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.

DOJ criminal investigation of Russia probe (1 Viewer)

shader said:
The potential is there for this investigation to have more teeth at the backend than the Mueller one, because the potus and the AG are involved.  “Come at the king you best not miss.” Since they missed (in the Russia investigation) the backlash for any procedural violations (or worse) could be harsh. Right or wrong, I truly think that’s a distinct possibility.
Click to expand...
Trump totally screwed up on this Ukraine thing, but popping a high level Intelligence leader on a Russia frame job is going to turn all of this on its head.  Nothing else is really going to matter.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
RBM said:
Flynn’s lawyers supposedly now have proof the lovebirds altered the 302s fabricating evidence he lied. His case will be tossed very soon. 

Doing that to a lifelong, decorated military man. Shameful. 
Click to expand...
https://saraacarter.com/judge-cancels-november-hearing-after-powells-explosive-brief-to-dismiss-flynns-case/amp/?utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=social-pug&utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=social-pug&__twitter_impression=true

In another dramatic turn of events U.S. District Court Judge Emmet Sullivan — who is overseeing the case of former National Security Advisor Army Lt. Gen. Michael T. Flynn–has canceled the upcoming November hearing based on an explosive brief submitted by Flynn’s defense attorney.

Sullivan stated in an order submitted Monday that “in view of the parties’ comprehensive briefing concerning [109] Defendant’s Motion to Compel Production of Brady Material, the Court cancels the motion hearing previously scheduled for November 5, 2019.”

 
timschochet said:
He doesn't seem to have a lot of credibility. Neither does this investigation.
Click to expand...
Barr was involved in Iran-Contra coverups.  Mueller attended his daughters' weddings.  They are great friends.  I'd be extremely skeptical of anyone that was that close to Poppy Bush.  

But how this conspiracy theory came to dominate the American news landscape is certainly something worth investigating.  We need answers and accountability on that, not only in the event there was wrongdoing at the highest levels of the intelligence agencies, but so that another president isn't falsely tarred as an agent of a foreign govt (or any other paid oppo dirt conspiracy theory). 

 
“These reports, if true, raise profound new concerns that the Department of Justice under AG Barr has lost its independence and become a vehicle for President Trump’s political revenge,” said a joint statement by House Judiciary Committee Chairman Rep. Jerrold Nadler, D-N.Y., and House Intelligence Committee Chairman Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., released last Thursday. “If the Department of Justice may be used as a tool of political retribution, or to help the President with a political narrative for the next election, the rule of law will suffer new and irreparable damage.”

Also, please spare us on the 'political revenge' of this investigation.  The Mueller investigation lasted for years and had a HUGE impact on political discourse, and our understanding of the Trump administration.  It hampered Trump's ability to conduct foreign policy.  They accused him of being a Putin puppet on national television.  People wrote children's books about Mueller, and sold Mueller candles.  Reporting on just about every foreign policy decision was centered on the notion of whether or not Trump is a Russian agent.  

It didn't really need a special counsel.  It shouldn't have implicated the Trump admin.  Their use of the Mifsud-Papadopolous predicate to launch a wide-ranging, multiyear investigation into a presidential campaign and eventually the president himself was an unprecedented misuse of authority.  It was a lot more political and vindictive than the Durham investigation, because it was based on falsehoods.  This is about scrutinizing why that happened.  

If they uncover wrongdoing, it will create huge political blowback for the FBI/CIA and probably help Trump.  But that doesn't mean we shouldn't find out what happened and why.  

 
In addition to helping trigger the Russia probe and overseeing the intelligence response, Brennan oversaw the hasty production of the Intelligence Community Assessment (ICA) that purportedly validated it. By claiming that Putin ordered an influence campaign to elect him, the January 2017 ICA helped cast a criminal shadow over Trump’s presidency just days before he took office. A series of unsubstantiated leaks from anonymous officials—about Flynn, about the Steele dossier, and about fictitious or overblown Trump-Russia contacts—continued that pattern as the Mueller investigation dragged on. Perhaps the most extraordinary example came in February 2017, when The New York Times reported that the US investigators had obtained “phone records and intercepted calls” showing that members of Trump’s campaign and other associates “had repeated contacts with senior Russian intelligence officials in the year before the election.” Four months later, FBI Jim Comey testified that this was “not true.”

If the FBI had investigated President Barack Obama for more than two years on the false allegation of conspiring with or being an agent of a foreign power, Democratic leaders would rightfully demand a full inquiry. It would set a dangerous precedent for liberals to now reject an effort to get answers only because those answers would not be politically expedient. If left unchecked now, the same intelligence services that involved themselves in domestic politics in 2016 could do so again against progressive candidates on similarly spurious grounds.

The unfortunate reality is that under Trump, Democratic leaders and intelligence officials used the Russia investigation as a political weapon against his presidency. Now that it has proven baseless, Trump and his supporters have legitimate grounds to uncover how it began. The fact that Trump will use Russiagate’s failure as a political weapon is exactly why us skeptics on the left warned that its evidentiary holes would help him. Rather than complaining, those who brought us Russiagate should accept responsibility for handing Trump that opportunity, and work to ensure that the national security state does not receive opportunities to intrude again.

https://www.thenation.com/article/russiagate-brennan/

 
ren hoek said:
Barr was involved in Iran-Contra coverups.  Mueller attended his daughters' weddings.  They are great friends.  I'd be extremely skeptical of anyone that was that close to Poppy Bush.  

But how this conspiracy theory came to dominate the American news landscape is certainly something worth investigating.  We need answers and accountability on that, not only in the event there was wrongdoing at the highest levels of the intelligence agencies, but so that another president isn't falsely tarred as an agent of a foreign govt (or any other paid oppo dirt conspiracy theory). 
Click to expand...
Seriously, did you read the Mueller report? I don’t understand how people can call it a conspiracy theory. 

 
ren hoek said:
In addition to helping trigger the Russia probe and overseeing the intelligence response, Brennan oversaw the hasty production of the Intelligence Community Assessment (ICA) that purportedly validated it. By claiming that Putin ordered an influence campaign to elect him, the January 2017 ICA helped cast a criminal shadow over Trump’s presidency just days before he took office. A series of unsubstantiated leaks from anonymous officials—about Flynn, about the Steele dossier, and about fictitious or overblown Trump-Russia contacts—continued that pattern as the Mueller investigation dragged on. Perhaps the most extraordinary example came in February 2017, when The New York Times reported that the US investigators had obtained “phone records and intercepted calls” showing that members of Trump’s campaign and other associates “had repeated contacts with senior Russian intelligence officials in the year before the election.” Four months later, FBI Jim Comey testified that this was “not true.”

If the FBI had investigated President Barack Obama for more than two years on the false allegation of conspiring with or being an agent of a foreign power, Democratic leaders would rightfully demand a full inquiry. It would set a dangerous precedent for liberals to now reject an effort to get answers only because those answers would not be politically expedient. If left unchecked now, the same intelligence services that involved themselves in domestic politics in 2016 could do so again against progressive candidates on similarly spurious grounds.

The unfortunate reality is that under Trump, Democratic leaders and intelligence officials used the Russia investigation as a political weapon against his presidency. Now that it has proven baseless, Trump and his supporters have legitimate grounds to uncover how it began. The fact that Trump will use Russiagate’s failure as a political weapon is exactly why us skeptics on the left warned that its evidentiary holes would help him. Rather than complaining, those who brought us Russiagate should accept responsibility for handing Trump that opportunity, and work to ensure that the national security state does not receive opportunities to intrude again.

https://www.thenation.com/article/russiagate-brennan/
Click to expand...
Congress investigated President Obama for four years over Benghazi, claiming he knew it would happen and allowed Americans to be murdered.

 
Dickies said:
Seriously, did you read the Mueller report? I don’t understand how people can call it a conspiracy theory. 
Click to expand...
Nope.  Didn't have to to know Trump/Russia was an outlandish conspiracy theory- it was already contradicted by mountains of real world evidence.  But I have read parts of it.  There are a lot of questions he didn't answer that I'm not comfortable with- like substantiating how, exactly, Mifsud was a suspected Russian agent.  Or why he couldn't rule out the way in which Wikileaks came in possession of the emails (hint: he never interviewed anyone from Wikileaks). 

The probe found no conspiracy.  It didn't charge anyone for engaging in a conspiracy with Russia.  It didn't even charge anyone for lying about a conspiracy with Russia.  This is why the conversation instantly turned into "obstruction" rather than "collusion".  How can you come to any conclusion other than it being an unfounded conspiracy theory?  

 
ren hoek said:
The probe found no conspiracy.  It didn't charge anyone for engaging in a conspiracy with Russia.  It didn't even charge anyone for lying about a conspiracy with Russia.  This is why the conversation instantly turned into "obstruction" rather than "collusion".  How can you come to any conclusion other than it being an unfounded conspiracy theory?  
Click to expand...
There was lots of evidence, but could not be proven beyond a reasonable doubt in part because of the rampant obstruction, and also because the people around Trump were too stupid to know what they were doing was illegal. To say they found “no conspiracy” seems misleading at best

 
Dickies said:
There was lots of evidence, but could not be proven beyond a reasonable doubt in part because of the rampant obstruction, and also because the people around Trump were too stupid to know what they were doing was illegal. To say they found “no conspiracy” seems misleading at best
Click to expand...
I wanted Trump to be a Russian asset just as bad as everyone, but it was a Nothingburger.  

 
Dickies said:
There was lots of evidence, but could not be proven beyond a reasonable doubt in part because of the rampant obstruction, and also because the people around Trump were too stupid to know what they were doing was illegal. To say they found “no conspiracy” seems misleading at best
Click to expand...
It is stunning how often these disingenuous claims are made.  Hard to prove anything beyond a reasonable doubt when the investigation is obstructed to the degree Trump did, but there is plenty of evidence about what happened.

 
ren hoek said:
Nope.  Didn't have to to know Trump/Russia was an outlandish conspiracy theory- it was already contradicted by mountains of real world evidence.  But I have read parts of it.  There are a lot of questions he didn't answer that I'm not comfortable with- like substantiating how, exactly, Mifsud was a suspected Russian agent.  Or why he couldn't rule out the way in which Wikileaks came in possession of the emails (hint: he never interviewed anyone from Wikileaks). 

The probe found no conspiracy.  It didn't charge anyone for engaging in a conspiracy with Russia.  It didn't even charge anyone for lying about a conspiracy with Russia.  This is why the conversation instantly turned into "obstruction" rather than "collusion".  How can you come to any conclusion other than it being an unfounded conspiracy theory?  
Click to expand...
Mifsud is the smoking gun. I'm not sure how, but everything points to him as the wildcard. Mueller refused to answer several questions irt Misfud and probably left some facts about the guy out of the report. 

Flynn's lawyer was on to Mifsud's cell phones pretty quickly after the DOJ got their hands on them. Now his case is taking a break to review new evidence. 

While in Italy Durham requested more manpower to document his findings and then Barr shifts their inquiry into a criminal probe. 

IMO something ugly is going to drop soon. 

 
Max Power said:
IMO something ugly is going to drop soon. 
Click to expand...
What are your parameters for "something ugly" and "soon"?

This is the second time in less than a week that the word "soon" has been used in this thread to describe various elements of this so-called 'investigation'. I attempted to follow-up on the previous usage, but my query was ignored.

It's the kind of word that conspiracy theorists use to propel vague and unstable narratives, without having to be held accountable for their behavior or for being wrong. It seems to me that it's in everyone's best interest to avoid vague conspiracies; let's establish a set of expectations so that we all can measure progress or regress in real time.

It's difficult to have a balanced exchange of ideas when guidelines are not established.

 
ren hoek said:
Nope.  Didn't have to to know Trump/Russia was an outlandish conspiracy theory- it was already contradicted by mountains of real world evidence.  But I have read parts of it.  There are a lot of questions he didn't answer that I'm not comfortable with- like substantiating how, exactly, Mifsud was a suspected Russian agent.  Or why he couldn't rule out the way in which Wikileaks came in possession of the emails (hint: he never interviewed anyone from Wikileaks). 

The probe found no conspiracy.  It didn't charge anyone for engaging in a conspiracy with Russia.  It didn't even charge anyone for lying about a conspiracy with Russia.  This is why the conversation instantly turned into "obstruction" rather than "collusion".  How can you come to any conclusion other than it being an unfounded conspiracy theory?  
Click to expand...
Because he read the report.

 
[scooter] said:
What are your parameters for "something ugly" and "soon"?

This is the second time in less than a week that the word "soon" has been used in this thread to describe various elements of this so-called 'investigation'. I attempted to follow-up on the previous usage, but my query was ignored.

It's the kind of word that conspiracy theorists use to propel vague and unstable narratives, without having to be held accountable for their behavior or for being wrong. It seems to me that it's in everyone's best interest to avoid vague conspiracies; let's establish a set of expectations so that we all can measure progress or regress in real time.

It's difficult to have a balanced exchange of ideas when guidelines are not established.
Click to expand...
I think "something ugly" is brewing because of the facts above. I stated I wasnt sure exactly, but sure sounds a lot like the IC had their finger deeper into russiagate than the Mueller report stated.  

I don't have the answers to who this Misfud guy is. The IC hasn't even said who he is. Mueller won't or can't answer basic questions about the guy. 

Now that people are looking into him, there have been several unverified reports about "Misfud's audiotape" as well as reporting I mentioned in my last post. 

"Soon" is a relative term. I'd say soon is within the next 3 or 4 months. But that is also a guess here. 

I dropped a factual based post with an "imo" for what I think and you need more guidelines for discussion? Part of this is speculation, because no one has all the facts right now. 

We have a 2,000+ page debunked conspiracy theory on page 1 here, so we still have a ways to go even if my personal opinion is wrong.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
ren hoek said:
That's unfortunate.  Guess it didn't do a very good job portraying reality then.  
Click to expand...
At least take 5 minutes to read the summaries.  You're an intelligent guy, so it frustrates me that you're claiming to know what something you admittedly haven't read says.

 
ren hoek said:
The probe found no conspiracy.  It didn't charge anyone for engaging in a conspiracy with Russia.
Click to expand...
This is odd stuff. The report discusses no one officially with the campaign (as opposed to associated with it, like say Stone) being found to have conspired with the government of Russia.

Actual Russian persons were charged with conspiring to conduct active measures for the Russian state.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
This seems like a rehash of resentments about the Mueller investigation. So far this thread has one report - in the OP - of a single source stating there is a criminal investigation, with an unknown predicate and without explaining the appointment of Durham.

 
Max Power said:
Mifsud is the smoking gun. I'm not sure how, but everything points to him as the wildcard. Mueller refused to answer several questions irt Misfud and probably left some facts about the guy out of the report. 

Flynn's lawyer was on to Mifsud's cell phones pretty quickly after the DOJ got their hands on them. Now his case is taking a break to review new evidence. 

While in Italy Durham requested more manpower to document his findings and then Barr shifts their inquiry into a criminal probe. 

IMO something ugly is going to drop soon. 
Click to expand...
So really dumb question because you seem to be following this. What does Mifsud have to do with the Flynn case?  I thought Flynn was in trouble because he was basically acting as a lobbyist for Turkey while the NSA and for lying to the FBI about his call with Kisliak about the sanctions  on Russia that Obama imposed. 

 
Seems like the basic theory is that Mifsud is a double agent who tricked George Papadopoulos into setting up Trump.

What does that have to do with Flynn? Absolutely nothing, as far as I can tell.

 
TheMagus said:
So really dumb question because you seem to be following this. What does Mifsud have to do with the Flynn case?  I thought Flynn was in trouble because he was basically acting as a lobbyist for Turkey while the NSA and for lying to the FBI about his call with Kisliak about the sanctions  on Russia that Obama imposed. 
Click to expand...
Flynn's lawyer claims Mifsud was used by the IC to entrap Flynn and the Govt withheld evidence in the case.

The DOJ now has Mifsud's phone and records going back to 2014 potentially. We do not know what is on them and I'm not sure if Flynn or his lawyers know either.

Papadopoulos (I know) claims Mifsud was a spy who spied on Flynn. That is the only known link I've seen and it's weak.

 
jonessed said:
Trump totally screwed up on this Ukraine thing, but popping a high level Intelligence leader on a Russia frame job is going to turn all of this on its head.  Nothing else is really going to matter.
Click to expand...
Nope. This won't happen.

Let's suppose for a moment that its true (I have no idea.) The problem is the same problem that Democrats faced with the Mueller investigation in the first place: it's too confusing for the public to follow. That's why they couldn't impeach him over that, and that's why this investigation will go nowhere. The Ukraine story has legs because it's easy to understand, like burglars breaking into Democratic headquarters or the President getting oral sex and lying about it. The public gets it. That's why 55% of them want impeachment at this point. That number is only going to go up no matter what this other investigation ultimately reveals. 

 
Slapdash said:
It is stunning how often these disingenuous claims are made.  Hard to prove anything beyond a reasonable doubt when the investigation is obstructed to the degree Trump did, but there is plenty of evidence about what happened.
Click to expand...
Well, there was evidence that Obama was not born in U.S. too.

 
[scooter] said:
What are your parameters for "something ugly" and "soon"?

This is the second time in less than a week that the word "soon" has been used in this thread to describe various elements of this so-called 'investigation'. I attempted to follow-up on the previous usage, but my query was ignored.

It's the kind of word that conspiracy theorists use to propel vague and unstable narratives, without having to be held accountable for their behavior or for being wrong. It seems to me that it's in everyone's best interest to avoid vague conspiracies; let's establish a set of expectations so that we all can measure progress or regress in real time.

It's difficult to have a balanced exchange of ideas when guidelines are not established.
Click to expand...
The bold is a good point - it was used over 700 times in the other Russia thread, for example.

 
timschochet said:
Unless there's something that threatens our national security, sure.
Click to expand...
No go for the moment. :kicksrock:

A federal circuit court on Tuesday evening temporarily blocked the release of grand jury materials from former special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation into Russian meddling in the 2016 election.

A three-judge panel, all Obama appointees to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, suspended a lower court’s Wednesday deadline in order to have extra time to consider the merits of a recent Department of Justice (DOJ) request.
Click to expand...
https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/468026-court-blocks-release-of-mueller-grand-jury-materials

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

dozer
****Official DOJ Investigation into Trump, Fake Electors, Fraud, Etc.****
5 6 7
Replies
348
Views
11K
Sabertooth
Sabertooth
A
Republican Officials In New Mexico County Refuse To Certify Election Results
2
Replies
61
Views
2K
roadkill1292
roadkill1292
timschochet
Dennis Rodman is back!
Replies
3
Views
304
Ghost Rider
Ghost Rider

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Top