Does Rosenstein believe that Putin is going

[westwall]

To send the entire KGB or whatever they call themselves now to the USA for prosecution?

Yesterday was the dumbest day in US history after the day that Obama was elected

Of course not.

Does that mean we should not indict people who commit crimes?

Indicting ones you have zero chance of ever prosecuting seems odd....thinking people might think there is another agenda like oh perhaps appeasing a certain faction and giving the appearance you're actually doing something. It's a smoke screen

No, it's not odd. We do it all the time. We did it with Chinese hackings. It sends a message and lays the groundwork for sanctions. If we have the evidence to support an indictment, we should make it.

I only can remember the five chinese hackers indicted in 2014. And likewise they too will never see the inside of a Courtroom, and more to the point, the chinese were then told in big letters that their methods had been figured out so they changed tactics. That seems kind of stupid to me. If you are never going to be able to prosecute them why tell them you figured out what they are doing. Far better would be to ply them with fake info to screw up their spying results.

Those are the ones I was thinking of. I think indicting them sends a clear message to the government supporting them...so I support it. It also sends a clear message to the US - that there is enough evidence to support an indictment. Perhaps (though I am not optimstic) that means defluffing a few conspiracy theories

I'm not even worried about conspiracy theories. I think it would be a stupid tactic. One doomed to failure, and one that weakens our cyber security methods. I see no good reason to do it.

 

[Coyote]

To send the entire KGB or whatever they call themselves now to the USA for prosecution?

Yesterday was the dumbest day in US history after the day that Obama was elected

Of course not.

Does that mean we should not indict people who commit crimes?

Should the American hackers who compiled this report be indicted?

LOL give up and go to bed

Why would we indict them?

 

[westwall]

To send the entire KGB or whatever they call themselves now to the USA for prosecution?

Yesterday was the dumbest day in US history after the day that Obama was elected

Of course not.

Does that mean we should not indict people who commit crimes?

Indicting ones you have zero chance of ever prosecuting seems odd....thinking people might think there is another agenda like oh perhaps appeasing a certain faction and giving the appearance you're actually doing something. It's a smoke screen

No, it's not odd. We do it all the time. We did it with Chinese hackings. It sends a message and lays the groundwork for sanctions. If we have the evidence to support an indictment, we should make it.

It's worthless, no Americans linked, Mewler is nowhere close to getting crap on Trump and Rosenstein is finished...next up will be pulling the plug on this witch hunt. It's past time. Mewler tried and failed. End it

It isn't worthless. Mueller's (you mispelled his name) mandate is to examine Russian interference in the election.

And so far he has spent way more time investigating financial crimes from more than ten years ago. Why is that?

 

[SassyIrishLass]

To send the entire KGB or whatever they call themselves now to the USA for prosecution?

Yesterday was the dumbest day in US history after the day that Obama was elected

Of course not.

Does that mean we should not indict people who commit crimes?

Indicting ones you have zero chance of ever prosecuting seems odd....thinking people might think there is another agenda like oh perhaps appeasing a certain faction and giving the appearance you're actually doing something. It's a smoke screen

No, it's not odd. We do it all the time. We did it with Chinese hackings. It sends a message and lays the groundwork for sanctions. If we have the evidence to support an indictment, we should make it.

I only can remember the five chinese hackers indicted in 2014. And likewise they too will never see the inside of a Courtroom, and more to the point, the chinese were then told in big letters that their methods had been figured out so they changed tactics. That seems kind of stupid to me. If you are never going to be able to prosecute them why tell them you figured out what they are doing. Far better would be to ply them with fake info to screw up their spying results.

Those are the ones I was thinking of. I think indicting them sends a clear message to the government supporting them...so I support it. It also sends a clear message to the US - that there is enough evidence to support an indictment. Perhaps (though I am not optimstic) that means defluffing a few conspiracy theories

Indictments are a dime a dozen. My husband could get an indictment on a ham sandwich if he wanted when he was working as a prosecutor...getting convictions is an entire new ball game. An indictment doesn't make one guilty of anything

 

[Coyote]

Of course not.

Does that mean we should not indict people who commit crimes?

Indicting ones you have zero chance of ever prosecuting seems odd....thinking people might think there is another agenda like oh perhaps appeasing a certain faction and giving the appearance you're actually doing something. It's a smoke screen

No, it's not odd. We do it all the time. We did it with Chinese hackings. It sends a message and lays the groundwork for sanctions. If we have the evidence to support an indictment, we should make it.

It's worthless, no Americans linked, Mewler is nowhere close to getting crap on Trump and Rosenstein is finished...next up will be pulling the plug on this witch hunt. It's past time. Mewler tried and failed. End it

It isn't worthless. Mueller's (you mispelled his name) mandate is to examine Russian interference in the election.

And so far he has spent way more time investigating financial crimes from more than ten years ago. Why is that?

Because Russian money laundering might have a bearing on it. I have no issue with the investigation. Whether it clears Trump or doesn't - I'm satisfied that it has been thorough and professional. And that is the point.

I can't understand why those that demanded in depth and lengthy investigations into the Clinton emails, Benghazi, and White Water do an abrupt about face when it comes to something as important as our electoral integrity.

 

[Snouter]

^Victim of conflating information. Even Rosenstine admits nothing tampered with the integrity of the election. But Crooked Hillary, the DNC and the MSM sure tried. And Seth Rich courageously providing Wikileaks with emails simply confirmed what we already knew about the corrupt democrat party. Did a democrat actually change their vote? Doesn't matter in the age of freedom of information, but it would be most unlikely since democrats were stupid enough to think they were fake and too dumb to realize they had been screwed by the party they support.

Rush did a great job of explaining the Rosenstine Russia fake news thing. The Mueller Witch Hunt will not end until after The Donald's second term as President. It is sad, but particularly pathetic when Dems think their butthurt will be relieved by the latest, greatest fake indictments Rosenstine informs the fake news about. Dems are just going to be repeatedly taken advantage of again and again, if they think the Mueller Witch Hunt has any hope of removing our President.

Hilarious Leftist Demand: Cancel Summit with Putin!

d...Rosenstein goes out and does this press conference...he makes mention of the fact that none of it affected the outcome of any election...And then almost instantly Mark Warner heads to the microphones demanding that Trump cancel this upcoming summit in Helsinki with Putin or that Trump not meet alone with Putin...They’ve never produced any evidence, and we know that it’s caca. We know that it was the Clintons that did all the colluding. We know all that. But the deep state is still pursuing this ’cause I think the Mueller investigation’s a cover-up for what really went on here in their effort to get Trump...The fact there’s no evidence doesn’t matter, folks...
If you think they’ve given up on this, do not misunderstand; they have not. They have not given up on trying to tie Trump to this. In specific, they have not given up trying to make a majority of Americans think it happened. The fact that there’s no evidence is irrelevant. There hasn’t ever been any evidence. Has that stopped ’em?...It’s not gonna be wrapped up by September. It’s certainly not gonna be wrapped up by October. It’s not gonna be wrapped up before the election. There is no way in hell this is gonna end before the election. If Mueller ended it today, he doesn’t have enough time to write the report that he wants to report, and if they can’t get that out before the election, they’re not gonna do that. So they’re not gonna put this away. This is nowhere near ending...The fact that Rosenstein said no election has been affected, we can’t prove that there was any effect on any election because of any — It’s not gonna stop ’em. Because they’re not going to stop trying to get rid of Donald Trump.

 

[Coyote]

Of course not.

Does that mean we should not indict people who commit crimes?

Indicting ones you have zero chance of ever prosecuting seems odd....thinking people might think there is another agenda like oh perhaps appeasing a certain faction and giving the appearance you're actually doing something. It's a smoke screen

No, it's not odd. We do it all the time. We did it with Chinese hackings. It sends a message and lays the groundwork for sanctions. If we have the evidence to support an indictment, we should make it.

I only can remember the five chinese hackers indicted in 2014. And likewise they too will never see the inside of a Courtroom, and more to the point, the chinese were then told in big letters that their methods had been figured out so they changed tactics. That seems kind of stupid to me. If you are never going to be able to prosecute them why tell them you figured out what they are doing. Far better would be to ply them with fake info to screw up their spying results.

Those are the ones I was thinking of. I think indicting them sends a clear message to the government supporting them...so I support it. It also sends a clear message to the US - that there is enough evidence to support an indictment. Perhaps (though I am not optimstic) that means defluffing a few conspiracy theories

Indictments are a dime a dozen. My husband could get an indictment on a ham sandwich if he wanted when he was working as a prosecutor...getting convictions is an entire new ball game. An indictment doesn't make one guilty of anything

Of course it doesn't. It's the first step.

Are you suggesting that if there is evidence for an indictment...one should NOT be made???

 

[SassyIrishLass]

Indicting ones you have zero chance of ever prosecuting seems odd....thinking people might think there is another agenda like oh perhaps appeasing a certain faction and giving the appearance you're actually doing something. It's a smoke screen

No, it's not odd. We do it all the time. We did it with Chinese hackings. It sends a message and lays the groundwork for sanctions. If we have the evidence to support an indictment, we should make it.

It's worthless, no Americans linked, Mewler is nowhere close to getting crap on Trump and Rosenstein is finished...next up will be pulling the plug on this witch hunt. It's past time. Mewler tried and failed. End it

It isn't worthless. Mueller's (you mispelled his name) mandate is to examine Russian interference in the election.

And so far he has spent way more time investigating financial crimes from more than ten years ago. Why is that?

Because Russian money laundering might have a bearing on it. I have no issue with the investigation. Whether it clears Trump or doesn't - I'm satisfied that it has been thorough and professional. And that is the point.

I can't understand why those that demanded in depth and lengthy investigations into the Clinton emails, Benghazi, and White Water do an abrupt about face when it comes to something as important as our electoral integrity.

Professional? Lol my husband calls it a circus

 

[westwall]

Indicting ones you have zero chance of ever prosecuting seems odd....thinking people might think there is another agenda like oh perhaps appeasing a certain faction and giving the appearance you're actually doing something. It's a smoke screen

No, it's not odd. We do it all the time. We did it with Chinese hackings. It sends a message and lays the groundwork for sanctions. If we have the evidence to support an indictment, we should make it.

It's worthless, no Americans linked, Mewler is nowhere close to getting crap on Trump and Rosenstein is finished...next up will be pulling the plug on this witch hunt. It's past time. Mewler tried and failed. End it

It isn't worthless. Mueller's (you mispelled his name) mandate is to examine Russian interference in the election.

And so far he has spent way more time investigating financial crimes from more than ten years ago. Why is that?

Because Russian money laundering might have a bearing on it. I have no issue with the investigation. Whether it clears Trump or doesn't - I'm satisfied that it has been thorough and professional. And that is the point.

I can't understand why those that demanded in depth and lengthy investigations into the Clinton emails, Benghazi, and White Water do an abrupt about face when it comes to something as important as our electoral integrity.

Because so far there has been no real attempt to actually do anything about it. It is clear to most everyone that the mueller investigation is focused on removing trump.

 

[Crepitus]

To send the entire KGB or whatever they call themselves now to the USA for prosecution?

Yesterday was the dumbest day in US history after the day that Obama was elected

So what would you have done? Just let it slide?

obummer did. Why is that?

That's already been addressed in the thread.

Read it.

No, it hasn't. There would have been no need to broadcast the info to the world, the FBI was ready to implement actions that would prevent the hacking. obummer told them not to. Why?

Right here, page one.

"WASHINGTON — The Obama administration feared that acknowledging Russian meddling in the 2016 election would reveal too much about intelligence gathering and be interpreted as “taking sides” in the race, the former secretary of homeland security said Wednesday.

“One of the candidates, as you recall, was predicting that the election was going to be ‘rigged’ in some way,” said Jeh Johnson, the former secretary, referring to President Trump’s unsubstantiated accusation before Election Day. “We were concerned that by making the statement we might, in and of itself, be challenging the integrity of the election process itself.”

Mr. Johnson’s testimony, before the House Intelligence Committee, provided a fresh insight into how the Obama administration tried to balance politically explosive information with the public’s need to know. That question also vexed federal law enforcement officials investigating Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email server.

Mr. Johnson said he became increasingly concerned about the vulnerabilities of the nation’s election infrastructure, particularly after the hacking at the Democratic National Committee last summer. The administration formally accused the Russian government of hacking into emails from the D.N.C. and other institutions and individuals on Oct. 7"

Next time I tell you something don't contradict me. I never lie and am rarely mistaken.

 

[SassyIrishLass]

Indicting ones you have zero chance of ever prosecuting seems odd....thinking people might think there is another agenda like oh perhaps appeasing a certain faction and giving the appearance you're actually doing something. It's a smoke screen

No, it's not odd. We do it all the time. We did it with Chinese hackings. It sends a message and lays the groundwork for sanctions. If we have the evidence to support an indictment, we should make it.

I only can remember the five chinese hackers indicted in 2014. And likewise they too will never see the inside of a Courtroom, and more to the point, the chinese were then told in big letters that their methods had been figured out so they changed tactics. That seems kind of stupid to me. If you are never going to be able to prosecute them why tell them you figured out what they are doing. Far better would be to ply them with fake info to screw up their spying results.

Those are the ones I was thinking of. I think indicting them sends a clear message to the government supporting them...so I support it. It also sends a clear message to the US - that there is enough evidence to support an indictment. Perhaps (though I am not optimstic) that means defluffing a few conspiracy theories

Indictments are a dime a dozen. My husband could get an indictment on a ham sandwich if he wanted when he was working as a prosecutor...getting convictions is an entire new ball game. An indictment doesn't make one guilty of anything

Of course it doesn't. It's the first step.

Are you suggesting that if there is evidence for an indictment...one should NOT be made???

In this case the only step....those Russians will never be convicted. Hence it's Mewler blowing smoke. This us my husband's words..its what he does and I suspect he's right

 

[westwall]

To send the entire KGB or whatever they call themselves now to the USA for prosecution?

Yesterday was the dumbest day in US history after the day that Obama was elected

So what would you have done? Just let it slide?

obummer did. Why is that?

That's already been addressed in the thread.

Read it.

No, it hasn't. There would have been no need to broadcast the info to the world, the FBI was ready to implement actions that would prevent the hacking. obummer told them not to. Why?

Right here, page one.

"WASHINGTON — The Obama administration feared that acknowledging Russian meddling in the 2016 election would reveal too much about intelligence gathering and be interpreted as “taking sides” in the race, the former secretary of homeland security said Wednesday.

“One of the candidates, as you recall, was predicting that the election was going to be ‘rigged’ in some way,” said Jeh Johnson, the former secretary, referring to President Trump’s unsubstantiated accusation before Election Day. “We were concerned that by making the statement we might, in and of itself, be challenging the integrity of the election process itself.”

Mr. Johnson’s testimony, before the House Intelligence Committee, provided a fresh insight into how the Obama administration tried to balance politically explosive information with the public’s need to know. That question also vexed federal law enforcement officials investigating Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email server.

Mr. Johnson said he became increasingly concerned about the vulnerabilities of the nation’s election infrastructure, particularly after the hacking at the Democratic National Committee last summer. The administration formally accused the Russian government of hacking into emails from the D.N.C. and other institutions and individuals on Oct. 7"

Next time I tell you something don't contradict me. I never lie and am rarely mistaken.

And i told you, they wouldn't have had to mention anything. They could have quietly enacted controls, and firewalls that would have prevented the russians from hacking. They didn't. Why didn't they?

 

[Rosy]

To send the entire KGB or whatever they call themselves now to the USA for prosecution?

Yesterday was the dumbest day in US history after the day that Obama was elected

Of course not.

Does that mean we should not indict people who commit crimes?

Should the American hackers who compiled this report be indicted?

LOL give up and go to bed

Why would we indict them?

They do the same things that the Russians did and are doing

 

[Coyote]

No, it's not odd. We do it all the time. We did it with Chinese hackings. It sends a message and lays the groundwork for sanctions. If we have the evidence to support an indictment, we should make it.

It's worthless, no Americans linked, Mewler is nowhere close to getting crap on Trump and Rosenstein is finished...next up will be pulling the plug on this witch hunt. It's past time. Mewler tried and failed. End it

It isn't worthless. Mueller's (you mispelled his name) mandate is to examine Russian interference in the election.

And so far he has spent way more time investigating financial crimes from more than ten years ago. Why is that?

Because Russian money laundering might have a bearing on it. I have no issue with the investigation. Whether it clears Trump or doesn't - I'm satisfied that it has been thorough and professional. And that is the point.

I can't understand why those that demanded in depth and lengthy investigations into the Clinton emails, Benghazi, and White Water do an abrupt about face when it comes to something as important as our electoral integrity.

Because so far there has been no real attempt to actually do anything about it. It is clear to most everyone that the mueller investigation is focused on removing trump.

I think that's a matter of opinion, and since we are talking opinion, here is mine. The investigation is focused on finding out the truth. I don't think Mueller cares which way the truth falls. His character was considered stellar by both the right and the left until he started to examine Trump. Then the attacks and smears came.

My opinion - he's the consumate professional. He doesn't leak, he has said NOTHING publically, unlike Comey. He has a job and he will do it. That is why I trust him. And that is why if Trump is exhonerated - I am fine with that. I don't NEED a verdict either way because I trust the process to be professional and ethical.

 

[Coyote]

To send the entire KGB or whatever they call themselves now to the USA for prosecution?

Yesterday was the dumbest day in US history after the day that Obama was elected

Of course not.

Does that mean we should not indict people who commit crimes?

Should the American hackers who compiled this report be indicted?

LOL give up and go to bed

Why would we indict them?

They do the same things that the Russians did and are doing

So?

 

[Rosy]

To send the entire KGB or whatever they call themselves now to the USA for prosecution?

Yesterday was the dumbest day in US history after the day that Obama was elected

Of course not.

Does that mean we should not indict people who commit crimes?

Should the American hackers who compiled this report be indicted?

LOL give up and go to bed

Why would we indict them?

They do the same things that the Russians did and are doing

So?

So why is hacking legal for the USA and not legal for Russia?

 

[Crepitus]

So what would you have done? Just let it slide?

obummer did. Why is that?

That's already been addressed in the thread.

Read it.

No, it hasn't. There would have been no need to broadcast the info to the world, the FBI was ready to implement actions that would prevent the hacking. obummer told them not to. Why?

Right here, page one.

"WASHINGTON — The Obama administration feared that acknowledging Russian meddling in the 2016 election would reveal too much about intelligence gathering and be interpreted as “taking sides” in the race, the former secretary of homeland security said Wednesday.

“One of the candidates, as you recall, was predicting that the election was going to be ‘rigged’ in some way,” said Jeh Johnson, the former secretary, referring to President Trump’s unsubstantiated accusation before Election Day. “We were concerned that by making the statement we might, in and of itself, be challenging the integrity of the election process itself.”

Mr. Johnson’s testimony, before the House Intelligence Committee, provided a fresh insight into how the Obama administration tried to balance politically explosive information with the public’s need to know. That question also vexed federal law enforcement officials investigating Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email server.

Mr. Johnson said he became increasingly concerned about the vulnerabilities of the nation’s election infrastructure, particularly after the hacking at the Democratic National Committee last summer. The administration formally accused the Russian government of hacking into emails from the D.N.C. and other institutions and individuals on Oct. 7"

Next time I tell you something don't contradict me. I never lie and am rarely mistaken.

And i told you, they wouldn't have had to mention anything. They could have quietly enacted controls, and firewalls that would have prevented the russians from hacking. They didn't. Why didn't they?

Seriously? Are you familiar at all with what happened in 2016?

 

[westwall]

obummer did. Why is that?

That's already been addressed in the thread.

Read it.

No, it hasn't. There would have been no need to broadcast the info to the world, the FBI was ready to implement actions that would prevent the hacking. obummer told them not to. Why?

Right here, page one.

"WASHINGTON — The Obama administration feared that acknowledging Russian meddling in the 2016 election would reveal too much about intelligence gathering and be interpreted as “taking sides” in the race, the former secretary of homeland security said Wednesday.

“One of the candidates, as you recall, was predicting that the election was going to be ‘rigged’ in some way,” said Jeh Johnson, the former secretary, referring to President Trump’s unsubstantiated accusation before Election Day. “We were concerned that by making the statement we might, in and of itself, be challenging the integrity of the election process itself.”

Mr. Johnson’s testimony, before the House Intelligence Committee, provided a fresh insight into how the Obama administration tried to balance politically explosive information with the public’s need to know. That question also vexed federal law enforcement officials investigating Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email server.

Mr. Johnson said he became increasingly concerned about the vulnerabilities of the nation’s election infrastructure, particularly after the hacking at the Democratic National Committee last summer. The administration formally accused the Russian government of hacking into emails from the D.N.C. and other institutions and individuals on Oct. 7"

Next time I tell you something don't contradict me. I never lie and am rarely mistaken.

And i told you, they wouldn't have had to mention anything. They could have quietly enacted controls, and firewalls that would have prevented the russians from hacking. They didn't. Why didn't they?

Seriously? Are you familiar at all with what happened in 2016?

It appears more than you.

 

[westwall]

It's worthless, no Americans linked, Mewler is nowhere close to getting crap on Trump and Rosenstein is finished...next up will be pulling the plug on this witch hunt. It's past time. Mewler tried and failed. End it

It isn't worthless. Mueller's (you mispelled his name) mandate is to examine Russian interference in the election.

And so far he has spent way more time investigating financial crimes from more than ten years ago. Why is that?

Because Russian money laundering might have a bearing on it. I have no issue with the investigation. Whether it clears Trump or doesn't - I'm satisfied that it has been thorough and professional. And that is the point.

I can't understand why those that demanded in depth and lengthy investigations into the Clinton emails, Benghazi, and White Water do an abrupt about face when it comes to something as important as our electoral integrity.

Because so far there has been no real attempt to actually do anything about it. It is clear to most everyone that the mueller investigation is focused on removing trump.

I think that's a matter of opinion, and since we are talking opinion, here is mine. The investigation is focused on finding out the truth. I don't think Mueller cares which way the truth falls. His character was considered stellar by both the right and the left until he started to examine Trump. Then the attacks and smears came.

My opinion - he's the consumate professional. He doesn't leak, he has said NOTHING publically, unlike Comey. He has a job and he will do it. That is why I trust him. And that is why if Trump is exhonerated - I am fine with that. I don't NEED a verdict either way because I trust the process to be professional and ethical.

If that were true they wouldn't be wasting time on 12 year old crimes that the fbi had already said weren't worth the effort to prosecute. if they cared about the truth there would be an indictment for podesta and his brother (who were named in the manafort indictment) but instead, they are allowed to go run and hide. Why is that?

 

[Coyote]

It isn't worthless. Mueller's (you mispelled his name) mandate is to examine Russian interference in the election.

And so far he has spent way more time investigating financial crimes from more than ten years ago. Why is that?

Because Russian money laundering might have a bearing on it. I have no issue with the investigation. Whether it clears Trump or doesn't - I'm satisfied that it has been thorough and professional. And that is the point.

I can't understand why those that demanded in depth and lengthy investigations into the Clinton emails, Benghazi, and White Water do an abrupt about face when it comes to something as important as our electoral integrity.

Because so far there has been no real attempt to actually do anything about it. It is clear to most everyone that the mueller investigation is focused on removing trump.

I think that's a matter of opinion, and since we are talking opinion, here is mine. The investigation is focused on finding out the truth. I don't think Mueller cares which way the truth falls. His character was considered stellar by both the right and the left until he started to examine Trump. Then the attacks and smears came.

My opinion - he's the consumate professional. He doesn't leak, he has said NOTHING publically, unlike Comey. He has a job and he will do it. That is why I trust him. And that is why if Trump is exhonerated - I am fine with that. I don't NEED a verdict either way because I trust the process to be professional and ethical.

If that were true they wouldn't be wasting time on 12 year old crimes that the fbi had already said weren't worth the effort to prosecute. if they cared about the truth there would be an indictment for podesta and his brother (who were named in the manafort indictment) but instead, they are allowed to go run and hide. Why is that?

Because there is probably no evidence to support an indictment.