What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

The Russia Investigation: Trump Pardons Flynn (5 Viewers)

Here is Durham’s story:

The Trump-Russia probe was launched in July 2016 when a former spy with no prior FBI contacts sent the FBI allegations about a Trump adviser. The ex-spy was being paid by the Clinton campaign.

That’s it. End of Story. Nice and simple, so assemble your talking points.

Despite all this:

The FBI started investigating the Trump campaign in 2015.

Steele had contacts in the FBI going back years.

Republicans first paid Fusion GPS.

The Russians most likely have Kompromat on Trump.

Candidate Trump had a signed memorandum of understanding to build Trump Tower Moscow, and simultaneously kept emphatically repeating over and over that he had no deals “whatsoever” in Russia.

The first guy he hires for his National Security Team is oozing with sketchy Russian connections, and was already under investigation by the FBI. (Page)

Papadoupolus? Yep, National Security team.

Manafort will work for free… while under contract with a Kremlin guy… whom he gave internal polling data.

Flynn. Fired. Found guilty.

Eric Prince, Steve Bannon, my gosh, the list goes on forever with all the sketchy contacts.

The June 10 meeting with the Kremlin lawyer.

Giuliani, Lev Parnas, Igor Fruman, COME ON!

Over and over again, this Russian connection, that Russian connection,

Is It really so hard to believe that a dossier of raw intelligence, which the author admits to be “about 70% accurate”, can be used as part of the evidence to establish probable cause in one FISA?

The only thing that I know of that has been proven wrong about the dossier is the “Michael Cohen in Prague” thing.

And, as is the nature of raw intelligence, much of it can never be corroborated.
Bump.

Durhams story is impotent.

 
Just wanted to bump a few things that are getting ready to come up again.

The bottom line is, Trump and his deceitful and seditious allies caused all this.

 
Trump Takes Another Hit After Obama Officials Cleared of Flynn Unmasking
Former President Donald Trump's efforts to dismiss the Democrats' claims of Russian collusion were dealt a second blow this week after a newly disclosed report revealed that the Justice Department cleared members of the Obama administration over the unmasking of Michael Flynn.

On Wednesday, Buzzfeed News obtained and published the previously classified document from then-U.S. Attorney John Bash's 2020 investigation into the practice of unmasking, one of several probes ordered by Trump's attorney general, William Barr, to undermine investigations into Trump's ties to Russia.

The full report revealed that Bash not only concluded the review without criminal charges, but he had also determined that "no unmasking requests made before Election Day that sought the identity of an apparent associate of the Trump campaign"—a conclusion that shattered Trump's allegations.

Throughout his presidency, Trump and other Republicans repeatedly accused senior Obama officials of deliberately targeting his associates—specifically Flynn, who briefly served as national security adviser to Trump—by using their positions to request their names be revealed on certain intelligence documents.

While Bash's decision not to prosecute anyone was reported back in 2020, the full 52-page report revealed just how resoundingly the details of the investigation rejected Trump's claims.

"I have not found evidence that senior U.S. officials unmasked the identities of U.S. persons contained in intelligence reports for political purposes or other inappropriate reasons during the 2016 election period or the ensuing transition period," Bash wrote in his report.

Examining "whether any senior officials had obtained General Flynn's identity in connection with those communications through an unmasking request made during the transition period," Bash concluded: "The answer is no."

Bash found that while the FBI shared transcripts of Flynn's calls with Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak outside the Bureau without masking Flynn's name, "Nothing about the content suggests that officials were seeking derogatory information about General Flynn or were otherwise inappropriately targeting him."

Although Flynn pleaded guilty to a felony count of "willingly and knowingly" making false statements denying his discussion of sanctions with Kislyak in 2017, Barr's DOJ dismissed the case against him and Flynn was later pardoned by Trump before he left office.

 
Appeals court says DOJ improperly redacted memo to AG Barr on Trump obstruction

In a scathing 41-page decision, she accused Barr and agency lawyers of creating the misleading impression that the former attorney general had been much more open-minded when weighing whether to recommend obstruction charges against Trump than the actual memo shows.

“The agency’s redactions and incomplete explanations obfuscate the true purpose of the memorandum, and the excised portions belie the notion that it fell to the Attorney General to make a prosecution decision or that any such decision was on the table at any time,” she wrote.

In his letter to Congress, Barr said that he had determined after consulting with the OLC that the facts of the investigation did not support bringing obstruction of justice charges against the president, regardless of what the office had previously said about whether such a prosecution would be constitutional.


But Jackson, in her decision, said it appeared that it was a foregone conclusion among DOJ leadership that there would be no prosecution against Trump.
In affirming her decision on Friday, the D.C. Circuit emphasized the narrowness of its ruling.

“Nothing in our decision should be read to suggest that deliberative documents related to actual charging decisions fall outside the deliberative-process privilege,” the panel wrote.

“We hold only that, in the unique circumstances of this case, in which a charging decision concededly was off the table and the agency failed to invoke an alternative rationale that might well have justified its invocation of the privilege, the district court did not err in granting judgment against the agency.”
 
So there really was a hoax?
As always with DJT and his minions, the very thing they accuse others of doing is the exact thing they do or are actually doing. Also, you'd have to be living in Blinder Land if you didn't recognize at the time that Barr's inconsistent summary of Muellers investigative report was complete and total bunk.
 

The question shouldn’t be if Russia interfered in our election but rather why Putin wanted a particular candidate to win.
The moment for me when Trump should have been removed from office and investigated was his meeting with Putin when Trump wouldn't allow any other Americans to attend. I guess there are millions of Americans who are ignorant of the history of Russia or else this sentiment should have been almost unanimous amongst we citizens.
 
The moment for me when Trump should have been removed from office and investigated was his meeting with Putin when Trump wouldn't allow any other Americans to attend. I guess there are millions of Americans who are ignorant of the history of Russia or else this sentiment should have been almost unanimous amongst we citizens.
And he did it at least twice - in the Oval Office and in Helsinki when he wouldn't allow any note takers. Remember, that was same meeting when he took Putin's word over his own IC. Secret meetings with Russia and no one knows what was said.
 
According to some although I haven't been able to verify this new reporting seems to basically be based off of the Senate Intelligence report that came when Republicans held the majority and Sen Rubio was the chairman. Curious if that is what any of you have seen?
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top