One Political Plaza - Home of politics
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Main
Who knew the Russians k**led Seth Rich?
Page <<first <prev 10 of 11 next>
Jul 12, 2019 16:24:42   #
Michael Rich Loc: Lapine Oregon
 
permafrost wrote:
I did watch that attempt in Venezuela.. like out of a SF movie..

A question for you...

Just how are arms deals setup? I know we as a nation are the biggest dealers by far.

But who does the actual selling.. the money..does it go into our treasury as seems it should or is a huge system of commissions for numerous people?



In the same manner that lobbyists bribe politicians, monies just seem to accumulate, with a politician who makes less than $200,000°° and is a multimillionaire after 5 yrs in the house.

You don't think the war mongering international gun runners grease a few palms?

Reply
Jul 12, 2019 16:29:32   #
debeda
 
byronglimish wrote:
In the same manner that lobbyists bribe politicians, monies just seem to accumulate, with a politician who makes less than $200,000°° and is a multimillionaire after 5 yrs in the house.

You don't think the war mongering international gun runners grease a few palms?


infinity

Reply
Jul 12, 2019 17:28:46   #
Mikeyavelli
 
77Reaganite wrote:
You can go ahead and believe that the Russians k**led Seth Rich all you want to but it was the Clinton crime syndicate that k**led Seth rich just like the Clinton crime syndicate k**led Vince Foster and placed his body next to a Confederate statue to make it look like he k**led himself but when you get to the crime scene there's no gun residue on mr. Foster's hand and there's no brain matter left around the area where he was supposedly shot himself but what you do find is that there is a lot of cotton fibers on his clothing which means he was rolling a carpet and dunk at the scene to make it look like he k**led himself because even the cia's old autopsy report rules out suicide so I don't know where this is going but it's not the Russians who k**led Seth Rich let me be perfectly clear what did Seth Rich release it was everything that the DNC had on their servers about Hillary Clinton and also shed light on the podesta brothers in there p********a that's what it shed light on that's the reason why he was k**led because you don't go against the clintons! All you got to do is just look up the body count from when they were in office there in Arkansas when Bill was governor that's all you got to do you'll be astonished my friend out of all the people that have gotten k**led working in and around the clintons! The only reason why the clintons don't get prosecuted is because Bill is the son of Nelson Rockefeller that's it because the Rockefeller name is still strong here in America they're still the strongest and wealthiest family in the world other than the Rothschilds second date their lineage all the way back to the beginning of Jerusalem that's no joke! They're basically royalty around the world! And they're all part of this Global destruction of the world known as globalism they are the biggest g*******ts known to man it was Hillary and Bill that gave the launch codes to China One bill was president can you can really look that up a really did give China our launch codes
You can go ahead and believe that the Russians k**... (show quote)


Reaganite is kryptonite to the kommiecrats.
All of Washington DC knows who k**led Seth Rich and yet to a man they support the lie.
Same with the c**p against Trump. They all know what is going on but no one does anything about it.
T*****rs all, to a man in Washington DC. Some talk a good game, but no one dares do anything about it. No one.

Reply
 
 
Jul 12, 2019 17:56:15   #
JoyV
 
permafrost wrote:
The fantasy you trump supporters live in is a match for Grimms fairy tales. Do you look at nothing but right wing fish wrap??

https://www.apnews.com/e0d125d737be4a21a81bec3d9f1dffd8


Click to copyhttps://apnews.com/e0d125d737be4a21a81bec3d9f1dffd8
RELATED TOPICS
AP Top News
Robert Mueller
Michael Flynn

Russia
Donald Trump
The 10 instances of possible obstruction in Mueller report
By MARK SHERMAN
April 18, 2019

1 of 11
Attorney General William Barr speaks alongside Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, right, and acting Principal Associate Deputy Attorney General Edward O'Callaghan, left, about the release of a redacted version of special counsel Robert Mueller's report during a news conference, Thursday, April 18, 2019, at the Department of Justice in Washington. (AP Photo/Patrick Semansky)
WASHINGTON (AP) — Special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation of Russian interference in the 2016 e******n identified 10 instances of possible obstruction of justice by President Donald Trump. Mueller said in his report that he could not conclusively determine that Trump had committed a crime or that he hadn’t.

A look at the 10 instances:

___

PRESSURE ON COMEY TO END PROBE OF MICHAEL FLYNN

This includes the president’s statement to then-FBI Director James Comey regarding the investigation of then-national security adviser Michael Flynn. Trump told Comey: “I hope you can see your way to letting this go.”


___

PRESIDENT’S REACTION TO THE CONTINUING RUSSIA INVESTIGATION

Among the evidence is the president telling then-White House counsel Don McGahn to stop Attorney General Jeff Sessions from recusing himself from the Russia investigation and Trump’s subsequent anger at Sessions. Trump also contacted Comey and other intelligence agency leaders to ask them to push back publicly on the suggestion that Trump had any connection to the Russian e******n-interference effort.

___

FIRING OF COMEY AND AFTERMATH

Mueller’s report says “substantial evidence” indicates Trump’s decision to fire Comey in May 2017 was the result of the FBI director’s unwillingness to say publicly that Trump was not personally under investigation. On the day after Trump fired Comey, the president told Russian officials that he had “faced great pressure because of Russia. That’s taken off.”

Attorney General William Barr says special counsel Robert Mueller's report recounts 10 episodes involving President Donald Trump that were investigated as potential acts of criminal obstruction of justice. (April 18)
AP Video
___

APPOINTMENT OF SPECIAL COUNSEL AND EFFORTS TO REMOVE HIM

Trump reacted to news of Mueller’s appointment by telling advisers that it was “the end of his presidency.” The president told aides that Mueller had conflicts of interest and should have to step aside. His aides told Trump the asserted conflicts were meritless. Following media reports that Mueller’s team was investigating whether the president had obstructed justice, Trump called then-White House counsel Don McGahn at home and directed him to have Mueller removed. McGahn refused.

____

FURTHER EFFORTS TO CURTAIL THE SPECIAL COUNSEL’s INVESTIGATION

Trump instructed former campaign manager Corey Lewandowski to have Sessions publicly announce that, notwithstanding his recusal from the Russia investigation, the investigation was “very unfair” to the president, the president had done nothing wrong, and Sessions planned to meet with Mueller to limit him to “investigating e******n meddling for future e******ns.”


___

EFFORTS TO PREVENT PUBLIC DISCLOSURE OF EVIDENCE

In summer of 2017, Trump learned that the news media planned to report on the June 2016 meeting at Trump Tower between senior campaign officials and Russians offering derogatory information about Hillary Clinton. The president directed aides not to publicly disclose the emails setting up the meeting. Before the emails became public, the president also edited a press statement for Donald Trump Jr. by deleting a line that acknowledged that the meeting was “with an individual who (Trump Jr.) was told might have information helpful to the campaign.”

___

ADDITIONAL EFFORTS TO HAVE SESSIONS TAKE CONTROL OF INVESTIGATION

At several points in between July 2017 and December 2017, Trump tried to get Sessions to declare that he was no longer recused from the Russia investigation and would assert control over it. The report says there’s evidence that one purpose of asking Sessions to step in was so that the attorney general would restrict the investigation’s scope.

___

TRUMP ORDERS WHITE HOUSE COUNSEL TO DENY THAT PRESIDENT TRIED TO FIRE MUELLER

In an Oval Office meeting in February 2018, Trump told McGahn to “correct” a New York Times story that reported Trump had earlier instructed McGahn to fire Mueller. Trump also asked why McGahn had told Mueller’s investigators about the directive to remove Mueller. McGahn told Trump he had to tell the investigators the t***h.

___

TRUMP’S ACTIONS TOWARD, FLYNN, MANAFORT AND OTHER POSSIBLE WITNESSES

Mueller looked at whether Trump’s sympathetic messages to Flynn, former campaign manager Paul Manafort and others were intended to limit their cooperation with Mueller’s investigation. When Flynn began cooperating with prosecutors, Trump passed word through his lawyer that he still had warm feeling for Flynn and asked for a “heads up” if Flynn knew of information implicating Trump. Trump praised Manafort during and after his criminal convictions, and refused to rule out a pardon for his former campaign chairman.

___

TRUMP ACTIONS TOWARD MICHAEL COHEN

Mueller noted that Trump’s conduct toward Cohen, a former Trump Organization executive, changed from praise to castigation after Cohen began cooperating with prosecutors. The evidence could “support an inference that the president used inducements in the form of positive messages in an effort to get Cohen not to cooperate, and then turned to attacks and intimidation to deter” cooperation and undermine Cohen’s credibility, Mueller wrote.

___

For complete coverage of the Mueller report, go to https://www.apnews.com/TrumpInvestigations
The fantasy you trump supporters live in is a matc... (show quote)


Do you read what you post?

1) “I hope you can see your way to letting this go.” How is that pressuring Comey to end the probe on Flynn? Since when did "I hope" become synonymous with "I order"

2) Oh how horrible -- He wanted Sessions to do his job! Yup. Proof of guilt! And where did you get that he called Comey to tell him to push back publicly on the Trump/Russia collusion story? Even after Comey's firing and his giving testimony under oath against Trump, Comey never said that. Now maybe it was in his later book which was not written under oath.

3) Trump expressed dismay that Sessions recused himself to put a anti-Trumper at the head of the investigation. How is that obstruction? He said Mueller had a conflict of interest. Yup, he did. Now where did you get that his aides told him that the conflict of interest was groundless? When did his aides give testimony to such under oath?

4) So Trump thought the investigation was being done very unfairly and wanted his people to convey that? Many of us were of the same opinion that it was being conducted very unfairly with people publicly acknowledged to want Trump out as president. How does that obstruct the investigation?

5) Not to publicly disclose! Not give to the news! He did not say to keep it from the investigation. Sorry to have to inform you; but a special counsel investigation is not the same thing as a report by the media. As for the substance, since when is meeting with someone who might have something against a competitor candidate which might be helpful to the campaign; a crime! So since you think this is so bad, you must be apoplectic over the Steele opposition research which involved far more than meeting with people who might have dirt of an opposing candidate, but actually paying to dig up dirt.

6) So again he wanted Sessions to do the job he had been appointed to do and which he took a binding oath to do. That MUST be obstruction. After all, when does anyone expect a government official to actually do their job, and since when is an oath by a federal government official taken seriously?

7) What White House directive to remove Mueller. Please post it. In fact, if Trump wanted to fire Mueller he could have under the grounds Mueller had a conflict of interest. P**********l appointments come in two forms: those that require the approval of the Senate and those that do not. Aside from Cabinet secretaries and Supreme Court justices, whose nominations require the approval of the Senate, the President of the United States currently has the authority to appoint people to high-level positions within the federal government unilaterally. According to the Government Accountability Office (GAO). Special Counsel is appointed by the Attorney General, who is in the executive branch under the President. "Grounds for removal are limited to “misconduct, dereliction of duty, incapacity, conflict of interest, or for other good cause, including violation of Departmental policies.” He had a serious conflict of interest!
https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/house-bill/5271
https://www.brookings.edu/testimonies/attorney-generals-special-counsel-regulations/

8) Sympathetic messages--positive messages? This is now obstruction?

9) Public sympathetic messages changed to castigation after Cohen was caught in lies (not just that Trump said so but he kept contradicting himself under questioning and in court), so it is not simply Trump's opinion. Did he threaten Cohen? Did he offer him any sort of bribe?

10) And the biggy. Comey fired!!!! Please look at your calendar. Comey was fired BEFORE the investigation began or was even in the works. So how could it be an attempt to obstruct the investigation?

Reply
Jul 12, 2019 18:13:09   #
JoyV
 
permafrost wrote:
Mueller was an investigator, not a judge.

He made it clear that trump could be cleared..

If trump were not sitting in the white house he would be indicted..


An indictment is: A written accusation charging that an individual named therein has committed an act or omitted to do something that is punishable by law.

If Trump were not a sitting president, there would still have to be evidence of a crime before a Grand Jury would indict. With what Mueller and his team came up with after 2 years, no Grand Jury would indict. Not because Trump is president but because there is zero evidence of a crime. And even if one or two of the things listed as potential evidence for obstruction of justice had merit; what justice would have been obstructed? First there would need to be at least evidence, let alone proof of Russia/Trump collusion for Trump to obstruct the justice of bringing that crime to judgement.

Reply
Jul 12, 2019 18:41:32   #
Seth
 
JoyV wrote:
I am not very computer or tech literate. But speaking of yahoo, maybe you could give me a clue why starting this month when I try to use google to look anything up, the list of sites that come up are in yahoo, not google? I have never used yahoo on this computer for anything.


Google and Yahoo are both left winger owned and operated -- so are most of the Big Tech companies. Google always goes left, and Yahoo fits the bill, like CNN or MSNBC.

If you Google a topic that can even remotely be construed as having any political connotations, you have to wade through a lot of pages before you clear the portside angles.

Good example, let's say you were looking for information on Lyndon Johnson... The man was a hardcore r****t JFK was saddled with as a running mate because the Democrats needed a well connected DixieCRAT on the ticket to get the southern v**e.

You'll find all sorts of revisionist history about what a civil rights champion he was, fighting the good fight for b****s' e******y, yadda yadda, when in reality he was a blatant, foul mouthed r****t (he was the founding father of the welfare state, single parent black households, miserable housing projects and the resulting social and criminal problems, who was credited with saying, "this'll have the n****rs v****g Democrat for the next 200 years."). You have to weed through a lot of that revisionist B.S. to get to the t***h, and these tech folks know most people won't go much farther than their initial hits.

Big Tech©, "a new age of bringing propaganda to America."

Reply
Jul 12, 2019 19:34:00   #
permafrost Loc: Minnesota
 
debeda wrote:
I disagree with your assessment


OK, watch and see..

Reply
 
 
Jul 12, 2019 19:39:02   #
permafrost Loc: Minnesota
 
byronglimish wrote:
In the same manner that lobbyists bribe politicians, monies just seem to accumulate, with a politician who makes less than $200,000°° and is a multimillionaire after 5 yrs in the house.

You don't think the war mongering international gun runners grease a few palms?




i thought you would come up with a permitting process. or something..

I wanna sell tanks.. darn it how can get some..

No the reason I asked, back when I was in high school I some found an application to buy decommissioned ship..

If I had the winning bid, the ship would be towed to Duluth harbor and that would be my point of acquiring the ship..

Of course, I never even considered putting in any kind of bid. but it sticks in my mind.

It was several years before they stopped sending information..

every thing for mine sweepers, landing craft, cargo..

All for junk/scrap. None were functional..

Reply
Jul 12, 2019 19:42:49   #
JoyV
 
Seth wrote:
Google and Yahoo are both left winger owned and operated -- so are most of the Big Tech companies. Google always goes left, and Yahoo fits the bill, like CNN or MSNBC.

If you Google a topic that can even remotely be construed as having any political connotations, you have to wade through a lot of pages before you clear the portside angles.

Good example, let's say you were looking for information on Lyndon Johnson... The man was a hardcore r****t JFK was saddled with as a running mate because the Democrats needed a well connected DixieCRAT on the ticket to get the southern v**e.

You'll find all sorts of revisionist history about what a civil rights champion he was, fighting the good fight for b****s' e******y, yadda yadda, when in reality he was a blatant, foul mouthed r****t (he was the founding father of the welfare state, single parent black households, miserable housing projects and the resulting social and criminal problems, who was credited with saying, "this'll have the n****rs v****g Democrat for the next 200 years."). You have to weed through a lot of that revisionist B.S. to get to the t***h, and these tech folks know most people won't go much farther than their initial hits.

Big Tech©, "a new age of bringing propaganda to America."
Google and Yahoo are both left winger owned and op... (show quote)


Yes I am aware of the bias and how it takes pages, and often several pages, before you get anything not strongly left wing. It still doesn't answer why when I google a topic, the sites come up under yahoo instead of google. Was there a merger or something?

Reply
Jul 12, 2019 20:02:07   #
Michael Rich Loc: Lapine Oregon
 
permafrost wrote:
i thought you would come up with a permitting process. or something..

I wanna sell tanks.. darn it how can get some..

No the reason I asked, back when I was in high school I some found an application to buy decommissioned ship..

If I had the winning bid, the ship would be towed to Duluth harbor and that would be my point of acquiring the ship..

Of course, I never even considered putting in any kind of bid. but it sticks in my mind.

It was several years before they stopped sending information..

every thing for mine sweepers, landing craft, cargo..

All for junk/scrap. None were functional..
i thought you would come up with a permitting proc... (show quote)


I've checked out decommissioned tanks, they cut holes in strategic places and render them vulnerable.

Reply
Jul 12, 2019 20:07:07   #
Seth
 
JoyV wrote:
Yes I am aware of the bias and how it takes pages, and often several pages, before you get anything not strongly left wing. It still doesn't answer why when I google a topic, the sites come up under yahoo instead of google. Was there a merger or something?


I think it's just because Yahoo! is more "news" (and I use the term loosely) oriented, so they just get the hits because of their lefty spin. Sort of like "the enemy of Google's enemy is their friend." Like a conservative site might link a FOX article or a Daily Caller article.

Reply
 
 
Jul 12, 2019 23:00:05   #
JoyV
 
Seth wrote:
I think it's just because Yahoo! is more "news" (and I use the term loosely) oriented, so they just get the hits because of their lefty spin. Sort of like "the enemy of Google's enemy is their friend." Like a conservative site might link a FOX article or a Daily Caller article.


No I don't mean linked to Yahoo. I mean the list of sites itself is a yahoo list not a google list. Even every page I go to has the yahoo symbol on the url bar, including right wing sites. The sites themselves are not yahoo. But the search is through yahoo even if I start out by going to google to start.

But it isn't important. It just bugs me that I am using yahoo against my wishes.

Reply
Jul 13, 2019 00:01:56   #
Seth
 
JoyV wrote:
No I don't mean linked to Yahoo. I mean the list of sites itself is a yahoo list not a google list. Even every page I go to has the yahoo symbol on the url bar, including right wing sites. The sites themselves are not yahoo. But the search is through yahoo even if I start out by going to google to start.

But it isn't important. It just bugs me that I am using yahoo against my wishes.


I get some other news dump alerts, possibly from MetroPCS, that include articles from various sites I visit or even subscribe to and a few from MSM sites like CNN that deal with the kind of political information some cookies monster has deduced would interest me.
Since I dumped Yahoo!, I haven't had any of their news appear, however.

Is it possible that your computer or device came with Yahoo! already installed, or that somewhere along the line you downloaded some Yahoo! product without realizing who it belonged to?

Being an analog man in a digital world, all I can do is guess... 😁

Reply
Jul 13, 2019 09:59:51   #
permafrost Loc: Minnesota
 
byronglimish wrote:
I've checked out decommissioned tanks, they cut holes in strategic places and render them vulnerable.


Gee, a great yard decoration if ever was one..

Reply
Jul 13, 2019 10:03:23   #
permafrost Loc: Minnesota
 
JoyV wrote:
Do you read what you post?

1) “I hope you can see your way to letting this go.” How is that pressuring Comey to end the probe on Flynn? Since when did "I hope" become synonymous with "I order"

2) Oh how horrible -- He wanted Sessions to do his job! Yup. Proof of guilt! And where did you get that he called Comey to tell him to push back publicly on the Trump/Russia collusion story? Even after Comey's firing and his giving testimony under oath against Trump, Comey never said that. Now maybe it was in his later book which was not written under oath.

3) Trump expressed dismay that Sessions recused himself to put a anti-Trumper at the head of the investigation. How is that obstruction? He said Mueller had a conflict of interest. Yup, he did. Now where did you get that his aides told him that the conflict of interest was groundless? When did his aides give testimony to such under oath?

4) So Trump thought the investigation was being done very unfairly and wanted his people to convey that? Many of us were of the same opinion that it was being conducted very unfairly with people publicly acknowledged to want Trump out as president. How does that obstruct the investigation?

5) Not to publicly disclose! Not give to the news! He did not say to keep it from the investigation. Sorry to have to inform you; but a special counsel investigation is not the same thing as a report by the media. As for the substance, since when is meeting with someone who might have something against a competitor candidate which might be helpful to the campaign; a crime! So since you think this is so bad, you must be apoplectic over the Steele opposition research which involved far more than meeting with people who might have dirt of an opposing candidate, but actually paying to dig up dirt.

6) So again he wanted Sessions to do the job he had been appointed to do and which he took a binding oath to do. That MUST be obstruction. After all, when does anyone expect a government official to actually do their job, and since when is an oath by a federal government official taken seriously?

7) What White House directive to remove Mueller. Please post it. In fact, if Trump wanted to fire Mueller he could have under the grounds Mueller had a conflict of interest. P**********l appointments come in two forms: those that require the approval of the Senate and those that do not. Aside from Cabinet secretaries and Supreme Court justices, whose nominations require the approval of the Senate, the President of the United States currently has the authority to appoint people to high-level positions within the federal government unilaterally. According to the Government Accountability Office (GAO). Special Counsel is appointed by the Attorney General, who is in the executive branch under the President. "Grounds for removal are limited to “misconduct, dereliction of duty, incapacity, conflict of interest, or for other good cause, including violation of Departmental policies.” He had a serious conflict of interest!
https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/house-bill/5271
https://www.brookings.edu/testimonies/attorney-generals-special-counsel-regulations/

8) Sympathetic messages--positive messages? This is now obstruction?

9) Public sympathetic messages changed to castigation after Cohen was caught in lies (not just that Trump said so but he kept contradicting himself under questioning and in court), so it is not simply Trump's opinion. Did he threaten Cohen? Did he offer him any sort of bribe?

10) And the biggy. Comey fired!!!! Please look at your calendar. Comey was fired BEFORE the investigation began or was even in the works. So how could it be an attempt to obstruct the investigation?
Do you read what you post? br br 1) “I hope yo... (show quote)




Gosh the tilt of the right wing is amazing.. not going over your 10 points, but will tell you that none of them are as you wish they were..



Reply
Page <<first <prev 10 of 11 next>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Main
OnePoliticalPlaza.com - Forum
Copyright 2012-2024 IDF International Technologies, Inc.