Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
whoknew

The Russia Investigation: Mueller to Testify on July 17

Recommended Posts

7 hours ago, [scooter] said:

Ukraine clears both Bidens of any wrongdoing

And another Trump/Rudy conspiracy theory goes up in smoke.

 

edit: props to SiD for beating me to the news.

I think you’ll be hearing about Biden/Ukraine for as long as Biden is a Democratic front runner.  It’s going to be the new Uranium One.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, Dinsy Ejotuz said:

I'm sure it's nothing.

Everyone in this administration has some sort of disorder where they lie constantly for no reason at all. 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, OrtonToOlsen said:

I’m going to use this.

”Your child has a 97% in my class but I’m giving them a ‘C minus’....”

My youngest said one of his teachers hated him. He's a great kid on all fronts so emailed her something like "we know this isn't true but our child thinks you hate him.  He is really struggling in your class for some reason and has always been an A/B student. We though you should know. Please let us know if you have any concerns."

She didn't bother to reply now she isn't getting a $25 Panera card in two weeks. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, OrtonToOlsen said:

I’m going to use this.

”Your child has a 97% in my class but I’m giving them a ‘C minus’....”

Close.  It’s more like....

”Your child has a 97% in my class but I don’t believe they exist.”

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, timschochet said:

This article has a headline that should make me feel better, but hidden in the poll is the stunning fact that nearly one third of all Republicans would like to see Trump’s initial term extended by 2 years to make up for the Russia investigation. 31%. 

Trump leads, Trump followers follow.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, 2Squirrels1Nut said:

My youngest said one of his teachers hated him. He's a great kid on all fronts so emailed her something like "we know this isn't true but our child thinks you hate him.  He is really struggling in your class for some reason and has always been an A/B student. We though you should know. Please let us know if you have any concerns."

She didn't bother to reply now she isn't getting a $25 Panera card in two weeks. 

Next time tell her about the gift card up front.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, Dinsy Ejotuz said:
Quote

Sullivan also ordered that still-redacted portions of the Mueller report that relate to Flynn be given to the court and made public.

 

Well that's one way to do it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, Dinsy Ejotuz said:

U.S. District Judge Emmet G. Sullivan in Washington ordered the government also to provide a public transcript of a November 2017 voice mail involving Flynn. In that sensitive call, President Trump’s attorney left a message for Flynn’s attorney reminding him of the president’s fondness for Flynn at a time when Flynn was considering cooperating with federal investigators.

Quote

Mueller’s team noted in particular that, in November 2017 — after Flynn withdrew from his joint defense agreement with the president — Trump’s “personal counsel,” who was Dowd, left a voice mail for Kelner that urged him to give a “heads up” if they had anything that implicated the president. He added: “Remember what we’ve always said about the President and his feelings toward Flynn.” In a later call, Kelner repeated that he could not share information with Dowd, and Dowd grew indignant and said he believed the president would be very displeased, the report said.

WaPo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is this the big reveal promised in November? Republicans being outed for treasonous acts.

  • Thanks 1
  • Laughing 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

The defendant also provided useful information concerning discussions within the campaign about WikiLeaks? release of emails. WikiLeaks is an important subject of the investigation because a Russian intelligence service used WikiLeaks to release emails the intelligence service stole during the 2016 presidential campaign. On July 22, 2016, WiltiLeaks released emails stolen from the Democratic National Committee. Beginning on October 2016, WikiLeaks released emails stolen from John Podesta, the chairman of Hillary Clinton's 2016 presidential campaign. The defendant relayed to the government statements made in 2016 by senior campaign officials about WikiLeaks to which only a select few people were privy. For example, the defendant recalled conversations with senior campaign officials after the release of the Podesta emails, during which the prospect of reaching out to WikiLeaks was discussed.

Quote

The defendant informed the government of multiple instances, both before and after his guilty plea, where either he or his attorneys received communications from persons connected to the Administration or Congress that could have affected both his willingness to cooperate and the completeness of that cooperation. The defendant even provided a voicemail recording of one such communication. In some of those instances, the SCO was unaware of the outreach until being alerted to it by the defendant.

Flynn sentencing memo.

Multiple instances.

Edited by SaintsInDome2006

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Don't Noonan said:

Getting...

This may help.

Quote

 

Klobuchar: You wrote on page one that a President persuading a person to commit perjury would be obstruction. Is that right?

Barr: Yes. Any person who persuades another.

Klobuchar: Okay. You also said that a President or any person convincing a witness to change testimony would be obstruction. Is that right?

Barr: Yes.

Klobuchar: And on page two, you said that a President deliberately impairing the integrity or availability of evidence would be an obstruction. Is that correct?

Barr: Yes.

Klobuchar: OK. And so what if a President told a witness not to cooperate with an investigation or hinted at a pardon?

Barr: I’d have to now the specifics facts, I’d have to know the specific facts.

Klobuchar: OK. And you wrote on page one that if a President knowingly destroys or alters evidence, that would be obstruction?

Barr: Yes.

And this.

Edited by SaintsInDome2006
  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1
  • Love 1
  • Thinking 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Don't Noonan said:
4 hours ago, SaintsInDome2006 said:

Proof would require a determination by the Attorney General

 Agreed

First, please don’t change people’s words within the quote boxes.

Second, Saints is right about whom Mueller punted to with respect to determining whether the President is criminally guilty of obstruction.

(Note that Mueller didn’t punt on the issue of whether to conclude that Trump is innocent of obstruction. Mueller stated that an examination of Trump’s actions and intent did not support a conclusion that Trump was innocent. He punted only on the question of whether Trump was guilty.)

On the question of whether Trump was criminally guilty of obstruction, Mueller abided by the OLC letter and its implications. The OLC letter says that a sitting President can’t be criminally tried while in office. And since he can’t be tried (and therefore can’t clear his name by being acquitted), it’s unfair for a prosecutor to make a judgment that he’s committed a crime.

But while the President can’t be criminally tried by the DOJ, Mueller explained that he can be impeached by Congress. In fact, Mueller further explained, one of the reasons that the DOJ (which includes both Mueller and Barr) should not make a determination about whether Trump is guilty of a crime is that such a determination might be seen as preempting Congress’s determination about whether Trump committed an impeachable offense. Therefore, Mueller was explicitly not punting to Barr at all, but to Congress.

I expect Mueller to reaffirm this point in clear language if he ever testifies to Congress. (It’s already pretty clear in the report.)

  • Like 11
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


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

https://www.google.com/amp/s/thehill.com/homenews/administration/444126-poll-overwhelming-majority-of-americans-dont-think-trumps-term-should%3famp

This article has a headline that should make me feel better, but hidden in the poll is the stunning fact that nearly one third of all Republicans would like to see Trump’s initial term extended by 2 years to make up for the Russia investigation. 31%. 

 

It kind of amazes me how you always think the best of people.

People suck.

  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, OrtonToOlsen said:

Next time tell her about the gift card up front.

First bad teacher any of my kids have had. Surprising and disappointed. Probably won't sleep with her now. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, SaintsInDome2006 said:

Here’s the Bloomberg report.

- Mueller produced evidence, he stated the DOJ did not have jurisdiction to prosecute. In Ukraine, they investigated and did not find evidence.

Obstruction.  Not collusion.  Collusion narrative was completely BTFO.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, timschochet said:

https://www.google.com/amp/s/thehill.com/homenews/administration/444126-poll-overwhelming-majority-of-americans-dont-think-trumps-term-should%3famp

This article has a headline that should make me feel better, but hidden in the poll is the stunning fact that nearly one third of all Republicans would like to see Trump’s initial term extended by 2 years to make up for the Russia investigation. 31%. 

Personally, I'm relieved that it's only 31%.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, timschochet said:

I was browsing some conservative websites today and it really is like visiting a different, alternative reality. Italy is about to reveal information about Brennan that will send him to jail. The solicitor general (Horowitz) is going to issue a report within days that will reveal that the FISA investigation of Trump was completely political and unwarranted, and several prominent Democrats, including Comey and Brennan, along with corrupt members of the FBI and CIA are going to be arrested. The public will freak out, probably guaranteeing a second term for Trump. 

And this is all going to happen SOON. Like maybe by next week. 

I thought Infowars got deplatformed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, [scooter] said:

If only there was a convenient 3-letter abbreviation which could accurately describe this condition...

QAnon is five letters.

  • Laughing 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, ren hoek said:

Obstruction.  Not collusion.  Collusion narrative was completely BTFO.  

Ha ha, I must've missed that tweet saying "no collusion just obstruction"! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, ren hoek said:

Obstruction.  Not collusion.  Collusion narrative was completely BTFO.  

TSP prepares one well for this. If you take away Barkley's runs over 30 yards, he's just averaging a paltry 3.8 ypc, yaknow. The Biden comp is beyond awful.

Quote

"Yuriy Lutsenko, the current prosecutor general, said that neither Hunter Biden nor Burisma were now the focus of an investigation."

Quote

“Biden was definitely not involved,” Lutsenko said. “We do not have any grounds to think that there was any wrongdoing starting from 2014.”

This is the guy that Giuliani thought had key information for him. Zelensky wouldn't meet with Giuliani.

So Hunter Biden wasn't even involved. He wasn't even a focus of the investigation. Trump and his campaign had several convictions and had over 140 contacts.  

In terms of comps, I guess what I'd like to know is why Giuliani has so many criminals and authoritarians in his private business, and why isn't he under investigation for Fara charges. This reminds me a little bit of Flynn and a little more of Manafort who, like Giuliani, said he was working for "free" when obviously he was expecting to make bank off his connection to Trump while working for the Russians and who knows who else.

Edited by SaintsInDome2006
  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, SaintsInDome2006 said:

TSP prepares one well for this. If you take away Barkley's runs over 30 yards, he's just averaging a paltry 3.8 ypc, yaknow. The Biden comp is beyond awful.

This is the guy that Giuliani thought had key information for him. Zelensky wouldn't meet with Giuliani.

So Hunter Biden wasn't even involved. He wasn't even a focus of the investigation. Trump and his campaign had several convictions and had over 140 contacts.  

In terms of comps, I guess what I'd like to know is why Giuliani has so many criminals and authoritarians in his private business, and why isn't he under investigation for Fara charges. This reminds me a little bit of Flynn and a little more of Manafort who, like Giuliani, said he was working for "free" when obviously he was expecting to make bank off his connection to Trump while working for the Russians and who knows who else.

And if Biden is the nominee how quickly will Trump talk about this at a rally?  “Who knows what Hunter was really doing over there...many people are saying he was doing bad things”.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, sho nuff said:

And if Biden is the nominee how quickly will Trump talk about this at a rally?  “Who knows what Hunter was really doing over there...many people are saying he was doing bad things”.

Publish your own Trump Libs activity book. Republicans will buy loads of them only to find out it is your knock off of Mad Libs. Lol

  • Laughing 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Don't Noonan said:

Agreed

Changing people's posts is not allowed here anymore

Edited by Slapdash
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, SaintsInDome2006 said:

In terms of comps, I guess what I'd like to know is why Giuliani has so many criminals and authoritarians in his private business, and why isn't he under investigation for Fara charges. This reminds me a little bit of Flynn and a little more of Manafort who, like Giuliani, said he was working for "free" when obviously he was expecting to make bank off his connection to Trump while working for the Russians and who knows who else.

If Rudy Giuliani was Russian, he would have been under investigation for FARA charges.  If he was Israeli, Saudi, or Japanese, he wouldn't have.  See how that works?

That's how you get a completely innocent person rotting in jail for a year and a half, while the real foreign lobbies crawling all over Washington skate free.

44 minutes ago, SaintsInDome2006 said:

So Hunter Biden wasn't even involved. He wasn't even a focus of the investigation. Trump and his campaign had several convictions and had over 140 contacts 

 

Quote

The New York Times first published its grand “connect the dots” graphic in January, 2019. After the Mueller report was published, ostensibly blowing up the conspiracy angle, the paper didn’t terminate the project. Instead, it expanded and updated its Manchurian Candidate-style infidel-counting exercise, under a new headline: “Mueller Report Shows Depth of Connections Between Trump Campaign and Russians.” 

The updated version counted 18 card-carrying Trump associates (it was 17 originally) who along with Trump had at least “140 contacts with Russian nationals and Wikileaks, or their intermediaries.”

Many features like this have been quietly updated over time to fit new developments, in what is an interesting and innovative (let’s call it that) new form of factually-agile publishing. The original Times chart contained a line about Michael Cohen: “His partner in the effort was Felix Sater, a Trump business associate with deep contacts in Russia.”

That line is yanked from the current version, presumably because Sater – who is described throughout the Mueller report promising an ability to set up meetings with the likes of Putin – has never been shown to actually have “deep contacts” in Russia.

In fact, according to Mueller, Cohen ultimately bailed on the Trump Tower project precisely because he started to realize Sater was full of it and and became “concerned that Russian officials were not actually involved” in any of the discussions he thought he’d been having.

Absent some indication that its pile of dots has ever been proven to mean anything, the inanity of this as a journalistic exercise is mind-boggling. Here are some of the things the Times still counts as showing a “depth” of connections with Russia:

— Hope Hicks, Trump’s former communications chief, “received an email on behalf of the editor-in-chief of a Russian internet newspaper asking for an interview with Donald Trump.”

— Hicks also “received an email from an official at the Russian embassy” containing Putin’s formal congratulations after the election. The paper made sure to note the email was subject-lined, “Message from Putin.”

— Former Trump aide Michael Caputo was “contacted by a Russian business associate.” This is a reference to Sergei Petrushin, a rock music producer and club owner who’s been Caputo’s longtime partner in a PR firm, Zeppelin Communications; the two have known each other for decades. 

— In the same dot, the Times went on to note Petrushin “said” he wanted to put the campaign in touch with “a Russian who had dirt on Hillary Clinton.” This makes it sound like a sneaky Russian-to-Russian approach of Caputo. Actually, the second “Russian,” Henry Greenberg, is a 17-year FBI informant who bumrushed Petrushin at a Miami studio opening with a phony offer of PR work, then asked to be put in touch with Caputo. This story in particular stinks to hell (much more on it later).

— Trump was “invited by a Russian deputy Prime Minister to attend a forum in St. Petersburg.”

— In a separate dot: “Trump was ‘honored to be asked’ to participate in the forum, but would ‘have to decline,’ according to an email from [Trump’s] personal assistant.” (So the issue here is, what – being “honored” by the invite?).

— Corey Lewandowski was “forwarded an email inviting Trump to attend a forum in St. Petersburg.”

Amazing how fast an email chain about one thing can turn into multiple “dots.” This goes on throughout. The approach of Trump aide George Papadopoulos by a Maltese professor claiming (but never proven) to have Russian ties produces another six or seven dots on the chart. It’s nuts.

https://taibbi.substack.com/p/the-roots-of-passive-collusion

His point, in the post he was responding to, was about how a conspiracy theory 'went up in smoke'.  Trump/Russia collusion, like the Hunter Biden story according to some here, was laid completely to waste.  Mueller threw tons of people in jail for any number of infractions, none of them having to do with collusion or conspiracy with Russia.  So it's deceptive to conflate the fake conspiracy theory with the decision not to prosecute obstruction.  

Edited by ren hoek

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, The Commish said:
22 hours ago, knowledge dropper said:

The tone of this thread has definitely changed after Trump’s “exoneration” and now opening an investigation into the source of this “witch hunt.”

It’s BARR TIME.  

Agreed....and I think many of us appreciate that.  It wasn't long ago that many here wouldn't bother to acknowledge reality by using quotes like you do here.  It's pretty refreshing :thumbup: 

Welp...that didn't last long.....back to SSDD.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The NYT's documenting of "Russian contacts," as if every administration didn't have extensive contact with the Russian state for the past 30 years, is an embarrassment.  Like working with people of Russian descent is automatically suspicious.  The "paper of record" should not be engaged in this sort of xenophobia.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, ren hoek said:

f Rudy Giuliani was Russian, he would have been under investigation for FARA charges.  If he was Israeli, Saudi, or Japanese, he wouldn't have.  See how that works?

That's how you get a completely innocent person rotting in jail for a year and a half, while the real foreign lobbies crawling all over Washington skate free.

Butina’s Not in jail for Fara. I’m surprised you/Tracey don’t know that.

Though I think the argument is why is Giuliani treated the same as others for foreign influencing (regardless of the law and nationality), well yeah exactly. 

Edited by SaintsInDome2006

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Bucky86 said:

He seems worried about Flynn once again.

His tweet about this is hysterical:  "Why didn't anyone warm me about Flynn?"

Um, dummkopf? Obama specifically warned you about him. As did Sally Yates TWICE before you fired her.

  • Like 2
  • Love 1
  • Thinking 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, ren hoek said:

The NYT's documenting of "Russian contacts," as if every administration didn't have extensive contact with the Russian state for the past 30 years, is an embarrassment.  Like working with people of Russian descent is automatically suspicious.  The "paper of record" should not be engaged in this sort of xenophobia.

It seems as though the Trump campaign felt as though they needed to rigorously conceal it.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, ren hoek said:

The NYT's documenting of "Russian contacts," as if every administration didn't have extensive contact with the Russian state for the past 30 years, is an embarrassment.  Like working with people of Russian descent is automatically suspicious.  The "paper of record" should not be engaged in this sort of xenophobia.

Those are campaign contacts listed, with a few exceptions I think.

The concern about anti-Russo prejudice is interesting in terms of your POV though. There's only one source pushing out that message.

  • Like 1
  • Thinking 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Workhorse said:

His tweet about this is hysterical:  "Why didn't anyone warm me about Flynn?"

Um, dummkopf? Obama specifically warned you about him. As did Sally Yates TWICE before you fired her.

And they kept him on for 18 days until the media pressure forced them to fire him...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Slapdash said:
14 hours ago, Don't Noonan said:

Agreed

Changing people's posts is not allowed here anymore

Hasn't been allowed for a long time and he knows it.

The guy deliberately thumbs his nose at the rules and shows no respect to the people trying to run this forum.

  • Like 2
  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, ren hoek said:

The NYT's documenting of "Russian contacts," as if every administration didn't have extensive contact with the Russian state for the past 30 years, is an embarrassment.  Like working with people of Russian descent is automatically suspicious.  The "paper of record" should not be engaged in this sort of xenophobia.

Ummm...when you share polling data with people who then use it to interfere in our election, yeah, it's very suspicious.

You can try to ignore the fact Russia attacked us all you like, but it's still a fact.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, SaintsInDome2006 said:

Butina’s Not in jail for Fara. I’m surprised you/Tracey don’t know that.

Though I think the argument is why is Giuliani treated the same as others for foreign influencing (regardless of the law and nationality), well yeah exactly. 

The charge itself mentions acting as an agent of a foreign government.  Not everyone gets off to legal statutes.  :shrug: 

Either way, it's the flimsiest of cases.  She's no spy or threat to this country.  Really she's a prolific example of the #metoo stuff.  

I think the FARA standard, if it's going to exist at all, should apply to everyone- Howard Dean (MEK), Giuliani (MEK), Bolton (MEK), people who take money from AIPAC.  But there's a lot of laws that don't apply in DC when it counts.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Skoo said:

Ummm...when you share polling data with people who then use it to interfere in our election, yeah, it's very suspicious.

There is no evidence this actually happened.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, ren hoek said:

There is no evidence this actually happened.  

Incorrect.

So your position is that our entire intelligence community simply made the whole thing up?

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, [scooter] said:

Hasn't been allowed for a long time and he knows it.

The guy deliberately thumbs his nose at the rules and shows no respect to the people trying to run this forum.

That is pretty amazing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Skoo said:

Incorrect.

So your position is that our entire intelligence community simply made the whole thing up?

SAD...but the guy that initially came out with "no one on my team had ANY contact with Russia" is the one they believe

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, Skoo said:

Incorrect.

So your position is that our entire intelligence community simply made the whole thing up?

Manafort's lawyers admitted he did this in a court filing :shrug: 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, yak651 said:

SAD...but the guy that initially came out with "no one on my team had ANY contact with Russia" is the one they believe

Its so ridiculous.  All of those lies just excused as if the entire administration tried like hell to keep all of those contacts secret, only to brush them off as no big deal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, Skoo said:

Incorrect.

So your position is that our entire intelligence community simply made the whole thing up?

Not to speak for @ren hoek, but I don't think he accepts the Russians hacked the DNC, so yes his position is the intelligence community made the whole thing up.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, ren hoek said:

The charge itself mentions acting as an agent of a foreign government.  Not everyone gets off to legal statutes.  :shrug: 

Either way, it's the flimsiest of cases.  She's no spy or threat to this country.  Really she's a prolific example of the #metoo stuff.  

I think the FARA standard, if it's going to exist at all, should apply to everyone- Howard Dean (MEK), Giuliani (MEK), Bolton (MEK), people who take money from AIPAC.  But there's a lot of laws that don't apply in DC when it counts.  

It's a different law, which is my point.

I'm in favor of prosecuting this and applying it to all equally, not killing a needed anti-corruption measure because some may be protected or unreachable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Opie said:

Yeah, yeah, yeah...and 97% of all scientists believe in "man-made" climate change...and 4 out of 5 dentists surveyed, recommend Colgate.

Those numbers mean nothing....unless they want what you want.

https://theintercept.com/2019/05/16/coal-industry-climate-change-denial-cloud-peak-energy/ 

"A MAJOR COAL COMPANY WENT BUST. ITS BANKRUPTCY FILING SHOWS THAT IT WAS FUNDING CLIMATE CHANGE DENIALISM."

Quote

The documents in the court docket show that the coal giant gave contributions to leading think tanks that have attacked the link between the burning of fossil fuels and climate change, as well as to several conservative advocacy groups that have attempted to undermine policies intended to shift the economy toward renewable energy.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, ren hoek said:
3 hours ago, Skoo said:

Ummm...when you share polling data with people who then use it to interfere in our election, yeah, it's very suspicious.

There is no evidence this actually happened.

Ren won't read the Mueller report, but if he did, he would actually find support for his contention there.

The Mueller report provides solid evidence that Manafort gave internal polling data from the Trump campaign to a person working with Russian intelligence.

The Mueller report also provides solid evidence that Russian intelligence interfered in the 2016 Presidential election.

But the Mueller report does not provide evidence that the data Manafort gave to Russian intelligence was then used to interfere in the election. We are left only to guess about that because neither Paul Manafort nor Konstantin Kilimnick nor Oleg Deripaska nor Vladimir Putin cooperated with the Mueller investigation, so we don't know exactly what happened to the data or how it was used once it left Manafort's hands.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
  • Thinking 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.