she entered the country after that time.

A federal prosecutor in the U.S. Attorney's office in Manhattan told the court in a hearing in January 2016 that the “extraordinary circumstances” parole request needed to be approved by Attorney General Loretta Lynch.

“In October the government bypassed 
the normal visa process and gave a type of extraordinary 
permission to enter the country called immigration parole,” Assistant U.S. Attorney Paul Monteleoni was quoted in the court transcript as saying. “That's a discretionary act that the statute allows the attorney general to do in extraordinary circumstances. In this case, we did that so that Mr. Katsyv could testify. And we made the 
further accommodation of allowing his Russian lawyer into the country to assist.”

Lynch issued a statement Thursday that distanced herself from any government decision to let the Russian lawyer enter the country, saying the former attorney general “does not have any personal knowledge of Ms. Veselnitskaya's travel.”

The statement was issued after President Trump suggested Lynch might have been responsible for the Russian lawyer's encounter with his eldest son Donald Jr. that is now under investigation.

Homeland said Veselnitskaya first got her immigration parole letter on Sept. 25, 2015 and it was last used in February 2016.

In June 2016, Homeland said Veselnitskaya was granted a B-status nonimmigrant visa so she could conduct her legal work in the country. Those typically create six months of entry permission, but can be extended as long as a year, according to the DHS’s web site.

It was in June 2016 that Veselnitskaya met at Trump Tower with Trump Jr., presidential son-in-law Jared Kushner and then-campaign chairman Paul Manafort. The Trump players thought the Russian was bringing political dirt on Democrat Hillary Clinton but she instead used the encounter to talk about the Magnitsky Act, according to released emails and interviews the eldest Trump son gave.

Veselnitskaya then traveled to Washington to continue her efforts to lobby against the anti-Russian law, attending a movie screening, a congressional hearing on Russia and a dinner that included at least one Republican congressman, The Hill has reported.

In an interview with NBC News, Veselnitskaya stated her June trip involved lobbying against the Magnitsky Act and that she never had any dirt to share on Clinton.
https://thehill.com/homenews/adminis...russian-lawyer

--

So, a lot of stuff the conservative treehouse says is just not true, or it's some huge exaggeration. And it takes several super long posts to prove you wrong. It's easy to lie. It's not so easy to be as accurate as possible.

That's why I try not to engage.
Doc had but three redeeming traits. One was his courage; he was afraid of nothing on Earth. The second was the one commendable principal in his code of life, sterling loyalty to friends. The third was his affection for Wyatt Earp.
post 1576990531 03-30-2019, 02:27 PM
-
#263
  1. beowulf10
  2. Registered User
  1. beowulf10
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: Jan 2014
  4. Posts: 7,405
  5. Rep Power: 14836
Originally Posted By Jrd86⏩
Mueller tried to save the deep state, and in doing so, incriminated himself. He knew collusion was dead and a nothing burger. That's why he went on from collusion and investigated obstruction...because there was nothing to collusion. We learned that from strzok. Thats why all the indictments are simple process crimes.
The reason Mueller had to include obstruction was because the special counsel was appointed after Trump did something that make it look like he was trying to obstruct justice. Trump fired Comey after Comey refused to stop investigating Flynn.

This is not anything the Deep State did. This is not anything the "fake news" media did. This is not anything Comey did. This is not anything Mueller did.

Trump did it. Trump fired Comey. Trump fired Comey after he asked Comey to end the Flynn investigation.

That's Trump's fault. Not Mueller's fault.

The reason why Trump's associated were charged and plead guilty to perjury...is...wait for it....because they lied.

That's not Mueller's fault. That's on them.

If you don't want to be charged with perjury. Don't lie. It's simple. It's not complicated.
Doc had but three redeeming traits. One was his courage; he was afraid of nothing on Earth. The second was the one commendable principal in his code of life, sterling loyalty to friends. The third was his affection for Wyatt Earp.
post 1576990591 03-30-2019, 02:28 PM
-
#264
  1. 401Delta
  2. ☠ ☠ ☠ ☠ ☠
  1. 401Delta
  2. ☠ ☠ ☠ ☠ ☠
  3. Join Date: May 2017
  4. Posts: 25,167
  5. Rep Power: 417920
Originally Posted By SillieBazzillie⏩
Looking forward to seeing the report.

No criminal collusion. Now let's get back to discussing the hundreds of other ways Trump has proven unfit and a horrible president. I'll start with pathetic GDP growth despite the bigly tax cuts for the rich. I'll continue with almost no real wage growth. I'll continue continue with his adding at least $3T to the deficit in his term.
Trump is head and shoulders above the last president by every metric. Stay salty for six more years.
post 1576990981 03-30-2019, 02:33 PM
-
#265
  1. rampagefc77
  2. Registered User
  1. rampagefc77
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: Apr 2006
  4. Age: 39
  5. Posts: 20,625
  6. Rep Power: 153167
Originally Posted By beowulf10⏩
Well, the translator has no connection to Clinton other than the fact he was a contractor for the State Dept. That's not really a connection in any meaningful sense.

Did the translator work for Clinton directly or something?

Why do you think that because the translator did some contract work for the State Dept. that this necessarily means Clinton and the translator had any sort of meaningful connection?



So, here's another one...why do you think Lynch was personally involved in allowing Veselnitskaya to either the U.S.?

On what basis are you making this statement?



https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/14/u...lnitskaya.html

More at the article above if you're interesting in reading.

So why do you keep saying Lynch personally approved her entry or somehow was involved in the decision?

Why do you say things like that that aren't accurate?

Don't you care about being accurate?



https://thehill.com/homenews/adminis...russian-lawyer

--

So, a lot of stuff the conservative treehouse says is just not true, or it's some huge exaggeration. And it takes several super long posts to prove you wrong. It's easy to lie. It's not so easy to be as accurate as possible.

That's why I try not to engage.
You disregarded 95% of my post, cherry picked a few things that you personally don’t find coincidental while disregarding everything else, and then say it’s all false.

This isn’t a CTH thing, it’s been brought up in msm as well to some degree. Pretty sure Solomon and others have written on it as well.

But my point was proven, it can be easy to create a narrative in either direction using associations, so why should the American public only get one view? Again, mueller had multiple staff kicked off his team for bias and conflicts. Do you expect a fair and balanced report from a team that squeezed people in solitary confinement, AM raids, tried to force people to sign pleas with lies and when confronted, the charges suddenly vanish, etc?
post 1576991391 03-30-2019, 02:40 PM
-
#266
  1. rampagefc77
  2. Registered User
  1. rampagefc77
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: Apr 2006
  4. Age: 39
  5. Posts: 20,625
  6. Rep Power: 153167
Originally Posted By beowulf10⏩
The reason Mueller had to include obstruction was because the special counsel was appointed after Trump did something that make it look like he was trying to obstruct justice. Trump fired Comey after Comey refused to stop investigating Flynn.

This is not anything the Deep State did. This is not anything the "fake news" media did. This is not anything Comey did. This is not anything Mueller did.

Trump did it. Trump fired Comey. Trump fired Comey after he asked Comey to end the Flynn investigation.

That's Trump's fault. Not Mueller's fault.

The reason why Trump's associated were charged and plead guilty to perjury...is...wait for it....because they lied.

That's not Mueller's fault. That's on them.

If you don't want to be charged with perjury. Don't lie. It's simple. It's not complicated.
So trump doesn’t commit any crimes, legally fires the fbi director, the acting director says dats later in testimony that the investigation wasn’t hindered in any way... mind you, coney was completely unfit for the job, had bipartisan support for his firing, was later called insubordinate by the IG, we found out he lied to us when he says a team of FBI agents were working tirelessly around the clock to review the 360k Clinton emails using metadata magic... when the fbi and cia IT depts both said metadata couldn’t be used and texts show only 3 people looked at around 3k emails in a single day led by the now fired strzok... and that is obstruction.

But Clinton by destroy subpoenaed evidence and devices, which DID obstruct the investigation... and her staff can lie about it under oath and then get immunity... and that isn’t obstruction?

I’m just trying to create some sort of common moral ground so that we can be consistent here...
post 1576992081 03-30-2019, 02:56 PM
-
#267
  1. beowulf10
  2. Registered User
  1. beowulf10
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: Jan 2014
  4. Posts: 7,405
  5. Rep Power: 14836
Originally Posted By rampagefc77⏩
You disregarded 95% of my post
It's a lot of work, man. Contrary to popular belief I don't get paid to post.
Cherry picked a few things that you personally don’t find coincidental while disregarding everything else, and then say it’s all false.
Well, before we move on to the other stuff. Talk to me about the two objections I raised about those two specific points you referenced.

When you say that the Russian lawyer needed special permission from Lynch, well, according to what I found, that's just not true.

Why do you write that the Russian lawyer needed special permission from Lynch, implying that Lynch somehow personally approved it, when that's not true?

When you say that the translator was "from Clinton's State Dept.", implying that the translator was an employee of the State Dept. or somehow worked for Clinton, that's not true, he was a contractor, so in my view saying that the translator was "from Clinton's State Dept." is more than a little disingenuous. Why do you think it's okay to write your argument like that?
Doc had but three redeeming traits. One was his courage; he was afraid of nothing on Earth. The second was the one commendable principal in his code of life, sterling loyalty to friends. The third was his affection for Wyatt Earp.
post 1576992931 03-30-2019, 03:11 PM
-
#268
  1. Noliberals4
  2. Registered User
  1. Noliberals4
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: Aug 2015
  4. Location: United States
  5. Age: 37
  6. Posts: 34,396
  7. Rep Power: 0
Originally Posted By beowulf10⏩
The reason Mueller had to include obstruction was because the special counsel was appointed after Trump did something that make it look like he was trying to obstruct justice. Trump fired Comey after Comey refused to stop investigating Flynn.

This is not anything the Deep State did. This is not anything the "fake news" media did. This is not anything Comey did. This is not anything Mueller did.

Trump did it. Trump fired Comey. Trump fired Comey after he asked Comey to end the Flynn investigation.

That's Trump's fault. Not Mueller's fault.

The reason why Trump's associated were charged and plead guilty to perjury...is...wait for it....because they lied.

That's not Mueller's fault. That's on them.

If you don't want to be charged with perjury. Don't lie. It's simple. It's not complicated.
Mueller said Iraq had WMDs under oath. Was that a lie?

The fact of the matter is, this was a witch hunt and Trump needs to pardon Manafort, Stone, Flynn, Gates, etc. etc. ASAP if he wants to expect loyalty.
Republicans are weak men who pretend to be strong

Democrats are strong men who pretend to be weak
post 1576993491 03-30-2019, 03:20 PM
-
#269
  1. rampagefc77
  2. Registered User
  1. rampagefc77
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: Apr 2006
  4. Age: 39
  5. Posts: 20,625
  6. Rep Power: 153167
Originally Posted By beowulf10⏩
It's a lot of work, man. Contrary to popular belief I don't get paid to post.



Well, before we move on to the other stuff. Talk to me about the two objections I raised about those two specific points you referenced.

When you say that the Russian lawyer needed special permission from Lynch, well, according to what I found, that's just not true.

Why do you write that the Russian lawyer needed special permission from Lynch, implying that Lynch somehow personally approved it, when that's not true?

When you say that the translator was "from Clinton's State Dept.", implying that the translator was an employee of the State Dept. or somehow worked for Clinton, that's not true, he was a contractor, so in my view saying that the translator was "from Clinton's State Dept." is more than a little disingenuous. Why do you think it's okay to write your argument like that?
I can answer, but that is shifting the argument entirely. You pick the weakest tidbits in the setting of a much larger post, and want to turn the convo that that. It’s a waste of time and energy to argue minutia.
post 1576999351 03-30-2019, 04:56 PM
-
#270
  1. beowulf10
  2. Registered User
  1. beowulf10
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: Jan 2014
  4. Posts: 7,405
  5. Rep Power: 14836
Originally Posted By Noliberals4⏩
Mueller said Iraq had WMDs under oath. Was that a lie?
He didn't actually say that. The FBI is not responsible for collecting foreign intelligence. That's not their job, therefore, he wouldn't have been in a position to say, one way or the other, if Iraq had WMDs.

Testifying... for the FBI...Mueller said before the Congressional committee:
...Secretary Powell presented evidence last week that Baghdad has failed to disarm its weapons of mass destruction, willfully attempting to evade and deceive the international community.

Our particular concern is that Saddam may supply al-Qaeda with biological, chemical, or radiological material...
https://fas.org/irp/congress/2003_hr/021103mueller.html

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uTDO-kuOGTQ
Doc had but three redeeming traits. One was his courage; he was afraid of nothing on Earth. The second was the one commendable principal in his code of life, sterling loyalty to friends. The third was his affection for Wyatt Earp.
Quick Navigation Top Misc
Bookmarks
Digg.com
Digg
del.icio.us
del.icio.us
Stumbleupon.com
StumbleUpon
Google.com
Google
Facebook.com
Facebook
Posting Permissions
  1. You may not post new threads
  2. You may not post replies
  3. You may not post attachments
  4. You may not edit your posts